Objectives-In many cases the clinical diVerentiation of patients with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) from those with Alzheimer's disease (AD) has been diYcult. Because many neuropsychological studies have reported greater visuospatial/ constructional impairment in DLB than in AD, it was determined whether accuracy in copying the interlocking pentagons item on the mini mental state examination (MMSE) may be helpful in distinguishing patients with DLB from those with AD relatively early in the course of the dementia. Methods-All cases of neuropathologically proved DLB and AD in the Center for Alzheimer Disease and Related Disorders brain bank were retrospectively reviewed, and the first available MMSE for each was retrieved. Only patients with MMSE scores>13 were included, indicating mild to moderate dementia. The patients' copies of the interlocking pentagons were analyzed and graded as acceptable or unacceptable according to the original instructions for grading the MMSE. Results-Seventeen patients with DLB and 27 patients with AD were identified for whom MMSE with copies of the interlocking pentagons were available. Two patients with DLB (MMSEs 22 and 27) drew the pentagons acceptably, by contrast with 16 of the patients with AD (MMSEs 13-28). An unacceptable copy was associated with DLB with a sensitivity of 88% and a specificity of 59% (p=0.002). Conclusions-For patients with MMSE scores>13, an inability to accurately copy the pentagons suggests that the diagnosis is more likely DLB than AD. The results confirm the work of others on visuospatial/constructional impairment in DLB and indicate that this feature may be helpful in its diagnosis. (J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2001;70:483-488)

ObjectivesTraditional healthcare education, delivered through a series of time‐limited clinical placements, often fails to deliver an understanding of the experiences of those with long‐term conditions, a growing issue for healthcare systems. Responses include longitudinal integrated clerkships and senior mentor programmes allowing students' longer placements, continuity of contact and opportunities to learn about chronic illness and patient experience. We review their development and delivery in dementia and present the Time for Dementia (TFD) Programme, a novel 2‐year interdisciplinary educational programme.DesignThe study design involves a scoping review of enhanced placements in dementia for healthcare professionals in training including longitudinal integrated clerkships and senior mentor programmes and a case study of the development of TFD and its evaluation.ResultsEight enhanced programmes in dementia were identified and seven in the USA. None were compulsory and all lasted 12 months. All reported positive impact from case study designs but data quality was weak. Building on these, TFD was developed in partnership between the Alzheimer's Society, universities and NHS and made a core part of the curriculum for medical, nursing and paramedic students. Students visit a person with dementia and their family in pairs for 2 h every 3 months for 2 years. They follow a semi‐structured interaction guide focusing on experiences of illness and services and complete reflective appraisals.ConclusionsWe need interprofessional undergraduate healthcare education that enables future healthcare professionals to be able to understand and manage the people with the long‐term conditions who current systems often fail. TFD is designed to help address this need. © 2016 The Authors. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Background

Background:There is a need to improve dementia education to prepare future generations of healthcare professionals to deal with the increasing challenges they will face. Time for Dementia is an innovative undergraduate education program for medical, nursing, and paramedic students in the south of England. Success of the program is dependent upon the participation of families (people with dementia and their carers). This qualitative study seeks to explore the motivation and experiences of the families taking part in the program.Methods:A topic guide was developed to understand factors influencing motivation and retention. A purposeful sample of participant families, who had at least 12 months of involvement in the program, were selected from a cohort of 282 families and were invited to take part in an in-depth qualitative interview. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using thematic analysis. This was subsequently refined in an on-going process of analysis aided by the use of Nvivo 11. Interviewing stopped when thematic saturation was reached.Results:Eighteen families took part in an in-depth qualitative interviews. Four themes were identified from the analysis. These themes were motivators, value to family, value to the person with dementia, and student factors.Conclusions:This study identifies underpinning factors that motivate families to join dementia education programs and the impact of such programs upon them. We found that engagement in such programs can have therapeutic benefits to participants, and do not cause harm. These findings can be used to strengthen recruitment and enhance family involvement in similar programs.

Background Traditional healthcare education typically focuses on short block clinical placements based on acute care, investigations and technical aspects of diagnosis and treatment. It may therefore fail to build the understanding, compassion and person‐centred empathy needed to help those with long‐term conditions, like dementia. Time for Dementia was developed to address this. Method Parallel group comparison of two cohorts of UK medical students from universities, one participating in Time for Dementia (intervention group) and one not (control group). In Time for Dementia students visit a person with dementia and their family in pairs for 2 hours three times a year for 2 years, the control group received their normal curriculum. Results In an adjusted multilevel model (intervention group n = 274, control n = 112), there was strong evidence supporting improvements for Time for Dementia participants in: total Approaches to Dementia Questionnaire score (coefficient: 2.19, p = 0.003) and its person‐centredness subscale (1.32, p = 0.006) and weaker evidence in its hopefulness subscale (0.78, p = 0.070). There was also strong evidence of improvement in the Dementia Knowledge Questionnaire (1.63, p < 0.001) and Dementia Attitudes Scale (total score: 6.55, p < 0.001; social comfort subscale: 4.15, p < 0.001; dementia knowledge subscale: 3.38, p = 0.001) scores. No differences were observed on the Alzheimer's Disease Knowledge Scale, the Medical Condition Regard Scale or the Jefferson Scale of Empathy. Discussion Time for Dementia may help improve the attitudes of medical students towards dementia promoting a person‐centred approach and increasing social comfort. Such patient‐focused programmes may be a useful complement to traditional medical education.