Dementia Care Management in an Underserved Community

The Comparative Effectiveness of Two Different Approaches

Published In: Journal of Aging and Health, 2015

Posted on RAND.org on February 19, 2015

by Joshua Chodosh, Benjamin Colaiaco, Karen Connor, Dennis W. Cope, Harry H. Liu, David A. Ganz, Mark Jason Richman, Debra Cherry, Joseph Moshe Blank, Raquel del Carbone, et al.

Read More

Access further information on this document at SAGE

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness and costs of telephone-only approach to in-person plus telephone for delivering an evidence-based, coordinated care management program for dementia. METHODS: We randomized 151 patient–caregiver dyads from an underserved predominantly Latino community to two arms that shared a care management protocol but implemented in different formats: in-person visits at home and/or in the community plus telephone and mail, versus telephone and mail only. We compared between-arm caregiver burden and care-recipient problem behaviors (primary outcomes) and patient–caregiver dyad retention, care quality, health care utilization, and costs (secondary outcomes) at 6- and 12-months follow-up. RESULTS: Care quality improved substantially over time in both arms. Caregiver burden, care-recipient problem behaviors, retention, and health care utilization did not differ across arms but the in-person program cost more to deliver. DISCUSSION: Dementia care quality improved regardless of how care management was delivered; large differences in effectiveness or cost offsets were not detected.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.