4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Protection against discrimination in national dementia guideline recommendations: A systematic review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          National dementia guidelines provide recommendations about the most effective approaches to diagnosis and interventions. Guidelines can improve care, but some groups such as people with minority characteristics may be disadvantaged if recommended approaches are the same for everyone. It is not known if dementia guidelines address specific needs related to patient characteristics. The objectives of this review are to identify which countries have national guidelines for dementia and synthesise recommendations relating to protected characteristics, as defined in the UK Equality Act 2010: age, disability, gender identity, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation.

          Methods and findings

          We searched CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Medline databases and the Guideline International Network library from inception to March 4, 2020, for dementia guidelines in any language. We also searched, between April and September 2020, Google and the national health websites of all 196 countries in English and in each country’s official languages. To be included, guidelines had to provide recommendations about dementia, which were expected to be followed by healthcare workers and be approved at a national policy level. We rated quality according to the iCAHE guideline quality checklist. We provide a narrative synthesis of recommendations identified for each protected characteristic, prioritising those from higher-quality guidelines. Forty-six guidelines from 44 countries met our criteria, of which 18 were rated as higher quality. Most guidelines (39/46; 85%) made at least one reference to protected characteristics, and we identified recommendations relating to age, disability, race (or culture, ethnicity, or language), religion, sex, and sexual orientation. Age was the most frequently referenced characteristic (31/46; 67%) followed by race (or culture, ethnicity, or language; 25/46; 54%). Recommendations included specialist investigation and support for younger people affected by dementia and consideration of culture when assessing whether someone had dementia and providing person-centred care. Guidelines recommended considering religion when providing person-centred and end-of-life care. For disability, it was recommended that healthcare workers consider intellectual disability and sensory impairment when assessing for dementia. Most recommendations related to sex recommended not using sex hormones to treat cognitive impairment in men and women. One guideline made one recommendation related to sexual orientation. The main limitation of this study is that we only included national guidelines applicable to a whole country meaning guidelines from countries with differing healthcare systems within the country may have been excluded.

          Conclusions

          National guidelines for dementia vary in their consideration of protected characteristics. We found that around a fifth of the world’s countries have guidelines for dementia. We have identified areas of good practice that can be considered for future guidelines and suggest that all guidelines provide specific evidence-based recommendations for minority groups with examples of how to implement them. This will promote equity in the care of people affected by dementia and help to ensure that people with protected characteristics also have high-quality clinical services.

          Abstract

          Tiffeny James and team investigate which countries have national guidelines for dementia, and synthesise recommendations relating to protected characteristics as defined in the UK Equality Act 2010.

          Author summary

          Why was this study done?
          • Clinical practice guidelines can improve the quality of dementia care, but some people with minority characteristics related, for example, to race or gender may be disadvantaged if the same approaches are used for everyone.

          • It is not known whether national guidelines for dementia consider such characteristics in their recommendations.

          What did the researchers do and find?
          • We did a systematic review searching in English and in the official languages of each country to identify which countries have national guidelines for dementia and assessed the extent to which they consider protected characteristics using the UK Equality Act 2010 to define protected characteristics.

          • We identified 46 guidelines from 44 out of 196 countries in the world, most of which were high-income countries, and 37 of them included at least one recommendation related to protected characteristics including age, disability, race, religion, sex, and sexual orientation.

          • Age and race were the most frequently referenced characteristics with recommendations including specialist investigation for younger people; consideration of culture and language when assessing dementia; and consideration of age, culture, and religion when providing person-centred care.

          What do these findings mean?
          • We identified areas of good practice in higher-quality guidelines and recommend that all guidelines include specific evidence-based recommendations for minority groups, which are in line with the World Health Organisation’s human rights–based approach to dementia care.

          • To our knowledge, this was the most comprehensive search for dementia guidelines to date; however, we only included national guidelines applicable to a whole country meaning that guidelines from countries with differing healthcare systems within the country have been excluded.

          Related collections

          Most cited references97

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Defining equity in health.

            To propose a definition of health equity to guide operationalisation and measurement, and to discuss the practical importance of clarity in defining this concept. Conceptual discussion. Setting, Patients/Participants, and Main results: not applicable. For the purposes of measurement and operationalisation, equity in health is the absence of systematic disparities in health (or in the major social determinants of health) between groups with different levels of underlying social advantage/disadvantage-that is, wealth, power, or prestige. Inequities in health systematically put groups of people who are already socially disadvantaged (for example, by virtue of being poor, female, and/or members of a disenfranchised racial, ethnic, or religious group) at further disadvantage with respect to their health; health is essential to wellbeing and to overcoming other effects of social disadvantage. Equity is an ethical principle; it also is consonant with and closely related to human rights principles. The proposed definition of equity supports operationalisation of the right to the highest attainable standard of health as indicated by the health status of the most socially advantaged group. Assessing health equity requires comparing health and its social determinants between more and less advantaged social groups. These comparisons are essential to assess whether national and international policies are leading toward or away from greater social justice in health.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Defining equity in health

              P Braveman (2003)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: SupervisionRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: SupervisionRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: MethodologyRole: ValidationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: MethodologyRole: ValidationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: ValidationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: SupervisionRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                PLoS Med
                PLoS Med
                plos
                PLoS Medicine
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1549-1277
                1549-1676
                11 January 2022
                January 2022
                : 19
                : 1
                : e1003860
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom
                [2 ] South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
                [3 ] Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
                University of New South Wales, AUSTRALIA
                Author notes

                The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5706-1467
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8635-9521
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8895-7055
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5828-6692
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9513-560X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6741-5516
                Article
                PMEDICINE-D-21-03042
                10.1371/journal.pmed.1003860
                8752020
                35015760
                a6fb7adc-706f-4511-96cb-65596e948ace
                © 2022 James et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 13 July 2021
                : 3 November 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 1, Pages: 21
                Funding
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272, national institute for health research;
                Award ID: NIHR 200163
                Award Recipient :
                This report is independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research ARC North Thames. TJ is funded by National Institute for Health Research ARC North Thames under Award number NIHR 200163 https://www.arc-nt.nihr.ac.uk/. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Mental Health and Psychiatry
                Dementia
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Neurology
                Dementia
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Public and Occupational Health
                Global Health
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Neuroscience
                Cognitive Science
                Cognitive Psychology
                Language
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Cognitive Psychology
                Language
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Cognitive Psychology
                Language
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Mental Health and Psychiatry
                Dementia
                Alzheimer's Disease
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Neurology
                Dementia
                Alzheimer's Disease
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Medical Conditions
                Neurodegenerative Diseases
                Alzheimer's Disease
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Neurology
                Neurodegenerative Diseases
                Alzheimer's Disease
                Social Sciences
                Anthropology
                Cultural Anthropology
                Religion
                Social Sciences
                Sociology
                Religion
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Health Care
                Health Care Policy
                Treatment Guidelines
                People and Places
                Population Groupings
                Professions
                Medical Personnel
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Database and Informatics Methods
                Database Searching
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files. We have described where each guideline was found and the exact search phrases used to find them, and have provided a URL to where each guideline can be found in the reference list.

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content38

                Cited by3

                Most referenced authors479