ArticleDementia and geriatric cognitive disorders extra
Cognitive Rehabilitation for People with Dementia in Norway: Case Managers' Experiences from a Pilot Study.
Article in Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders extra. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: People with dementia are eligible for rehabilitation for functional difficulties resulting from cognitive symptoms, but no method for this is used in Norwegian municipalities. GREAT cognitive rehabilitation (CR) is an approach which has shown significant positive effects. The study aimed to explore the experiences of dementia case managers using the GREAT CR approach to address the rehabilitation goals of people with dementia. Method: Six dementia case managers, from four Norwegian municipalities, participated. The pilot study had two phases: phase 1: the participants learnt the approach, and each used it with two clients, to become CR practitioners; phase 2: the participants could use CR in their normal practice. Their experiences were explored in two focus groups. The focus groups were audiotaped, transcribed, and analysed in line with directed content analysis. Results: Three categories were described: (1) the training and written material, (2) professional development, and (3) proposals for solutions on how to use CR in clinical practice. The case managers found it both engaging and challenging to use CR. They observed that the experience had changed their usual practice: they asked people with dementia more questions about their everyday functioning and resources. The most important barrier to implementing CR was lack of time, although funds were provided to allow municipalities to provide cover for participants' time, participants still found they lacked the time to use the approach as planned. Conclusion: This study has demonstrated that it is feasible to implement CR in a Norwegian municipality if enough time is available and sufficient resources are provided. There is an urgent need to identify how healthcare services can be enabled to make rehabilitation methods like CR a regular part of post-diagnostic support.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.