Open Access
Open Peer Review

This article has Open Peer Review reports available.

How does Open Peer Review work?

The last phase of life with dementia in Swiss nursing homes: the study protocol of the longitudinal and prospective ZULIDAD study

  • Stefanie Eicher1, 2Email author,
  • Nathan Theill1, 2, 3,
  • Heike Geschwindner4,
  • Caroline Moor2,
  • Albert Wettstein2,
  • Gabriela Bieri-Brüning5,
  • Christoph Hock3,
  • Mike Martin1, 2, 6,
  • Henrike Wolf3 and
  • Florian Riese1, 3
BMC Palliative CareBMC series – open, inclusive and trusted201615:80

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12904-016-0151-2

Received: 21 April 2016

Accepted: 15 August 2016

Published: 24 August 2016

Abstract

Background

The proportion of older people with advanced dementia who will die in nursing homes is constantly growing. However, little is known about the dying phase, the type of symptoms, the management of symptoms and the quality of life and dying in people with advanced dementia. The ZULIDAD (Zurich Life and Death with Advanced Dementia) study aims at extending the current scientific knowledge by providing first data from Switzerland.

Methods

The ZULIDAD study employs a prospective design to study nursing home residents with advanced dementia for three years or until their death in eleven nursing homes in Zurich. Observational data from quarterly questionnaires for relatives and primary nurses is combined with data from the Resident Assessment Instrument – Minimum Data Set (RAI-MDS). Special focus is put on 1) the cross-sectional analysis of baseline and post-mortem data regarding quality of life and quality of dying and how the perceptions of these measures differ between relatives and primary nurses, 2) the longitudinal analyses of established health outcome measures (e.g., EOLD, MSSE, BISAD, QUALID) in order to understand their trajectories and 3) international comparisons of cross-sectional and longitudinal data.

Discussion

The ZULIDAD study is one of the few existing prospective studies on end-of-life care in dementia and it is the first prospective study to describe the situation in Switzerland. Its multi-perspective approach allows a comprehensive approximation to central health outcome measures at the end of life such as pain, suffering or quality of life. Providing insights into the current provision of care, it can serve as a basis for improving dementia end-of-life care in Switzerland and internationally.

Keywords

Advanced dementia Palliative care End-of-life care Nursing home Satisfaction with care Quality of care Qquality of life Dying Terminal phase

Background

In the year 2010, 35 million people were estimated to live with dementia worldwide and it is predicted that this number will double every 20 years until 2050 [1]. Even though the percentages differ between countries, the majority of people with advanced dementia die in long-term care facilities (67 % in the U.S. [2]; 50.2 % in Wales, 92 % in Netherlands [3]; 30.1 % in Germany [4]). The last months of life of nursing home residents with advanced dementia (RAD) are frequently accompanied by distressing symptoms such as dyspnea, pain, pressure ulcers and eating problems, and these symptoms increase with the proximity of death [5, 6]. Due to behavioral problems, unidentified pain, inappropriate medication or other factors, quality of life can be impaired [7]. Even though there is little difference between those people dying with dementia and those dying without cognitive impairments regarding burdensome symptoms in the last phase of life [8] and causes of death [9], RAD are frequently not perceived as having a terminal condition and mostly do not receive optimal palliative care [5, 7, 10]. In order to emphasize the appropriateness and necessity of palliative care in dementia, the European Association of Palliative Care issued a white paper which attempts to define high quality palliative care in dementia [11]. However, only some of the white paper’s recommendations have been included in national dementia strategies so far [12].

