Most people living with dementia do so at home, comprising approximately 30 million people globally. Despite extensive research on psychotropic medication use in long-term care settings, there has been little comparative research looking at psychotropic use in people living with dementia at home.

The study aim was to systematically review the literature to identify factors associated with psychotropic medication use in people living with dementia at home.

The PROSPERO-registered review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive search of four databases (2010 to 2020) was undertaken for the systematic review to identify empirical studies. A combination of MESH search terms for dementia, community-dwelling, and psychotropic medications were used. Suitable data were subject to meta-analysis using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis to calculate raw data to event rates and pooled, adjusted event rates for different modifier sub-analyses. Thematic analysis was utilised to synthesise emergent factors and a meta-analysis undertaken on suitable data.

The search identified 619 articles of which 39 met inclusion/exclusion criteria. Use of psychotropics ranged from 18.7% for anxiolytic/hypnotics, to 26.9% for antipsychotics and 33.1% for antidepressants. Thematic analysis suggested that psychotropic prescribing was associated with a range of patient and environmental factors, including, but not limited to: (i) age (<75yr; >90yr); (ii) gender (being male); (iii) more advanced functional decline; and (iv) living alone. There was a conspicuous absence of data pertaining to carer and prescriber factors. Significant associations were identified in the meta-analysis between psychotropic use and respite in full-time care or hospitalisation as well as co-morbid psychiatric illness.

The reasons for psychotropic prescribing in this population remain poorly understood. Significant associations and knowledge gaps identified here generate opportunities for further research and development of targeted interventions to improve care and meeting the needs of this population group. This includes cautionary trigger questions for prescribers including: What am I treating? Who am I treating? How will I measure response? How can I ensure that psychotropics initiated in respite/hospital are used short-term only?

To follow-up a cohort of older people who self-harmed, their carer, and general practitioner (GP) and examine their reflections on the self-harm, care experiences, and outcomes.

Qualitative in-depth interviews.

Two teaching hospitals and associated community services.

Twelve-month follow-up of participants aged 80 or older who self-harmed, their nominated carers, and GPs.

A geriatric psychiatrist gathered data through patient and carer interviews using a narrative inquiry approach and from medical records. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. N-VIVO facilitated data organization for thematic analysis. Questionnaires sent to the patient’s GP examined their perspectives and aspects of care relating to the self-harm.

Nineteen patients (63% baseline sample), 29 carers (90.6%), and 11 GPs (36.7%) were available at follow-up. Themes emerging from patients were “denial and secrets;” “endless suffering;” “more invalidation;” “being heard;” and “miserable in care.” Themes from carer interviews were “denial and secrets;” “patient’s persistent wish to die;” “abandonment by clinicians;” “unending burden for the carer;” and “distress regarding placement.” General practitioner themes were “the problem is fixed;” “the troops have arrived;” and “I understand.”

Factors contributing to self-harm persisted at follow-up. Positive and negative responses were identified in the older person’s system, highlighting areas for potential intervention. A conceptual framework for understanding self-harm in the very old was derived that emphasized the importance of understanding individual needs, the interpersonal context of the older person, and carer burden. Interventions should improve communication, facilitate shared understanding of perspectives, and provide support at all levels.

Behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) are virtually ubiquitous in dementia. Excessive recourse to use of psychotropics which have high risk to benefit ratio remains a global problem. We aimed to identify components of quality prescribing in BPSD to develop a tool for quality prescribing and to test this tool.

We used Delphi methodology to identify elements of quality prescribing in BPSD. The tool was tested by a range of medical and nursing professionals on 48 patients, in inpatient and ambulatory settings in Northern Sydney Local Health District, Australia.

Consensual opinion using Delphi method was that quality prescribing in dementia comprised ten factors including failure to use first line non-pharmacological strategies, indication, choice of drug, consent, dosage, mode of administration, titration, polypharmacy, toxicity, and review. These elements formed the quality use of medications in dementia (QUM-D) tool, lower scores of which reflected quality prescribing, with a possible range of scores from 0 to 30. When inter-rater reliability was tested on a subgroup of raters, QUM-D showed high inter-rater reliability. A significant reduction in QUM-D scores was demonstrated from baseline to follow-up, mean difference being 5.3 (SD = 3.8; 95% confidence interval 4.1–6.4; t = 9.5; df = 47; p < 0.001). There was also a significant reduction in score from baseline to follow-up when rated by clinical nurse consultants from a specialized behavior assessment management service (BAMS) (N = 12).

The QUM-D is a tool which may help to improve quality prescribing practices in the context of BPSD. In this setting, we consider quality prescribing, and accordingly the obligations of prescribers, to be an inclusive concept rather than just adding to the mantra of “not prescribing.”

The International Psychogeriatric Association (IPA) capacity taskforce was established to promote the autonomy, proper access to care, and dignity of persons with decision-making disabilities (DMDs) across nations. The Asia Consortium of the taskforce was established to pursue these goals in the Asia-Pacific region. This paper is part of the Asia Consortium's initiative to promote understanding and advocacy in regard to surrogate decision-making across the region.

The current guardianship laws are compared, and jurisdictional variations in the processes for proxy decision-making to support persons with DMDs and other health and social needs in China, Japan, Thailand, and Australia are explored.

The different Asia-Pacific countries have various proxy decision-making mechanisms in place for persons with DMDs, which are both formalized according to common law, civil law, and other legislation, and shaped by cultural practices. Various processes for guardianship and mechanisms for medical decision-making and asset management exist across the region. Processes that are still evolving across the region include those that facilitate advanced planning as a result of the paucity of legal structures for enduring powers of attorney (EPA) and guardianship in some regions, and the struggle to achieve consensual positions in regard to end-of-life decision-making. Formal processes for supporting decision-making are yet to be developed.

The diverse legal approaches to guardianship and administration must be understood to meet the challenges of the rapidly ageing population in the Asia-Pacific region. Commonalities in the solutions and difficulties faced in encountering these challenges have global significance.