This study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators of mental health care for patients with trauma histories via qualitative methods with clinicians and administrators from primary care clinics for the underserved. Individual interviews were conducted, followed by a combined focus group with administrators from three jurisdictions; there were three focus groups with clinicians from each clinic system. Common themes were identified, and responses from groups were compared. Administrators and clinicians report extensive trauma histories among patients. Clinician barriers include lack of time, patient resistance, and inadequate referral options; administrators cite reimbursement issues, staff training, and lack of clarity about the term trauma. A key facilitator is doctor-patient relationship. There were differences in perceived barriers and facilitators at the institutional and clinical levels for mental health care for patients with trauma. Importantly, there is agreement about better access to and development of trauma-specific interventions. Findings will aid the development and implementation of trauma-focused interventions embedded in primary care.

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are used to evaluate disease and treatments in many therapeutic areas, capturing relevant aspects of the disorder not obtainable through clinician or informant report, including those for which patients may have a greater level of awareness than those around them. Using PRO measures in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and prodromal Alzheimer's disease (AD) presents challenges given the presence of cognitive impairment and loss of insight. This overview presents issues relevant to the value of patient report with emphasis on the role of insight. Complex activities of daily living functioning and executive functioning emerge as areas of particular promise for obtaining patient self-report. The full promise of patient self-report has yet to be realized in MCI and prodromal AD, however, in part because of lack of PRO measures developed specifically for mild disease, limited use of best practices in new measure development, and limited attention to psychometric evaluation. Resolving different diagnostic definitions and improving clinical understanding of MCI and prodromal AD will also be critical to the development and use of PRO measures.

Multiple arguments for considering routine dementia screening have been presented. Furthermore, dementia diagnoses are widely unrecognized. As a result, persons with dementia are missing important clinical care and treatment interventions. By distinction, the problems of defining, diagnosing, and treating mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are not yet resolved, and MCI is not ready for a screening recommendation. Dementia screening approaches, including cognitive testing and functional assessment, must be evaluated on their scientific merits, including sensitivity and specificity for recognizing affected individuals in at-risk populations. Screening tests must be “cost-worthy”, with the benefits of true-positive test results justifying the costs of testing and resolving false-positive cases, with due consideration for proper diagnostic evaluation and potential harms. With the tremendous number of new cases projected in the near future and the expected emergence of beneficial therapies, considerably more research is needed to develop more efficient screening systems.

Background

Multiple instruments exist to measure dementia behaviors, but the nursing staff perspective on those behaviors and their level of burden has not been well measured. The goal of this study was to examine the psychometric performance of the Modified Nursing Care Assessment Scale (M-NCAS), a 28-item nurse rating of burden associated with care for institutionalized individuals with dementia. Nurses rate items in terms of extent to which the behavior or characteristic is present ("attitude" domain), and extent to which it is a burden ("strain" domain).

Methods

Data from 282 patients enrolled in a 12-week, double-blind, randomized clinical trial comparing risperidone treatment to placebo was used to evaluate M-NCAS item performance, internal consistency reliability, and construct validity. Empirical subscales were identified via exploratory factor analysis (EFA).

Results

Four poorly-performing items were deleted from further analyses. EFA identified 3 "attitude" subscales and 5 "strain" subscales. Cronbach's alphas were 0.65 and above. Correlation with the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory and the BEHAVE-AD, clinical ratings of dementia behaviors, were low to moderate.

Conclusion

The M-NCAS provides a valid and reliable means of obtaining care burden ratings from formal caregivers in long-term care, and provides a method for evaluating dementia interventions from the perspective of nursing staff.