M Bryans

Effectiveness of educational interventions in improving detection and management of dementia in primary care: cluster randomised controlled study

Abstract Objective To test the effectiveness of educational interventions in improving detection rates and management of dementia in primary care. Design Unblinded, cluster randomised, before and after controlled study. Setting General practices in the United Kingdom (central Scotland and London) between 1999 and 2002. Interventions Three educational interventions: an electronic tutorial carried on a CD Rom; decision support software built into the electronic medical record; and practice based workshops. Participants 36 practices participated in the study. Eight practices were randomly assigned to the electronic tutorial; eight to decision support software; 10 to practice based workshops; and 10 to control. Electronic and manual searches yielded 450 valid and usable medical records. Main outcome measures Rates of detection of dementia and the extent to which medical records showed evidence of improved concordance with guidelines regarding diagnosis and management. Results Decision support software (P = 0.01) and practice based workshops (P = 0.01) both significantly improved rates of detection compared with control. There were no significant differences by intervention in the measures of concordance with guidelines. Conclusions Decision support systems and practice based workshops are effective educational approaches in improving detection rates in dementia.

Dementia Diagnosis and Management in Primary Care Developing and testing educational models

Dementia presents a challenge for primary care and the advent of new therapeutic options has highlighted the need to improve its detection so that early decisions about medication use can be made. Efforts at earlier diagnosis should be targeted at primary care as the gateway to specialist health and social services. There is, however, evidence that dementia remains under-detected and sub-optimally managed in general practice throughout the world. This article reviews the obstacles to early recognition of dementia and the factors causing sub-optimal management in the community, and discusses educational approaches to enhancing professional skills in the recognition of and response to dementia. Three educational interventions with different characteristics and methods of delivery are described.

Concordance with clinical practice guidelines for dementia in general practice

Background: Dementia is said to be under-recognized and sub-optimally managed in primary care, but there is little information about actual processes of diagnosis and clinical care. Aim: To determine general practitioners’ concordance with clinical guidelines on the diagnosis and management of patients with dementia. Design: Unblinded, cluster randomized pre-test–post-test controlled trial involving 35 practices in the UK. Methods: Patients with a diagnosis of probable or confirmed dementia were identified in practices, and permission sought from the older person and/or their carer to study the medical records of these patients. Medical records were reviewed using a data extraction tool designed for the study and based on published guidelines, and unweighted scores for diagnostic concordance and management concordance were calculated. Results: We reviewed 450 records of patients aged 75 and over with a diagnosis of dementia and found that: only 4% of cases were identified first in secondary care; two-thirds of those identified in primary care were referred immediately; about one-third identified had informant history and blood tests documented at the Index consultation and one-fifth underwent cognitive function testing. Discussion: The records analysed in this study came from a period before the Quality Outcomes Framework and show that the documentation in primary care of the diagnostic process in dementia syndromes is good, although there were significant gaps, particularly around depression case-finding. Information about management processes were less evident in the records.

Methodological problems in dementia research in primary care: a case study of a randomized controlled trial

The emerging UK national research network in neurodegenerative diseases and dementias aims to promote large-scale community-based studies of therapeutic interventions, based in primary care. However, trials in primary care settings can be problematic, a common difficulty being the recruitment of a large enough sample. The article discusses recruitment issues in a multi-centre randomized controlled trial of differing educational approaches to improving dementia care in general practice. Sample size calculations based on community studies of prevalence may be misleading in intervention trials which may recruit practices with atypical demography. Recruitment rates for practitioners in this study were lower than expected. Professionals excluded themselves from the study mainly due to pressures of time and staff shortages, and we detected both ambivalent attitudes to primary care research and a perception that research into dementia care was not a high priority. Evaluation of the quality of care may be perceived as criticism of clinical practice, at a time when general practice is undergoing major administrative and contractual changes. Variations in Research Ethics Committee conditions for approval led to different methods of recruitment of patients and carers into the study, a factor which may have contributed to disparate levels of recruitment across study sites. Patient and carer levels of recruitment were lower than expected and were affected partly by carers’ time pressures and other family commitments, but largely by problems in identifying patients and carers in the practices. The development of research potential in primary care is at an early stage and studies reliant on patient recruitment in general practice must allow for multiple obstacles to enrollment. This is particularly relevant for studies of dementia care, where the prevalence of dementia in a demographically average population is low and the incidence very low, compared with other disabilities. Professionals may give dementia low priority in allocating practice time for research projects, and strategies to address this problem are needed.