The increasing amount of studies in the field motivated van der Steen and Goodman [13] to point out what kind of research is needed in order to advance in research as well as in practical care regarding dementia at the end of life. Besides the demand for theory-driven research, they advocate for study designs which allow for comparisons either with other patient groups, health care systems or countries and for analyses of disease trajectories. Furthermore they advocate for multidisciplinary research. The latter is important not only because palliative care is per se multidisciplinary, but also because RAD are unable to reliably communicate their wellbeing, discomfort or care preferences. The conflation of different proxy estimations, e.g., from relatives (REL), primary nurses (PN) or physicians regarding central outcome measures such as pain, suffering, quality of life is essential in order to provide optimal individualized care. So far, most studies regarding palliative care in dementia have been small and only few have applied a prospective design that allows the determination of disease trajectories and the concomitant proxy estimations [14] (Table 1). Furthermore, the four published prospective studies often used different outcome measures in different proxy groups and this hampers the direct comparison of proxy estimations. As a consequence, further multi-perspective prospective studies on RAD are needed, especially in Switzerland, where data is completely lacking. Exploratory research adapted to the Swiss cultural context and the local structures of the health care system can shed light on the current state of dementia palliative care in Switzerland. Furthermore, in accordance with current recommendations on research strategies in the field [13], for the present study data is prospectively collected from multiple perspectives. To facilitate comparability of data with other countries, the study methodology is closely modeled after existing high-quality studies. This report presents the methodology established in the ZULIDAD study.
Table 1

Main characteristics of the four published prospective cohort studies on institutional end-of-life care in dementia

Study

Sample

Data sources

Main outcome measures

Main study aims

CareAD [2527]

N = 123 (91 cases of death), census in 3 NH, main inclusion criteria: life expectancy of 6 month or less, dementia diagnosis, receiving or meeting criteria for hospice or palliative care

Chart review (BL, 3 M, PM); surrogate decision-makers (BL, 3 M, PM); physicians (BL); nurses (BL, incomplete information); direct assessment of residents (BL, 3 M)

Medical status (by charts); treatment decisions (by surrogates); quality of life (by caregivers and surrogates); frequency of contact with staff (by surrogates); spiritual and religious beliefs (by surrogates)

Description of health problems, examination of decisions of surrogate decision-makers regarding treatment

CASCADE [5, 16]

N = 323 (177 cases of death), main inclusion criteria: CPS 5 or 6, dementia diagnosis, GDS = 7

Chart review, nurses and clinical examination (BL, 3 M, PM2, PM7); REL (BL, PM2, PM7)

EOLD-SM (by nurses); EOLD-CAD (by nurses); EOLD-SWC (by REL); QUALID (by nurses); DSI (by REL)

Description of disease trajectories, resident comfort, clinical decision-making, family satisfaction with care, complicated grief among REL

DEOLD [17, 28]

N = 372 (218 cases of death), main inclusion criteria: CPS 5 or 6, GDS = 7

Physician (BL, 6 M, PM), REL (BL, 6 M, PM)

EOLD Scales, PAINAD, QUALID (by physicians and REL)

Description of comfort, symptom burden, pain and family satisfaction with care

EoLO-PSODEC [29, 30]

N = 315 (NH), N = 181 (home care) (100 cases of death), main inclusion criteria: FAST ≥ =7, life expectancy of more than two weeks

Chart review (bi-weekly), nurses (bi-weekly), physicians (incomplete information)

Diagnosis, ongoing treatment, current prescriptions, appropriateness of prescription (by charts), DS-DAT (by nurses)

Description of treatment and prescription, discomfort, critical decisions

Note. Abbreviations: NH nursing home, REL relatives, BL baseline, 3 M three-monthly, 6 M biannually, PM post mortem, PM2 post mortem after two weeks, PM7 post-mortem after 7 weeks, CPS cognitive performance score [15, 31], GDS global deterioration scale [32], EOLD-SM/ -SWC/ -CAD end-of-life in dementia - symptom management/ -satisfaction with care/-comfort at dying [21], QUALID quality of life in late-stage dementia scale [24], DSI decision satisfaction inventory [33], PAINAD pain assessment in advanced dementia [34], FAST functional assessment staging [35], DS-DAT discomfort scale for dementia of the alzheimer’s type [36]

Study aims

The aims of the ZULIDAD study are:
  1. 1)

    To describe a sample of Swiss RAD during their last phase of life and thus explore the situation in Switzerland (e.g., How are RAD cared for during the last phase of their life? What are common symptoms and how are they managed?).

