No abstract

Background There are currently no studies in Argentina that measures the knowledge of all types of dementia. Given the increasing prevalence of this disease, knowing the level of knowledge could be useful to provide psychoeducation tools, allowing better understanding, objetive setting and daily managment of dementia. The aim of this study is to evaluate dementia knowledge among general population, families and health staff. Method Dementia knowledge will be assessed whith the Dementia Knowledge Assessment Tool 2 (DKAT‐2), validated in Spanish by Parra‐Anguita et al. (2018). DKAT‐2‐Sp has 21 items, with three response optiones (Yes, No, I don’t know). The questionnaire will be distributed in form throught virtual platforms. Statistic data will be analyzed with SPSS. Result We expect a participation of no less than 300 respondents. Toye et. al (2013) administered DKAT‐2 in familiies and care staff, obteining a median of 14 correct responses for familires, and 16 for the staff. In 2018, Parra‐Anguita et. al evaluated dementia knowledge with DKAT‐2‐ Sp in nursing professionals and students, obtaining a mean of 15.57 in staff versus 12.85 in students, with very significant differences in incontinence, visual perception, distressing behaviors and swallowing difficulties items. For the current study, we will include general population, predicting similar results, with highest scores to be obtained by health care professionals, comparatively lower scores by family carers and lowest scores among the general population. Conclusion the results could be usefull to detect areas of intervention and provide psychoeducations tools for better understanding dementia.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Several studies have shown misconceptions about Acquired Brain Injury (ABI) and it's sequelae on different populations. Considering the motor, sensory, cognitive or emotional consequences of ABI, and their impact in the patient and its relatives’ life, the information offered on ABI is essential to provide adequate care. Objectives: to acknowledge the presence of misconceptions regarding ABI in our population by applying a self‐administered questionnaire Method Three groups were formed. One for general population (GP), one for patients’ relatives with ABI (RP), and one for health workers (HW). Instrument: five questions were added to the Spanish survey about misconceptions in ABI published by Navarro Main et al. (2017). The survey includes twenty‐four mandatory true or false questions. Furthermore, demographical data was required (for e.g. age, years of education and place of residence), along with information regarding having a relative who has suffered from traumatic brain injury or a stroke. The survey was distributed virtually. Result 648 surveys were obtained; 305 belonged to GP, 143 to RP, and 200 to HW. The median age of the respondents was 37, 42 and 36 years‐old respectively. Tertiary and college education have been referred by the 77,5%, 71,5% and 96,5% respectively. The highest number of errors was similar for the three populations for the questions that assessed misconceptions about the influence of cognitive symptomatology, giving the idea that only the behavior observation and physical state of a patient allows us to infer ABI, and that cognitive status is not related to functional independence. “The greater the effort, the faster the recovery” misconception was more prevalent in the RP group. Conclusion The results showed that having a direct relative does not improve the knowledge on ABI and it's possible sequelae, and this fact stands for the need of a better communication from the rehabilitation group to the relatives in order to adequate achievement expectations and to accomplish a better symptoms management. Moreover, although HW obtained the lowest rate of misconception, the lack of knowledge on ABI’s cognitive component was solid evidence.