Core outcome set for nonpharmacological community-based interventions for people living with dementia at home : A Systematic Review of Outcome Measurement Instruments

Harding, Andrew and Morbey, Hazel and Ahmed, Faraz and Opdebeeck, Carol and Elvish, Ruth and Leroi, Ira and Williamson, Paula and Keady, John and Reilly, Siobhan (2021) Core outcome set for nonpharmacological community-based interventions for people living with dementia at home : A Systematic Review of Outcome Measurement Instruments. The Gerontologist, 61 (8). e435-e448. ISSN 0016-9013

Text (Systematic review author accepted version published)
Systematic_review_author_accepted_version_published.pdf - Accepted Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (616kB)

Abstract

Background and Objectives: It is questionable whether existing outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) in dementia research reflect what key stakeholders’ value. We attained consensus from over 300 key stakeholders, including people living with dementia, and identified 13 core outcome items for use in nonpharmacological and community-based interventions for people with dementia living at home. In this systematic review we review OMIs that have previously been used in dementia care research to determine how, or even if, the 13 core outcome items can be measured. Research Design and Methods: We extracted self-reported OMIs from trials, reviews and reports of instrument development. Searches were undertaken in the ALOIS database, Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, socINDEX and COSMIN database. We aimed to assess the psychometric properties of OMI items for face validity with the core outcome items, content validity, internal consistency and responsiveness. We held a co-research workshop involving people living with dementia and care partners in order to ratify the findings. Results: In total 347 OMIs were located from 354 sources. Of these 76 OMIs met the inclusion criteria. No OMIs were deemed to have sufficient face validity for the COS items, and no OMIs proceeded to further assessment. The ‘best’ available OMI is the Engagement and Independence in Dementia Questionnaire (EID-Q). Discussion and Implications: This study provides a practical resource for those designing dementia research trials. Being able to measure the COS items would herald a paradigm shift for dementia research, be responsive to what key stakeholders value and enhance the ability to make comparisons.