     
  2. 2)

    To compare the perspectives of REL and PN (e.g., What is the level of suffering perceived by REL and PN? How is the quality of life estimated by REL and PN?).

     
  3. 3)

    To describe disease and care trajectories (e.g., How does care change over time? How do symptoms change over time?).

     
  4. 4)

    To compare the results with those from other studies/countries (e.g., How is the quality of life of RAD in Switzerland compared to other countries such as the Netherlands?).

     

Methods

Study design

The ZULIDAD study employs a prospective multi-perspective design. Residents of eleven nursing homes (NH) in the greater Zurich area in Switzerland are followed for three years or until their death. Observational data is collected three-monthly through extensive questionnaires for REL, and PN (see Fig. 1). In addition, routine data from the Resident Assessment Instrument – Minimal Data Set (RAI-MDS), Version 2.0 [15], is collected annually (full assessment) and biannually (abbreviated assessment). In order to facilitate international comparability, the study design, inclusion criteria and applied measurements refer to previous studies, namely CASCADE from U.S. [16], DEOLD from the Netherlands [17] and Dying Well from Belgium [18]. ZULIDAD is a collaborative study with partners from several university centers and departments, nursing homes and the municipal physician service of Zurich. The conduct of the ZULIDAD study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Canton of Zurich (KEK-ZH-Nr. 2013-0385) and was registered in FORSbase (Ref No 11530), a Swiss online platform for social science studies.
Fig. 1

Timeline of data collection in the ZULIDAD study

The ZULIDAD round table

The entire ZULIDAD research process is accompanied by the Round Table (RT) in terms of a participatory research approach. The RT is composed of representatives of three relevant stakeholder groups (REL of RAD; professionals in dementia care, nursing care and palliative care; researchers). Scientific and strategic decisions as well as study results are discussed at the RT on a regular basis. The RT supervises the ZULIDAD study by supporting and advising the research team (e.g., with regard to the selection of variables, the wording of questions or the appropriate interpretation of results). The RT furthermore carries out an independent but related project aiming at the dissemination of the ZULIDAD study results.

Study setting

The ZULIDAD study is a multicenter study. It is being conducted in eleven NH (ten municipal NH of the City of Zurich, one privately managed NH specialized in dementia care, Sonnweid AG). The municipal NH have a predefined staff ratio, are obliged to have an appropriate skill and grade mix and are certified on a regular basis. Altogether the municipal NH encompass 1’625 beds (ranging from 42 to 334). Based on RAI-MDS data 69 % of the residents had a dementia diagnosis in 2013 (ZULIDAD unpublished data). The privately run NH Sonnweid offers 154 beds which are exclusively for people with dementia.

Study population

The ZULIDAD study population comprises three groups of subjects: 1) RAD, 2) REL, and 3) PN. Eligibility criteria are presented in Table 2. More than 1’700 RAD were screened, 410 of them met the inclusion criteria and 126 REL and PN gave their informed consent (as of June 2016). Thus, the sample size currently encompasses 126 RAD, REL and PN (3 × 126). The exact sample size will be confirmed in publications after data collection has finished.
Table 2

Eligibility criteria for nursing home residents with advanced dementia, relatives and primary nurses

 

Inclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria

RAD

- At least one complete RAI-MDS assessment in database

- Dementia diagnosis (RAI item I1q (Alzheimer’s Dementia) or I1u (other dementia)

- CPS of 5 or 6

- Informed consents by the authorized representatives, following the presumed will of the resident

- Sub-acute or short-term rehabilitative unit

- Cognitive impairment due to a major stroke, traumatic brain injury, tumor, or chronic psychiatric condition

- Cognitive impairment due to coma

REL

- Informed consent

- Proficiency in German

 

PN

- Informed consent

- Proficiency in German

 

