Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T22:47:24.694Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Costing resource use of the Namaste Care Intervention UK: a novel framework for costing dementia care interventions in care homes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2019

Jennifer Bray Open the ORCID record for Jennifer Bray [Opens in a new window] ,
Dawn Brooker ,
Isabelle Latham ,
Faith Wray  and
Darrin Baines
Jennifer Bray
Affiliation:
Association for Dementia Studies, University of Worcester, Worcester, UK
Dawn Brooker*
Affiliation:
Association for Dementia Studies, University of Worcester, Worcester, UK
Isabelle Latham
Affiliation:
Association for Dementia Studies, University of Worcester, Worcester, UK
Faith Wray
Affiliation:
Association for Dementia Studies, University of Worcester, Worcester, UK
Darrin Baines
Affiliation:
Department of Accounting, Finance & Economics, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, UK
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Dawn Brooker, Association for Dementia Studies, University of Worcester, Henwick Grove, Worcester WR2 6AJ, UK. Phone: 01905 855250; Fax: 01905 855132. Email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives:

To develop a representative full cost model for a UK version of the multi-component, non-pharmacological Namaste Care intervention for care home residents with advanced dementia.

Design:

The Namaste Care Intervention UK comprises multiple individual cost components, and a comprehensive list of all possible resources that could be expended in each cost component formed the initial stage of the cost model development. Resource use was divided into three key areas: staff, capital and consumables. Representative costs were identified for each of the possible resources, with a standard approach being used for all resources within each of the three key areas.

Assumptions were made regarding the number and duration of sessions, group size, involvement of different staff members, and additional activity before and after a session, as these all have an impact on resource use and hence cost. A comparable ‘usual care’ session for residents not receiving Namaste Care was also costed to enable the ‘additional’ cost of delivering Namaste Care to be calculated.

Results:

The full cost model indicates that Namaste Care Intervention UK costs approximately £8-£10 more per resident per 2-hour session than a comparable period of usual care. However, positive impacts on resident and staff well-being resulting from receiving Namaste Care will also have their own associated costs/benefits which may negate the ‘additional’ cost of the intervention.

Conclusions:

The cost model provides the first opportunity to investigate the full costs associated with Namaste Care, and will be refined as additional information is captured during subsequent phases of the research.

Keywords

dementiahealth economicsagingnursing homespsychosocial interventions
Type
Original Research Article
Information
International Psychogeriatrics , Volume 32 , Special Issue 12: Issue Theme: Implementation Science , December 2020 , pp. 1429 - 1438
Copyright
© International Psychogeriatric Association 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alzheimer’s Society (2014). Dementia 2014 infographic. Available at: https://www.alzheimers.org.uk/about-us/policy-and-influencing/dementia-uk-report; last accessed 25 July 2018.Google Scholar
Alzheimer’s Society (2016). Fix Dementia Care: NHS and care homes. Available at: https://www.alzheimers.org.uk/download/downloads/id/3026/fix_dementia_care_nhs_and_care_homes_report.pdf; last accessed 25 July 2018.Google Scholar
Brooker, D. and Latham, I. (2016). Person-Centred Dementia Care (2nd edn). London: Jessica Kingsley.Google Scholar
Drummond, M., Sculpher, M., Claxton, K., Stoddart, G. and Torrance, G. (2015). Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes (4th edn). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Glick, H., Doshi, J., Sonnad, S. and Polsky, D. (2014). Economic Evaluation in Clinical Trials (2nd edn). Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/med/9780199685028.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hancock, G. A., Woods, B., Challis, D. and Orrell, M. (2006). The needs of older people with dementia in residential care. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 21, 43–49.10.1002/gps.1421CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoomans, T. and Severens, J. (2014). Economic evaluation of implementation strategies in health care. Implementation Science, 9, 168.10.1186/s13012-014-0168-yCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Personal Social Services Research Unit (2016). Unit Costs of Health & Social Care. Canterbury: Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent.Google Scholar
Prince, M., Wimo, A., Guerchet, M., Ali, G. C., Wu, Y. T., and Prina, M. (2015) World Alzheimer Report: 2015 the Global Impact of Dementia: An Analysis of Prevalence, Incidence, Cost and Trends. London: Alzheimer’s Disease International.Google Scholar
Saldana, L., Chamberlain, P., Bradford, W. D., Campbell, M. and Landsverk, J. (2014). The Cost of Implementing New Strategies (COINS): a method for mapping implementation resources using the stages of implementation completion. Children and Youth Services Review, 39, 177–182.10.1016/j.childyouth.2013.10.006CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simard, J. (2013). Namaste Care: The End of Life Program for People with Dementia (2nd edn). Baltimore, MA: Health Professions Press.Google Scholar
Thompsell, A. (2009). Namaste Care – How to Deliver Quality Dementia Care with No More Staff. Available at: http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/pdf/Thompsell%20Amanda.pdf; last accessed 25 July 2018.Google Scholar