One of the biggest problems with
Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia is that people who get the
disease often want to continue living alone in their own homes and have
trouble admitting that they need help. Since around 5.5 million people
over age 65 are estimated to be struggling with the disease (a number
that is only growing), it’s important that we find a sustainable way to
not only help dementia patients remain alive but also improve their
quality of life.
Service dogs have been adapted in recent years to do more than just
help the blind navigate busy city streets. They now help the
hearing-impaired, those with mobility problems, people with mental
health issues, and even those with diabetes who are prone to dangerous spikes and dips in blood sugar. And most recently, they’re being trained to help dementia patients cope with their disease.
Dogs and dementia patients are perfect companions right from the
get-go. Both are creatures of habit, happiest when they have a sense of
routine and normalcy. They’re also both in need of companionship. For an
Alzheimer’s patient who lives alone, particularly if family members
aren’t able to visit every day, a dog is the perfect friend. It’s also
been shown that dementia patients who have something to care for
(anything from chickens to baby dolls
depending on the severity of the disease) have a better quality of life
than those who don’t. A dog can reduce an Alzheimer’s patient’s
feelings of helplessness and dependency (reducing the risk of
depression) and even promote good exercise habits.
We know what you’re thinking. Let’s just
get Grandpa a dog for a pet. We don’t need an actual service dog,
right? Well, yes. But a service dog is trained to deal with dementia and
the issues that come along with it, such as sudden mood swings and
wandering. There are several benefits to having a trained service dog
care for your loved one. It’s a big job, so make sure you get a dog who’s been equipped to handle it.
The most important job of an Alzheimer’s aid dog is to deter its
owner from leaving the house unaccompanied, which prevents patients from
getting lost and relieves some of their family’s worry about them
wandering off.
If an Alzheimer’s patient does get lost while walking with a service dog, the simple command “home”
will signal the dog to guide its master back home. For patients who are
still capable of driving, an assistance dog could also help find the car when their owner forgets where it is parked.
Since it’s quite possible that an Alzheimer’s patient will forget this command over time, the dog’s collar
is also there to help. A GPS tracking system lets the patient’s family
know where the pair is at all times, and, in an emergency, a button can
be pressed which causes the collar to emit a sound that acts as an
alternative to the “home” command. The dog then knows to lead its owner
to safety without having heard the actual word “home.”
In the event that the patient suffers a heart attack or has another
health issue that leaves him or her immobile and in need of help, the
dog is trained to stay with its master and bark to alert
other people in the area to the problem. If at home, the dog can
trigger an alarm system to let family members or emergency professionals
know about the problem.
If the person with Alzheimer’s leaves the home without his or her dog, the dog can track its owner by scent.
The list of services
a trained dog can provide to its owner goes on and on. Different
programs train their dogs to perform different functions, but some
options include bringing their master’s pills, leading him or her to the
restroom or another place where a loved one has left a permanent
reminder note for the person with dementia (perhaps telling them to
drink some water, bathe, eat, take their medication, etcetera). Timers
or alarms can alert service dogs to do these “chores” at specific times
of the day.
While most patients living with dementia will eventually need to be
in a nursing home or have someone around all the time to keep an eye on
them, service dogs allow them to be independent longer. It may also be
possible in the future to have dogs in nursing homes to keep morale up
and alert nurses of health emergencies (or even escapees, perhaps). Some
assisted-living facilities already have dog handlers bring in therapy dogs to help with their patients’ mental health. Who’s to say this isn’t the next step?
If you’re thinking about getting an Alzheimer’s assistance dog for yourself or a loved one, check out Assistance Dogs International or Dog Wish.
To learn more about what it’s like being an Alzheimer’s patient and
still trying to retain independence, listen to this woman explain what
it’s like to shop for groceries with Alzheimer’s.