Note. CPS cognitive performance score, it is composed of five variables from the RAI-MDS [15], scores range from 0-6. Scores of 4-6 identify residents who are severely impaired in their daily decision-making. A CPS score of 5 is comparable to a Mini Mental State Examination score of 5 [37]

Abbreviations: RAD resident with advanced dementia, RAI-MDS resident assessment instrument – minimum data set, REL relative, PN primary nurse

Recruitment and informed consent

Recruitment is conducted consecutively in the eleven participating NH. Eligible RAD are identified based on screening the NH’s RAI-MDS databases on a reference date. Subsequently, legally authorized representatives (REL and assistances) and, if the authorized representative cannot be the informant an additional REL, are contacted by postal mail which includes an information sheet describing the study. If they declare interest by returning a prepaid return form, they receive a phone call by a trained research assistant who provides more information about the study and a personal meeting is scheduled if interest persists. The first face-to-face contact with REL includes a detailed clarification of the study procedure, provision of written informed consent (for informant and RAD according to the presumed will) and – if both consents are provided – the completion of the baseline questionnaire. A research assistant then contacts the PN of the RAD directly by telephone (a general information about the study has been provided by the manager of the NH in advance), informs about the study procedure and arranges – if interest is expressed – a personal meeting in order to provide full study information, obtain informed consent and to complete the baseline questionnaire. If REL does not respond to the initial enquiry, they receive one postal reminder.

Data collection

After the baseline assessment, questionnaires are sent three-monthly and are completed autonomously by the REL and PN (see Fig. 1). If problems occur, participants are requested to contact the research team. Should a RAD decease, the last questionnaire (post mortem) is sent out two weeks (PN) and six weeks (REL), respectively, after death. The duration of the initial face-to-face meeting is 90-120 min, and the repeated and post mortem questionnaires require 45-60 min to complete. If REL or PN fail to submit two questionnaires consecutively, they are excluded from the study. However, unless REL withdraws consent, the RAD remains in the study population, as long as either REL or PN continues to submit the questionnaires. Data collection started in November 2013 and will presumably end in December 2017.

Instruments

As shown in Table 3, the questionnaires for REL and PN address several topics suggested by the ZULIDAD RT members to play an important role in the last phase of life of RAD. Corresponding variables and instruments were selected based on clinical and research expertise of the investigators and existing studies (indicated in Table 3). Whenever possible, reliable and validated instruments were used, which were – if necessary – translated into German (indicated in Table 3) following ISPOR guidelines [19] and/or slightly adapted to the field of dementia. With few exceptions, questions have a closed-ended response format. Overall, there are two sets of ZULIDAD questionnaires, one for REL and one for PN, which in turn contain three different compositions of variables and instruments – baseline, three-monthly and post mortem. Questionnaires were revised and piloted by the members of the ZULIDAD RT. Data is entered into a central study database which runs on the RedCAP platform [20]. Questionnaire data is complemented by the routinely collected RAI-MDS data [15].
Table 3

Data collection elements in the ZULIDAD study

Topic

Instruments

Source

Time

RAD characteristics

 Demographics

 

REL

BL

 Dementia

 

REL/RAI-MDS

BL

 Health status

 

REL/PN/RAI-MDS

BL/6M

 Quality of life

QUALIDabcd, single item

REL/PN

BL/3M/PM

 Pain

BISAD, single item

PN

BL/3M/PM

 Suffering

MSSEa, single item

PN

BL/3M/PM

 Behavioral problems

NPI-Q

PN

BL/3M/PM

 Survival time

 

REL/PN

BL/3M

Care

 Treatment strategy

 

PN

BL/3M/PM

 Current treatments

 

PN

BL/3M/PM

 Symptom Management

EOLD-SMabc

REL/PN

BL/3M/PM

 Satisfaction with care

EOLD-SWCabc, single item, open question

REL

BL/3M/PM

 Communication

 

REL/PN

BL/3M/PM

 Trust in staff

 

REL

BL/3M/PM

 Decisions

DSIab

REL

3M/PM

Dying

 Circumstances of dying

 

