Respite services for caregivers: research findings for service planning. In-home respite intervention reduces plasma epinephrine in stressed Alzheimer caregivers. Caring for Aged Dementia Care Resident Study (CADRES) of person-centred care, dementia-care mapping, and usual care in dementia: a cluster-randomised trial.
A demonstration respite project for caregivers of older people with Alzheimer's disease was evaluated by a randomized experiment. Three hundred and sixteen volunteer primary caregivers were offered respite services and 315 completed the research portion without the offer of respite. The research indicated that even before the demonstration most families had some respite help in place. Of all those offered respite, 58% availed themselves of the offer. During the project year experimental and control subjects were equal in using slightly more services and there was no evidence that formal services had substituted for informal. Some excess morbidity and mortality in Alzheimer caregivers (CGs) may be related to chronic activation of the sympatho-adrenal-medullary (SAM) system. Authors tested the efficacy of an in-home respite intervention to reduce peripheral markers of SAM activation and psychological distress in spousal caregivers of patients with Alzheimer disease.
                Caregivers were classified as Vulnerable (n = 27) or Non-Vulnerable (n = 28). Vulnerable CGs were those with a severe mismatch between caregiving demand and help received in the preceding 6 months. CGs had plasma catecholamine levels sampled at rest and in response to a stressor (speech task) before and 1 month after a 2-week in-home respite intervention. Self-reported symptoms of anxiety and depression were also obtained.
                ANOVA revealed a group x treatment interaction: At the 1-month follow-up, plasma epinephrine declined significantly in the vulnerable caregivers who received respite, but rose in those who were wait-listed. No effect was found for norepinephrine, heart rate, blood pressure, or psychological symptoms.
                Findings suggest that an in-home respite program may reduce SAM activation independent of psychological symptoms. To the extent that sympathetic activation mediates pathophysiological events, these results suggest an approach that may reduce morbidity and mortality in certain caregivers. Evidence for improved outcomes for people with dementia through provision of person-centred care and dementia-care mapping is largely observational. We aimed to do a large, randomised comparison of person-centred care, dementia-care mapping, and usual care.
                In a cluster randomised controlled trial, urban residential sites were randomly assigned to person-centred care, dementia-care mapping, or usual care. Carers received training and support in either intervention or continued usual care. Treatment allocation was masked to assessors. The primary outcome was agitation measured with the Cohen-Mansfield agitation inventory (CMAI). Secondary outcomes included psychiatric symptoms including hallucinations, neuropsychological status, quality of life, falls, and cost of treatment. Outcome measures were assessed before and directly after 4 months of intervention, and at 4 months of follow-up. Hierarchical linear models were used to test treatment and time effects. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12608000084381.
                15 care sites with 289 residents were randomly assigned. Pairwise contrasts revealed that at follow-up, and relative to usual care, CMAI score was lower in sites providing mapping (mean difference 10.9, 95% CI 0.7-21.1; p=0.04) and person-centred care (13.6, 3.3-23.9; p=0.01). Compared with usual care, fewer falls were recorded in sites that used mapping (0.24, 0.08-0.40; p=0.02) but there were more falls with person-centred care (0.15, 0.02-0.28; p=0.03). There were no other significant effects.
                Person-centred care and dementia-care mapping both seem to reduce agitation in people with dementia in residential care.
Current evidence does not demonstrate any benefits or adverse effects from the use of respite care for people with dementia or their caregivers. These results should be treated with caution, however, as they may reflect the lack of high quality research in this area rather than an actual lack of benefit. Given the frequency with which respite care is advocated and provided, well-designed trials in this area are needed.