Skip to content

The pros and cons of small-scale living for elderly people suffering from dementia in the Netherlands and Belgium

Perspectives on the results of small-scale living facilities in the Netherlands and Belgium

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ISRCTN
Registry ID
ISRCTN23772945
Enrollment
180
Registered
2010-05-12
Start date
2007-06-01
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2015-01-13

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Severe dementia Mental and Behavioural Disorders Dementia

Interventions

Participants will be followed for a year during their stay at a closed-environment dementia care ward. They were not assigned a kind of ward by the researchers. At three points during the study (the b

Sponsors

University of Tilburg (Netherlands) - Department Tranzo
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Care centres were selected based on the kind of wards existing contacts and willingness to participate. Traditional and Small-scale closed-environment wards were selected with a policy indicating that a patient can stay there till the end of their life. From those care centres participants were selected who were patients suffering from dementia, over the age of 70, of either sex. Also, information from family and direct care-givers of the participants were included in the study. For every participant a compliance form was filled out and returned by the family to the researchers

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Patients did not fit the inclusion criteria 2. Patients did not finish the study. This could happen for example by a death or by moving to another institution.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
1. Quality of life, assessed by Quality of Life in Dementia (QUALIDEM) 2. Activities of daily living (ADL), assessed by Barthel Index 3. Depression, assessed by Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD) 4. Neuropsychiatric symptoms, assessed by Neuropsychiatric Inventory, Nursing Home Version (NPI-NH) 5. Social engagement, assessed by Revised Index of Social Engagement (RISE) taken from the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI 2.0) All outcomes were measured at baseline (i.e. start of study), 6 months and one year. All questionnaires used were in the Dutch language.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
1. Control measures: 1.1. Severity of dementia, assessed by Standardized Mini Mental State Examination (S-MMSE) 1.2. Medications falling in the category antipsychotics, antidepressants and sedatives were 1.3. Restriction measures, kind of measure and number of measures were noted 1.4. Visitors, a single question was answered how many times a month the patient gets a visit from family or friends 1.5. Weight, registered fully clothed and with shoes on 2. Family: 2.1. Quality of care 2.2. Interactive activities with their loved one The questionnaire they received was designed by the researchers themselves. A copy can be requested through the contact details below. 3. Staff: 3.1. Work load and work experience The questionnaire they received was designed by the researchers themselves. A copy can be requested through the contact details below. Additionally, staff filled out the Utrecht Burnout Scale (Utrechtse Burnout Schaal) (UBOS-C), a questionnaire for professions in which physical contact is present All patient and family outcomes will be measured at baseline (i.e. start of study), 6 months and one year. Staff outcomes will be measured at the beginning and end of the study. All questionnaires used were in the Dutch language.

Countries

Belgium, Netherlands

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ISRCTN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Mar 29, 2026