REL/PN

PM

 Quality of dying

EOLD-CADabcd, QOD-LTCa, QODD, FPCSa, single item

REL/PN

PM

Advanced planning issues

 Advanced directives

 

REL/PN

BL/PM

 Presumed preferences

PADDa

REL

BL

 Care agreements

 

PN

BL/3M/PM

REL characteristics

 Demographics

 

REL

BL

 Wellbeing

WHO-5

REL

BL/3M/PM

 Relation to RAD

 

REL

BL/3M

 Knowledge

 

REL

BL

 Attitudes

 

REL

BL/3M/PM

PN characteristics

 Demographics

 

PN

BL

 Wellbeing

WHO-5

PN

BL/3M/PM

 Work

 

PN

BL/3M/PM

 Attitudes

 

PN

BL/3M/PM

Note. RAD Demographics = Sex, year of birth, religious affiliation, marital status. Dementia = Dementia type, Cognitive Performance Scale. Health status = Overall health status, changes in overall health status, RAI-MDS. Survival time = Estimated survival time, has dying phase started? Treatment strategy = palliative vs. curative. Current treatments = Medical treatments, safety-related measures, psychosocial interventions. Communication = Frequency of and satisfaction with staff/REL communication. Trust in staff = Trust in nursing staff. Decisions = Satisfaction with decisions (DSI), discussions about interventions and whether they lead to decisions. Circumstances of Dying = Cause of death, place of death, attendees, subjective estimation of global dying quality. Quality of dying = REL: EOLD-CAD, QOD-LTC, FPCS; PN: EOLD-CAD. Advanced directives = Availability, content, were directives adhered to? Care agreements = Regarding medical treatments and safety-related measures. Demographics REL = Sex, year of birth, nationality, religious affiliation, education. Wellbeing REL = Health status, wellbeing (WHO-5), quality of life, emotional burden, feelings of guilt. Relation to RAD = relationship quality before dementia and after dementia, frequency and duration of visits. Knowledge = Knowledge of dementia, palliative care and new legislation. Attitudes = Attitudes towards means of ending or prolonging life. Demographics PN = Sex, year of birth. Wellbeing PN = Health status, wellbeing (WHO-5), quality of life. Work = Work satisfaction, work load, work experiences, qualification

Abbreviations: RAD resident with advanced dementia, RAI-MDS resident assessment instrument – minimum data set, REL relative, BL baseline questionnaire, 3 M three-monthly questionnaire, 6 M six-monthly RAI-MDS, PM post mortem questionnaire, QUALID quality of life in late-stage dementia scale [24], BISAD Observational instrument to assess pain in dementia [23], MSSE mini suffering state examination [22], EOLD-SM/ -SWC/ -CAD end-of-life care in dementia – symptom management/ -satisfaction with care/ -comfort assessment in dying [21], QOD-LTC quality of dying in long-term care [38], PADD preferences about dying and death [39], QODD quality of dying and death (corresponds with PADD) [40], FPCS family perception of care scale [41], DSI decision satisfaction inventory [33], WHO-5 the WHO-five well-being index [42]

anewly translated into German, bapplied in CASCADE study, capplied in DEOLD study, dapplied in the “Dying Well” study

Statistical analysis

A first focus will be put on the cross-sectional analysis of baseline and post-mortem data, regarding quality of life, quality of dying and comfort/discomfort and how the perceptions of these measures differ between REL and PN (see Fig. 2). A second focus will be put on longitudinal analyses in order to understand dynamics of change and to identify potential factors that influence stability and deterioration over time. Therefore standard longitudinal data analysis approaches based on the general linear model and multilevel and structural equation models such as latent growth curve or growth mixture models will be applied. In line with previous publications established scales such as EOLD [21], MSSE [22], BISAD [23] or QUALID [24] will be used as primary outcome measures to estimate quality of dying. A third focus will be put on the comparisons with data from other countries, e.g., the Netherlands.
Fig. 2

