Do service-users find the outcome of Mild Cognitive Impairment useful? A summary of Blatchford & Cook’s (2020) systematic review

C. Rowley, Julia cook, L. Blatchford
{"title":"Do service-users find the outcome of Mild Cognitive Impairment useful? A summary of Blatchford & Cook’s (2020) systematic review","authors":"C. Rowley, Julia cook, L. Blatchford","doi":"10.53841/bpsfpop.2023.1.161.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) is a common outcome following assessment of suspected dementia. However, it is unclear whether service-users perceive that being made aware is beneficial. The term itself is nebulous in terms of prognostic certainty and its utility for guiding interventions. This article summarises the systematic review conducted by Blatchford and Cook (2020) exploring research focused on service-users experiences of receiving the outcome of MCI and the impact of this upon them and their care partners. Service-user and care partner perspectives were shaped by the quality of information and support provided, and several factors shaped their experiences of being informed, including: personal perceptions and experiences, coping styles and living circumstance. The results suggested that clear information and quality support, tailored to service-user needs may improve the utility of the MCI outcome for service-users. The summary concludes by providing suggestions for enhancing service provision.","PeriodicalId":306496,"journal":{"name":"FPOP Bulletin: Psychology of Older People","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"FPOP Bulletin: Psychology of Older People","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53841/bpsfpop.2023.1.161.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) is a common outcome following assessment of suspected dementia. However, it is unclear whether service-users perceive that being made aware is beneficial. The term itself is nebulous in terms of prognostic certainty and its utility for guiding interventions. This article summarises the systematic review conducted by Blatchford and Cook (2020) exploring research focused on service-users experiences of receiving the outcome of MCI and the impact of this upon them and their care partners. Service-user and care partner perspectives were shaped by the quality of information and support provided, and several factors shaped their experiences of being informed, including: personal perceptions and experiences, coping styles and living circumstance. The results suggested that clear information and quality support, tailored to service-user needs may improve the utility of the MCI outcome for service-users. The summary concludes by providing suggestions for enhancing service provision.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
服务使用者发现轻度认知障碍的结果有用吗?blachford & Cook(2020)系统综述摘要
轻度认知障碍(MCI)是评估疑似痴呆后的常见结果。然而,目前尚不清楚服务用户是否认为被告知是有益的。就预测的确定性和指导干预的效用而言,这个术语本身是模糊的。本文总结了blachford和Cook(2020)进行的系统综述,该综述探索了专注于服务用户接受MCI结果的体验及其对他们及其护理伙伴的影响的研究。服务使用者和护理伙伴的观点受到所提供的信息和支持的质量的影响,有几个因素影响了他们的知情经历,包括:个人看法和经历、应对方式和生活环境。结果表明,针对服务用户需求的明确信息和质量支持可以提高服务用户MCI结果的效用。摘要最后提出了加强服务提供的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Widening access to older people’s clinical psychology: Piloting a summer shadowing programme in older adults services An evaluation of the process of measuring outcomes of a cognitive stimulation therapy group Exploring clinicians’ experience of using Behavioural Family Therapy within an older adult community mental health service Talking sh**! – are we doing enough? Reflections of an APPly programme assistant psychologist: 6-month post in an acute older adults’ ward
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1