Full Article & Source:
Service Dogs Adapted to Help Dementia Patients Who Live Alone
Showing posts with label dementia patients. Show all posts
Showing posts with label dementia patients. Show all posts
Saturday, February 23, 2019
Monday, August 13, 2018
Why are nursing homes drugging dementia patients without their consent?
It helps control the residents, and institutions are rarely punished.
A year and a half ago in a Texas nursing home, I met an 84-year-old resident with dementia named Felipa Natividad. Her sister, Aurora Suarez, told me that the staff dosed Natividad with Haldol, an antipsychotic drug, to ease the burden of bathing her. “They give my sister medication to sedate her on the days of her shower: Monday, Wednesday, Friday,” Suarez said. “They give her so much she sleeps through the lunch hour and supper.” A review of Natividad’s medical chart confirmed the schedule.
Suarez
said she had given her consent to use the drugs because she feared that
the staff would not bathe her sister enough if she refused. But when
Suarez saw the effect they had, she had second thoughts. She expressed
them to the nursing home, but Natividad was taken off the antipsychotics
only after she was placed in hospice care. She died a few months after
my interview. Her family, seeing her in a reduced state and unable to
communicate, wondered whether the drugs had compounded the losses
associated with dementia; Suarez thought they contributed to her
sister’s decline. “She gets no nourishment,” she told me not long before
Natividad died.
The use of antipsychotic drugs
as chemical restraints — for staff convenience or to “discipline” a
resident — has a long history in nursing homes. In 1975, the Senate
released a report,
“Drugs in Nursing Homes: Misuse, High Costs, and Kickbacks,”
documenting some of the same trends we still see, more than 40 years
later. In the past decade, many manufacturers of antipsychotic drugs
have faced civil and criminal penalties
for misbranding the medications to promote them as appropriate for
treating older people with dementia. For more than a decade, the Food
and Drug Administration has required manufacturers to place the
strongest caution, known as a “black box warning,” on the packaging to
advise against the medicines’ use in these patients; such drugs almost
double the risk of death for them and have never been approved as safe or effective
for treating symptoms of dementia. Despite the warning, nursing homes
still often administer antipsychotic drugs in this manner, sometimes
without seeking informed consent first, in violation of federal regulations and human rights norms.
Last year, I visited more than 100 nursing homes
across six states as part of Human Rights Watch research on the abuse of
antipsychotic drugs in such facilities. Based on government data, we estimate
that in an average week, more than 179,000 older people in nursing
homes are given antipsychotic drugs without an appropriate diagnosis.
The powerful medications were developed to treat schizophrenia, but
staff most commonly administer them to older people with dementia. Too often, nursing homes use the antipsychotics for their sedative effects rather than to treat a medical problem. It’s true that the prevalence of antipsychotic drugs has declined in recent years, from 1 in 4 nursing home residents without an approved diagnosis in 2012 to 1 in 6 today,
but that falsely suggests that a longtime wrong is being righted.
Government enforcement of regulations prohibiting the use of the drugs
as a chemical restraint or without informed consent remains weak. What’s
more, two Trump administration decisions threaten the progress made in
curbing the abuse.
These powerful drugs are misused for a variety of reasons,
including a misperception by nursing home staff that the medications
can help people with dementia; a lack of awareness of their dangers,
despite the black box warnings; lack of training in dementia care; and,
perhaps most significant, to compensate for understaffing. Nursing homes
have been exaggerating levels of nursing and caretaking staff for
years, according to an analysis of federal data by Kaiser Health News.
To
understand the human toll of the misuse of antipsychotics, in my visits
to the nursing homes I interviewed more than 300 people — residents,
their families, staff, ombudsmen and doctors, as well as researchers and
regulators. In most cases, I did not use their names in my report
because they cited a fear of retaliation for speaking openly to me.
Human Rights Watch did not identify the individual facilities in its
report because the abuse is so pervasive in the industry, and not
identifying nursing homes persuaded some staffers to speak with me.