Illustration of proposed data analyses

Discussion

The importance of dementia as a life-limiting condition is increasing. As a consequence, providing end-of-life care in dementia will become one of the most challenging tasks for health care systems. Yet, existing knowledge about palliative care in dementia is scarce. With a prospective cohort design the ZULIDAD study examines the last phase of life of RAD. It is one of the few existing prospective studies on the last phase of life in dementia and it is the first prospective study to describe the situation in the greater Zurich area, Switzerland. The combination of data from REL, PN and RAI-MDS allows a comprehensive description and an approximation to the actual quality of life and quality of dying of the RAD. Furthermore, the multi-perspective approach will help to close knowledge gaps regarding differences in REL’s and PN’s perceptions of central outcome measures at the end of life in dementia. Systematic differences in proxy estimations (e.g., REL and PN) can provide a basis for interventions and interventional studies aiming at optimizing palliative care.

The alignment of the ZULDAD study design, inclusion criteria and applied measures to related studies allows for comparisons between European countries and between Europe and U.S. However, due to the geographical limitation to the greater Zurich area and the limitation to municipal NH and NH specialized in dementia care the study results will neither be generalizable to the French- and Italian-speaking parts of Switzerland nor to all nursing homes in Zurich. The right-censoring of some of the data (because not all RAD will be followed until death) is another bias that needs to be considered when interpreting the data. A unique characteristic of the ZULIDAD study is that it is performed as participatory research project with stakeholder involvement throughout the entire study process. The ZULIDAD RT promotes the practical relevance and the effective knowledge transfer of study results.

In conclusion, the ZULIDAD study provides prospective multi-perspective data on the last phase of life of RAD. This is an important pre-requisite to improve palliative care in advanced dementia in Switzerland and internationally.

Abbreviations

NH: 

Nursing home

PN: 

Primary nurse

RAD: 

Nursing home resident with advanced dementia

RAI-MDS: 

Resident assessment instrument – minimum data set

REL: 

Relatives

RT: 

Round table

ZULIDAD: 

Zurich Life and Death with Advanced Dementia study

Declarations

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Florian Koehn for help with recruitment and participant follow-up, Christiane Arenz, Rebecca Billeter, Cecilia Câceda, Renate Fiedler, Florian Koehn and Silvia Seidl for data collection, the City of Zurich Nursing Homes and the Sonnweid AG for supporting the ZULIDAD study and the participants for their study participation. The authors thank Aimée Spring and Stephanie Lehmann for their contributions to earlier stages of the project. Furthermore, the authors thank all members of the Round Table ZULIDAD for their generous donation of time and willingness to share knowledge and experiences.

Funding

The study is funded by SNSF grant 406740_139363 as part of the National Research Program 67 “End-of-life”.

Authors’ contributions

All authors have made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the study. SE, NT and FR drafted the manuscript. All authors critically revised the manuscript and gave final approval of the version to be published.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interest.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Ethical approval and consent to participate

The ZULIDAD study was approved by the Ethical Committee of the Canton of Zurich (KEK-ZH-Nr. 2013-0385). All participating REL and PN signed an informed consent. For RAD the legally authorized representatives signed the informed consent.

Study registration

The ZULIDAD study was registered in FORSbase (Ref No 11530), a Swiss online platform for social science studies.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
University Research Priority Program “Dynamics of Healthy Aging”, University of Zurich
(2)
Center for Gerontology, University of Zurich
(3)
Division of Psychiatry Research and Psychogeriatric Medicine, University of Zurich
(4)
City of Zurich Nursing Homes
(5)
Municipal Physician Service Zurich
(6)
Department of Psychology, University of Zurich

