Background: Person-centered care (PCC) is an important concept in many countries’ national guidelines and dementia plans. Key intervention categories, i.e., a taxonomy of person-centered (PC)-interventions, to provide person-centered dementia care, are difficult to identify from literature. Objective: This systematic review aimed to identify and categorize published PC-interventions into key intervention categories to guide the provision of person-centered dementia care. Methods: Conduct of this systematic review followed Cochrane guidelines. A search of the dimensions ‘Dementia’, ‘Person-Centered Care’, and ‘Intervention’ combined was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Study selection was based on 2-stage screening against eligibility criteria, limited to controlled study designs. Information about interventions and outcomes was extracted into an “Effects Table”. The identified PC-interventions were categorized in intervention categories to provide person-centered dementia care. Results: Searches identified 1,806 records. 19 studies were included. These covered a range of psychosocial interventions, oftentimes multi-component interventions, which followed heterogeneous approaches. Studies were conducted in long-term care/hospital settings. Nine key intervention categories were identified: social contact, physical activities, cognitive training, sensory enhancement, daily living assistance, life history oriented emotional support, training and support for professional caregivers, environmental adjustments, and care organization. Conclusion: Our findings provide a current overview of published PC-interventions in dementia, which followed heterogeneous approaches under the PCC-concept. The heterogeneity made it challenging to identify a well-defined concept of PCC and common key intervention categories. An effectiveness-evaluation of “PC”-including “relationship-centered”-interventions may be valuable, to assess whether an explicit focus on relationships around PCC-interventions yields an added benefit. PROSPERO-ID: CRD42021225084.

Person-centered care (PCC) requires knowledge about patient preferences. This formative qualitative study aimed to identify (sub)criteria of PCC for the design of a quantitative, choice-based instrument to elicit patient preferences for person-centered dementia care. Method: Interviews were conducted with n = 2 dementia care managers, n = 10 People living with Dementia (PlwD), and n = 3 caregivers (CGs), which followed a semi-structured interview guide including a card game with PCC criteria identified from the literature. Criteria cards were shown to explore the PlwD’s conception. PlwD were asked to rank the cards to identify patient-relevant criteria of PCC. Audios were verbatim-transcribed and analyzed with qualitative content analysis. Card game results were coded on a 10-point-scale, and sums and means for criteria were calculated. Results: Six criteria with two sub-criteria emerged from the analysis; social relationships (indirect contact, direct contact), cognitive training (passive, active), organization of care (decentralized structures and no shared decision making, centralized structures and shared decision making), assistance with daily activities (professional, family member), characteristics of care professionals (empathy, education and work experience) and physical activities (alone, group). Dementia-sensitive wording and balance between comprehensibility vs. completeness of the (sub)criteria emerged as additional themes. Conclusion: Our formative study provides initial data about patient-relevant criteria of PCC to design a quantitative patient preference instrument. Future research may want to consider the balance between (sub)criteria comprehensibility vs. completeness.

Background: Low-value care (LvC) is defined as care unlikely to provide a benefit to the patient regarding the patient’s preferences, potential harms, costs, or available alternatives. Avoiding LvC and promoting recommended evidence-based treatments, referred to as high-value care (HvC), could improve patient-reported outcomes for people living with dementia (PwD). Objective: This study aims to determine the prevalence of LvC and HvC in dementia and the associations of LvC and HvC with patients’ quality of life and hospitalization. Methods: The analysis was based on data of the DelpHi trial and included 516 PwD. Dementia-specific guidelines, the “Choosing Wisely” campaign and the PRISCUS list were used to indicate LvC and HvC treatments, resulting in 347 LvC and HvC related recommendations. Of these, 77 recommendations (51 for LvC, 26 for HvC) were measured within the DelpHi-trial and finally used for this analysis. The association of LvC and HvC treatments with PwD health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and hospitalization was assessed using multiple regression models. Results: LvC was highly prevalent in PwD (31%). PwD receiving LvC had a significantly lower quality of life (b = –0.07; 95%CI –0.14––0.01) and were significantly more likely to be hospitalized (OR = 2.06; 95%CI 1.26–3.39). Different HvC treatments were associated with both positive and negative changes in HRQoL. Conclusion: LvC could cause adverse outcomes and should be identified as early as possible and tried to be replaced. Future research should examine innovative models of care or treatment pathways supporting the identification and replacement of LvC in dementia.

Background Knowledge about the priorities and preferences of people living with dementia (PwD) might help to individualize treatment, care, and support, which could improve patient-related outcomes. This study aimed to summarize preferences of PwD or people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), considering all relevant aspects of health care and everyday life. Methods We conducted a systematic literature review and included studies about patient preferences published in English between January 1, 1990 and October 28, 2019. The inclusion criteria were that preferences were elicited directly by PwD or patients with MCI. We used the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Management value set for dementia to categorize the preferences into the following topics: a) clinical status, b) symptoms, functioning, and quality of life, and c) sustainability of care. Results Of 578 initially identified studies, 45 met the inclusion criteria. Patients preferred to be informed about the diagnosis as early as possible, especially for anticipatory care planning. They ranked caregiver quality of life as their highest priority. They preferred not to be a burden to others more than their caregivers’ mood, their own functional status, or their own distressing behaviors. Furthermore, PwD are eager to participate in medical decisions, especially in those about creating an everyday life routine. PwD preferred their own quality of life, self-efficacy, and emotional well-being. Institutionalized PwD preferred individualized and person-centered care. According to the sustainability of care, PwD preferred to maintain close bonds with their family at the end of their life and wanted to be treated with empathy. Conclusion This systematic review provides essential insights into cognitively impaired patients’ preferences, which are rarely considered in treatment, care, and support services. Further studies should evaluate whether considering preferences in treatment and care or daily living can improve patient-reported outcomes.

The results of this trial are expected to provide a basis for defining an evidence-based standard and will have a wide impact on managing this disease.