Further, the goal was not to expose particular private actors so much as
to pressure government officials to enforce minimum health and safety
standards for all providers.
I found that too often, antipsychotic drugs are administered in harmful,
avoidable ways and without the appropriate consent. They are used to
control people. Nursing home residents and their family members
repeatedly told me they were given these medicines without their
knowledge, without awareness of the risks or over their objections.
Staff members frankly admitted giving residents these medicines for
their own convenience, with some saying they were not aware of an
informed-consent policy. Nursing facility staff, pharmacists and medical
directors described how doctors commonly prescribed the medications at
the request of nursing staff, without even seeing the patients.
Nursing homes turn to antipsychotic drugs — among other classes of psychotropic medications — because dementia is associated with agitation, irritability, aggression, delusions, wandering, disinhibition and anxiety. While such symptoms
are frightening for the people experiencing them and challenging for
their caregivers, institutional or otherwise, antipsychotic drugs have
not been found to be effective at managing them. In a small number of
particularly complex cases, antipsychotic drugs may be appropriate as a
last resort. But that is a far cry from how they are used. The American
Psychiatric Association concludes that the drugs offer “at best small”
potential benefits (such as minimizing the risk of self-harm in people
with extreme agitation), while “on the whole, there is consistent
evidence that antipsychotics are associated with clinically significant
adverse effects, including mortality.”
On paper, federal regulations
say that residents have the right to be fully informed of their
treatment and to refuse treatment, which should amount to a right to
informed consent. But nursing facilities widely ignore the rules, partly
because they are rarely held accountable. Reviewing government data
from 2014 through mid-2017, Human Rights Watch found that in 97 percent of
citations for violations related to antipsychotic drugs, the incidents
were determined to have caused “no actual harm” to residents. As a
result, in almost no cases did the government impose financial
penalties, which correspond to the severity of harm caused by the
noncompliance. The prospect of enforcement actions, and the rare
sanctions issued, unsurprisingly had little deterrent effect, our
analysis found. Nursing homes cited for antipsychotic-drug-related
issues did not reduce their rates of drug use any more than facilities
not cited.
The way nursing homes obtain or
define “informed consent” can also be a factor in the drugs’ misuse.
“The use of specific medicines, particularly for somebody with dementia,
who lacks the capacity to consent themselves, should require informed
consent from their legal representative,” says Jonathan Evans, a former
president of the American Medical Directors Association. “But in
practice that seldom happens. Not just for that medicine but for any
medicine.”
The former administrator of a
nursing home in Kansas, who asked to remain anonymous, said: “The
facility usually gets informed consent like this: They call you up. They
say: ‘X, Y and Z is happening with your mom. This is going to help
her.’ Black box warning? It’s best just not to read that. The risks?
They gloss over them. They say, ‘That only happens once in a while, and
we’ll look for problems.’ We sell it. And, by the way, we already
started them on it.”
Despite
the limited threat of penalties, many nursing homes have reduced
inappropriate use of the drugs in recent years anyway, in response to
increased public pressure. By 2012, congressional outrage over the widespread misuse of medications, costing hundreds of millions of Medicare dollars annually, had motivated the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to create the National Partnership to Improve Dementia Care in Nursing Homes
. While the partnership is only a voluntary initiative offering
educational support to train providers, the increased attention has been
associated with the reduction in misuse. But it is hard to celebrate
the decline when the government elects not to rigorously use the tools
it has to protect Americans in nursing homes from irreversible harm.
What’s
more, the national reduction may be misleading — and it may not last.
First, there’s been a notable uptick in the diagnosis of schizophrenia
(a disease that typically develops before age 30) in predominantly
elderly nursing home populations. This increase corresponds to the
rising pressure on facilities to reduce off-label antipsychotic drug
use. There’s no proven link, but the trend does suggest
that some homes seek false diagnoses to avoid red flags with the use of
these medications. A second concern, recognized by CMS, is that nursing
homes are simply replacing this closely watched class of psychotropic
medication with other types of sedating drugs with similar health risks.
