IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v17y2024i2d10.1007_s40271-023-00661-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Best–Worst Scaling Study of the General Population's Preferences for Activities in Living Arrangements for Persons With Dementia

Author

Listed:
  • Christian Speckemeier

    (University of Duisburg-Essen)

  • Carina Abels

    (University of Duisburg-Essen)

  • Klemens Höfer

    (University of Duisburg-Essen)

  • Anke Walendzik

    (University of Duisburg-Essen)

  • Jürgen Wasem

    (University of Duisburg-Essen)

  • Silke Neusser

    (University of Duisburg-Essen)

Abstract

Background Activity involvement is a central element of dementia care. However, few studies have examined preferences for types of activities for persons who may be in need of care in the future. In this study, a best–worst scaling (BWS) was conducted to gather insights on preferred activities in small-scale living arrangements for dementia in the general population aged 50–65 years from rural and urban regions. Methods BWS tasks were developed based on literature searches and focus groups. The final BWS contains ten activities, namely ‘interaction with animals’, ‘gardening’, ‘painting, handicrafts, manual activities’, ‘household activities (e.g., folding laundry, cooking)’, ‘watching television’, ‘practicing religion’, ‘listening to music and singing familiar songs’, ‘conversations about the past’, ‘walks and excursions’, ‘sport activities (e.g., gymnastics)’. Each participant had to fill out subsets of four objects each and identify them as best and worst. A postal survey was sent to a total of 4390 persons from rural and urban regions aged between 50 and 65 years. Results were analyzed by count analysis and logit models. It was examined if preferences differ with respect to gender, religiousness, and informal caregiving experience. Results A total of 840 questionnaires were returned, and 627 surveys were included in the analysis. In the rural sample, the highest relative importance (RI) was assigned to ‘walks and excursions’ (RI: 100%), ‘sport activities (e.g., gymnastics)’ (RI: 56%), ‘gardening’ (RI: 28%), and ‘interaction with animals’ (26%). In the urban sample, ‘walks and excursions’ (RI: 100%), ‘sport activities (e.g., gymnastics)’ (RI: 37%), ‘interaction with animals’ (25%) and ‘gardening’ (RI: 22%) were perceived as most important. In both groups, household activities and practicing religion were of lowest importance. Importance ranks differed between subgroups. Results of the logit models with random effects showed the same order as results from the count analyses. Discussion Our findings show that respondents generally favored activities with an outdoor component, while the household activities that are part of many concepts were of low importance to respondents. Thus, our study can inform the design of a preference-based specific range of activities in small-scale living arrangements for dementia.

Suggested Citation

  • Christian Speckemeier & Carina Abels & Klemens Höfer & Anke Walendzik & Jürgen Wasem & Silke Neusser, 2024. "A Best–Worst Scaling Study of the General Population's Preferences for Activities in Living Arrangements for Persons With Dementia," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 17(2), pages 121-131, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:17:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s40271-023-00661-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s40271-023-00661-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-023-00661-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40271-023-00661-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:17:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s40271-023-00661-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.