The variable and personal emotional experiences of individuals with dementia are well described and should not continue to be overlooked. Limitations, future research, and clinical implications are discussed.

The guidance available for tailoring mental health services for autistic people is limited and dispersed. Practitioners attempting to appropriately adapt mental healthcare and therapy provision report low confidence and inconsistency in their approach. This study contributes to the guidance by providing a shortlist of usable and priority adaptations for diagnostic and therapy services as described by multidisciplinary staff members responsible for the design and delivery of a specialist autism service in the UK. Individual freelisting interviews were conducted with 15 staff, who were asked to list the ways that they adapt their practice individually, within therapy, and collectively as a service. Salience and cultural consensus analyses demonstrated the following agreed priority service adaptations: ensuring the suitability of the service environment with consideration of sensory demands, adapting communication, knowing individual gender identity preferences and minimising client uncertainty. Detailed examples are given for flexibly adapting therapy to individual needs to inform general and specialist services. The findings require replication and evaluation.

Background and Objectives: People with dementia are vulnerable when in hospital, with serious risks to their physical and emotional wellbeing. Hospital staff are expected to understand and respond to the emotions of the patient; however, it is not known how this can be achieved. We provide a concise description of achievable emotion-focused care for patients with dementia. Design and Methods: Exploratory qualitative interviews were conducted with a whole UK hospital ward providing dementia care, constituting 47 staff members. Staff responded to four questions using ethnographic freelisting. They listed: (1) all the ways they notice the emotional distress of patients with dementia, (2) the causes of emotional distress, (3) all the ways they respond and (4) the responses that seem to work. Cultural consensus analysis was applied. Results: A single-factor solution for each question indicated a consensus approach to emotional distress. Emotional distress was noticed from agitation (Smith's saliency score, 0.418), crying (0.350) and increased mobilising (0.238). The main causes of distress were the unfamiliar hospital environment (0.355) and not knowing what is happening (0.313). The most effective ways to respond to emotional distress required knowing the person (0.299), talking (0.283) and being with the person (0.269). Discussion and Implications: The findings expand what is understood of behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia; these communicated emotional distress with wellunderstood causes. Prioritised ways of responding to emotional distress described personcentred care. The results offer a menu of options for providing emotionally-responsive care for patients with dementia in hospital. Future research should evaluate the care described.