Meanwhile, in response to an industry request, the Trump administration in July 2017 changed its guidance
on financial penalties, limiting the instances when inspectors can
assess the heaviest fines. The guidance also favors one-time sanctions
for harmful noncompliance with the law, rather than a per-day sanction
that corresponds to the number of days the harm persists. As a result,
in many cases facilities face less-significant consequences for harming
residents than they used to. And last November
, CMS imposed an 18-month moratorium on Obama-era revisions to some
regulations — not updated since 1991 — intended in part to protect
residents whose psychotropic medications are prescribed on an “as
needed” basis. While it is unclear if those new protections will come
into force, it is abundantly clear that this administration’s
deregulatory scheme, which it calls “Patients Over Paperwork,” reduces oversight and enforcement in an already dangerously underpoliced industry.
Karla Benkula,
daughter of a 75-year-old woman in Kansas, said that when the nursing
facility began giving her mother an antipsychotic drug, her mother
“would just sit there like this. No personality. Just a zombie.” Laurel
Cline, the daughter of an 88-year-old woman in a California nursing
home, said she thought the facility used antipsychotic medication to
silence people whose symptoms disturbed the staff. Cline said it was
obvious that her mother had physiological conditions requiring medical
attention. “She would be sitting there, slumped over, mucus everywhere. I
would go over and say, ‘She’s sick.’ ” But Cline’s mother wasn’t able
to advocate for herself, and Cline had to intervene to demand
appropriate medical care for a urinary tract infection, pneumonia and a
pulmonary embolism, she said.
“Dementia’s
already so hard,” said Ashley Plummer, a licensed practical nurse who
works in a Kansas nursing home. “But on top of that, throw [on] a few
Seroquels [a common antipsychotic drug], and then you’re just drooling. I
mean, it’s taking away even your right to be upset about your disease
process. It’s taking away your right to mourn what you’re going
through.”
In my interviews, it was disturbing how frequently
staff justified administering antipsychotic drugs for “behaviors,” a
disconcerting term suggesting that residents could, and should, avoid
acting in a disruptive way. A social worker in Texas who used to work in
a nursing facility said the underlying issue is that “the nursing homes
don’t want behaviors. They want docile.”
Many
nursing home staff spoke to me about using antipsychotics to control
residents as if it were a perfectly acceptable practice. Others told me
that they had become aware that antipsychotic drugs were frequently
misused only after the facility’s administration or corporate owners
decided to cut down on their use. “It used to be like a death prison
here,” a nursing director in a Kansas nursing home told me. “Half our
residents were on antipsychotics. Only 10 percent of our residents have a
mental illness.” Senior staff at the facility led an effort to reduce
the antipsychotic drug rate after receiving financial penalties for
administering unnecessary medications and after pressure from the
chain’s owners. Another nurse in Kansas said: “We were at 55 percent
antipsychotic drug rate before. Now we’re down to only people with a
diagnosis [for which the FDA has approved the medications] on the drugs.
They have a better quality of life because they’re not sedated.”
Nursing homes, a mostly for-profit
industry, control most aspects of their residents’ lives. Presumably,
providers would be more inclined to meet minimum health and safety
standards if it cost them dearly not to do so. “In this industry, there
is a real cost-benefit
analysis,” one long-term-care consultant told me. “If the fine will be
$100,000, then they’ll hire the three nurse aides who will cost them
about the same amount.”
Antipsychotic drugs may
be an appropriate treatment for some people with dementia in nursing
homes, but determining that requires a doctor and an informed patient
(or proxy). And once told of the significant risks, unlikely benefits
and possible alternative treatments — such as behavioral therapy,
adjusting routine and environment, or alleviating the source of
underlying loneliness, pain, boredom or fear — many people would
probably reject the drugs. As one long-term-care pharmacist in Kansas
said: “I don’t think antipsychotic drugs are presented well to the
family in informed-consent conversations. Because if it were, they’d all
reject it.”
