Objective: As the elderly population increases, the number of elderly people suffering from dementia is also showing an increase, but public sector support measures remain inadequate. Seventy % of all senjor citizens with dementia in Japan are cared for at home. The remaining 30% are cared for at care facilities or hospitals. These people cannot be managed at home for a of reasons. To help elderly people with dementia and their caretakers maintain a decent QOL, the sequence of events leading to readmission and their background circumstances were investigated for 35 of the caretakers (group A) of elderly people with dementia who had previonsly been cared for at home and were admitted to a sanatorium ward. The findings were compared with those for 30 caretakers (group B) of elderly people with dementia who continued to be cared for at home while utilizing domiciliary services, This comparison was performed to identify, factors making it difficult to continue with domiciliary care and what supportive measures for nursing and care-giving should be developed for the future. Methods: Age, gender, duration of dementia, primary diagnosis, associated diseases, treatment, ADL selfcare grade, dementia grade, and extent of dependence on the caregivers were determined from medical records. To assess the status of the caregivers and their background circumstances, the age, gender, relationship with the elderly person, duration of providing care, the number of persons in the household, the availability of an alternative care-giver, the availability of the family doctor, the utilization of services, and the burden of care-giving (CCI score and 27 items) were surveyed through interview. Results: The ADL grade of the persons requiring care was correlated with the amount of care-giving provided in both groups. There Were significant differences, in the burden of care-giving between the groups, which was especially high with respect to toileting, transfer, and bathing. The time required for care-giving became greater with decreasing ADL grade, and this was especially obvious in group A. In both groups, the burden of care-giving was lighter when alternative care-gives were available, and more alternative care-gives were available in group B, suggesting that this was a factor in the continuation of home care. There was no difference between the groups in the number of persons utilizing domiciliary care services. The percentage utilizing such services was significantly higher in group B than in group A, suggesting that this was also a factor in the continuation of home care. As for the burden of care-giving, there was no difference between the groups regarding the CCI score and the total score for the 27 items. The score for a feeling of restriction among the 27 items was significantly high in group A than in group B, suggesting this was a factor in the discontinuation of home care. There was a marked difference in the duration of care-giving, but in both groups the duration of care-giving was not correlated with the perceived burden of care. Common reasons for hospitalization in group A were deterioration of the elderly persons conditions and limitations on the ability of the care-givers to provide care. Many persons cited limitations on care-giving as a reason. They also complained of a heavier burden of these duties. Conclusion: Importance should be attached to sufficient understanding of the QOL and the circumstances of both the persons requiring care and their care-givers, so that the improvement of services, and support provided, can be based on each individual situation in the future.
View full abstract