References

  1. Prince M, Bryce R, Albanese E, Wimo A, Ribeiro W, Ferri CP. The global prevalence of dementia: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Alzheimers Dement. 2013;9:63–75.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Mitchell SL, Teno JM, Miller SC, Mor V. A national study of the location of death for older persons with dementia. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53:299–305.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Houttekier D, Cohen J, Bilsen J, Addington-Hall J, Onwuteaka-Philipsen BD, Deliens L. Place of death of older persons with dementia. a study in five European countries. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010;58:751–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Escobar Pinzón LC, Münster E, Fischbeck S, Unrath M, Claus M, Martini T, Weber M. End-of-life care in Germany: study design, methods and first results of the EPACS study (Establishment of Hospice and Palliative Care Services in Germany). BMC Palliat Care. 2010;9:16.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Mitchell SL, Teno JM, Kiely DK, Shaffer ML, Jones RN, Prigerson HG, Volicer L, Givens JL, Hamel MB. The clinical course of advanced dementia. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:1529–38.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Wetzels R, Zuidema S, Jansen I, Verhey F, Koopmans R. Course of neuropsychiatric symptoms in residents with dementia in long-term care institutions: a systematic review. Int Psychogeriatr. 2010;22:1040–53.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Cordner Z, Blass DM, Rabins PV, Black BS. Quality of life in nursing home residents with advanced dementia. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010;58:2394–400.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Pautex S, Herrmann FR, Le Lous P, Ghedira M, Zulian GB, Michon A, Gold G. Symptom relief in the last week of life: Is dementia always a limiting factor? J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007;55:1316–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Kammoun S, Gold G, Bouras C, Giannakopoulos P, McGee W, Herrmann F, Michel JP. Immediate causes of death of demented and non-demented elderly. Acta Neurol Scand Suppl. 2000;102:96–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Mitchell SL, Kiely DK, Hamel MB. Dying with advanced dementia in the nursing home. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:321–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Van der Steen JT, Radbruch L, Hertogh CM, de Boer ME, Hughes JC, Larkin P, Francke AL, Junger S, Gove D, Firth P, Koopmans RT, Volicer L, on behalf of the European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC). White paper defining optimal palliative care in older people with dementia: a Delphi study and recommendations from the European Association for Palliative Care. Palliat Med. 2014;28:197–209.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Nakanishi M, Nakashima T, Shindo Y. An evaluation of palliative care contents in national dementia strategies in reference to the European Association for Palliative Care white paper. Int Psychogeriatr. 2015;27:1551–61.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Van Der Steen JT, Goodman C. What research we no longer need in neurodegenerative disease at the end of life: The case of research in dementia. Palliat Med. 2015;29:189–92.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Van der Steen JT. Dying with dementia: What we know after more than a decade of research. J Alzheimers Dis. 2010;22:37–55.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Garms-Homolová V, Gilgen R. RAI 2.0 - Resident Assessment Instrument. 2nd ed. Bern: Verlag Hans Huber; 2000.Google Scholar
  16. Mitchell SL, Kiely DK, Jones RN, Prigerson H, Volicer L, Teno JM. Advanced dementia research in the nursing home: The CASCADE study. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 2006;20:166–75.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Van Der Steen JT, Ribbe MW, Deliens L, Gutschow G, Onwuteaka-Philipsen BD. Retrospective and prospective data collection compared in the Dutch end of life in dementia (DEOLD) study. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 2014;28:88–94.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Vandervoort A, Van den Block L, Van der Steen JT, Volicer L, Van der Stichele R, Houttekier D, Deliens L. Nursing home residents dying with dementia in Flanders, Belgium: A nationwide postmortem study on clinical characteristics and quality of dying. JAMDA. 2013;14:485–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, Eremenco S, McElroy S, Verjee-Lorenz A, Erikson P. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: Report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Value Health. 2005;8:94–104.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)-a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42:377–81.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Volicer L, Hurley AC, Blasi ZV. Scales for evaluation of end-of-life care in dementia. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 2001;15:194–200.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Aminoff BZ, Purits E, Noy S, Adunsky A. Measuring the suffering of end-stage dementia: reliability and validity of the Mini-Suffering State Examination. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2004;38:123–30.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Fischer T. Schmerzeinschätzung bei Menschen mit schwerer Demenz. Bern: Hogrefe; 2011.Google Scholar