An 81-year-old man in a Texas
nursing home put it this way to me: “Too many times I’m given too many
pills. I can’t even talk. I have a thick tongue when they do that. I ask
them not to [give me the antipsychotic drugs]. When I say that, they
threaten to remove me from the home. They get me so I can’t think. I
don’t want anything to make me change the person I am.”
Full Article & Source:
Why are nursing homes drugging dementia patients without their consent?
Sunday, July 15, 2018
Cops: Nursing home workers duct-taped patient to chair
![]() |
| Lashron Williams and Phygelle Brudent |
Boynton Beach police said in a news release
Friday that 52-year-old Lashron Williams and 44-year-old Phygelle
Brudent, who worked at Regal Park Assisted Living Facility, duct-taped a
67-year-old woman to a chair and used tape to cover her mouth. They
were arrested Thursday and charged with elder abuse and false
imprisonment.
Detectives say Brudent confessed to duct-taping the victim July 3, telling them the woman wouldn’t remain quiet.
Williams told police Brudent duct-taped the
victim. She said she uncovered the patient’s mouth to give her sleeping
pills. She said she told Brudent it was wrong to duct-tape patients, but
did not report her.
Full Article & Source:
Cops: Nursing home workers duct-taped patient to chair
Saturday, June 10, 2017
Oregon Senate Committee Passes Bill to Allow Starving Mentally Ill Patients to Death
Yesterday the Oregon Senate Rules Committee passed out Senate Bill 494 on a party-line vote. Touted as a “simple update” to Oregon’s current advance directive, this bill is designed to allow for the starving and dehydrating to death of patients with dementia or mental illness.
Senate Bill 494 is little more than the state colluding with the healthcare industry to save money on the backs of mentally ill and dementia patients. This bill would remove current safeguards in Oregon’s advance directive statute that protect conscious patients’ access to ordinary food and water when they no longer have the ability to make decisions about their own care.
“It’s appalling what the Senate Rules Committee just voted to do,” said Gayle Atteberry, Oregon Right to Life executive director. “This bill, written in a deceiving manner, has as its goal to save money at the expense of starving and dehydrating dementia and mentally ill patients to death.”
“Oregon law currently has strong safeguards to protect patients who are no longer able to make decisions for themselves,” said Atteberry. “Nursing homes and other organizations dedicated to protecting vulnerable patients work hard to make sure patients receive the food and water they need. Senate Bill 494, pushed hard by the insurance lobby, would take patient care a step backwards and decimate patient rights.”
“Oregon Right to Life is committed to fighting this terrible legislation every step of the way,” said Atteberry. “We have already seen the outrage of countless Oregonians that the Legislature would consider putting them in danger. We expect the grassroots response to only increase.”
SB 494 was amended in committee yesterday. However, the amendments did not solve the fundamental problem with the bill. To learn more about what SB 494 will do, please watch testimony made to the Rules Committee on behalf of Oregon Right to Life yesterday by clicking here. SB 494 likely heads to a vote of the full State Senate in the coming weeks.
Three additional bills (SB 239, SB 708 and HB 3272) that also remove rights from vulnerable patients were introduced this session.
“There is a clear effort to move state policy away from protecting the rights of patients with dementia and mental illness and toward empowering surrogates to make life-ending decisions,” Atteberry said.
Senate Bill 494 makes many changes to advance directive law, eliminating definitions that can leave a patient’s directions left open to interpretation. SB 494 would also create a committee, appointed rather than elected, that can make future changes to the advance directive without approval from the Oregon Legislature. This could easily result in further erosion of patient rights.
Full Article & Source:
Oregon Senate Committee Passes Bill to Allow Starving Mentally Ill Patients to Death
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



