Shared decision-making for people living with dementia in extended care settings: a systematic review

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

27 Citations (Scopus)
59 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background Shared decision-making is recognised as an important element of person-centred dementia care. Objectives The aim of this review was to explore how people living with dementia and cognitive impairment can be included in day-to-day decisions about their health and care in extended care settings. Design A systematic review including primary research relating to shared decision-making, with cognitively impaired adults in (or transferrable to) extended care settings. Databases searched were: CINAHL, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, NICE Evidence, OpenGrey, Autism Data, Google Scholar, Scopus and Medicines Complete (June to October 2016 and updated 2018) for studies published in the last 20 years. Results Of the 19 included studies 15 involved people with living dementia, seven in extended care settings. People living with cognitive impairment often have the desire and ability to participate in decision-making about their everyday care, although this is regularly underestimated by their staff and family care partners. Shared decision-making has the potential to improve quality of life for both the person living with dementia and those who support them. How resources to support shared decision-making are implemented in extended care settings is less well understood. Conclusions Evidence suggests that people living with cognitive impairment value opportunities to be involved in everyday decision-making about their care. How these opportunities are created, understood, supported and sustained in extended care settings remains to be determined.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere018977
JournalBMJ Open
Volume8
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 9 Jun 2018

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Shared decision-making for people living with dementia in extended care settings: a systematic review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this