  24. Weiner MF, Martin-Cook K, Svetlik DA, Saine K, Foster B, Fontaine C. The quality of life in late-stage dementia (QUALID) scale. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2000;1:114–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Black BS, Finucane T, Baker A, Loreck D, Blass D, Fogarty L, Phillips H, Hovanec L, Steele C, Rabins PV. Health problems and correlates of pain in nursing home residents with advanced dementia. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 2006;20:283–90.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Maust DT, Blass DM, Black BS, Rabins PV. Treatment decisions regarding hospitalization and surgery for nursing home residents with advanced dementia: the CareAD Study. Int Psychogeriatr. 2007;20:406–18.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Hicks KL, Rabins PV, Black BS. Predictors of mortality in nursing home residents with advanced dementia. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen. 2010;25:439–45.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Hendriks SA, Smalbrugge M, Galindo-Garre F, Hertogh CMPM, Van der Steen JT. From admission to death: Prevalence and course of pain, agitation, and shortness of breath, and treatment of these symptoms in nursing home residents with dementia. JAMDA. 2015;16:475–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Toscani F, Di Giulio P, Villani D, Giunco F, Brunelli C, Gentile S, Finetti S, Charrier L, Monti M, Van der Steen J, on behalf of the End of Life Observatory - Prospective Study on Dementia Patients Care (EoLO-PSODEC) Research Group. Treatment and prescription in advanced dementia patients residing in long-term care geriatric institution and at home. J Palliat Med. 2013;16:1–7.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  30. Toscani F, Van der Steen JT, Finetti S, Giunco F, Pettenati F, Villani D, Monti M, Gentile S, Charrier L, Di Giulio P, Grp E-PR. Critical decisions for older people with advanced dementia: A prospective study in long-term institutions and district home care. JAMDA. 2015;16:535–U169.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Morris JN, Fries BE, Mehr DR, Hawes C, Phillips C, Mor V, Lipsitz LA. MDS cognitive performance scale. J Gerontol. 1994;49:M174–82.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Reisberg B, Ferris SH, Deleon MJ, Crook T. The Global Deterioration Scale for assessment of primary degenerative dementia. Am J Psychiatry. 1982;139:1136–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Barry MJ, Cherkin DC, Chang Y, Fowler FJ, Skates S. A randomized trial of a multimedia shared decision-making program for men facing a treatment decision for begnin prostatic hyperplasia. Dis Manag Clin Outcome. 1997;1:5–14.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  34. Warden V, Hurley AC, Volicer L. Development and psychometric evaluation of the Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia (PAINAD) Scale. JAMDA. 2003;4:9–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Reisberg B. Functional Assessment Staging (Fast). Psychopharmacol Bull. 1988;24:653–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Hurley AC, Volicer BJ, Hanrahan PA. Assessment of discomfort in advanced Alzheimer patients. Res Nurs Health. 1992;15:369–77.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Hartmaier SL, Sloane PD, Guess HA, Koch GG, Mitchell CM, Phillips CD. Validation of the minimum data set cognitive performance scale - agreement with the mini-mental-state-examination. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1995;50:M128–33.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Munn JC, Zimmerman S, Hanson LC, Williams CS, Sloane PD, Clipp EC, Tulsky JA, Steinhauser KE. Measuring the quality of dying in long-term care. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007;55:1371–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Engelberg RA, Patrick DL, Curtis JR. Correspondence between patients’ preferences and Surrogates’ understandings for dying and death. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2005;30:498–509.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Patrick DL, Engelberg RA, Curtis JR. Evaluating the quality of dying and death. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2001;22:717–26.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Vohra JU, Brazil K, Hanna S, Abelson J. Family perceptions of end-of-life care in long-term care facilities. J Palliat Care. 2004;20:297–302.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Bech P, Olsen RL, Kjoller M, Rasmussen NK. Measuring well-being rather than the absence of distress symptoms: a comparison of the SF-36 Mental Health subscale and the WHO-Five Well-Being Scale. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2003;12:85–91.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s). 2016

Advertisement