Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Clinical safety

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Aims Little is known about how behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) manifest in the general hospital. The aim was to examine the frequency of BPSD in general hospitals and their associations with nursing staff distress and complications in care. Methods Cross-sectional representative study with 1469 patients aged ≥65, including 270 patients with dementia, of 33 randomly selected general hospitals in Germany. BPSD and complications were reported by nurses. Results Overall frequency of BPSD was higher in patients with dementia (76%) than without (38%). The most frequent symptoms in patients with dementia were nighttime disturbances (38%), depression (29%) and aberrant motor behaviour (28%) and the most distressing symptoms for nursing staff were delusions, aggression and nighttime disturbances. The overall frequency of BPSD increased from 67% in mild dementia, to 76% in moderate dementia and to 88% in severe dementia. The most frequent symptoms in patients without dementia were depression (19%), nighttime disturbances (13%) and irritability (13%). The most distressing symptoms were aggression and delusions, while the same symptoms were consistently rated as less distressing than in patients with dementia. Factor analysis revealed three independent groups of BPSD that explained 45% of the total variance. First, expansive symptoms (aggression, irritability, nighttime disturbances, aberrant motor behaviour and disinhibition) were frequent, distressing for nursing staff and associated with many complications. Second, psychotic symptoms (delusions and hallucinations) were infrequent, distressing and associated with some complications. Third, affective symptoms (apathy, anxiety and depression) were frequent, non-distressing and associated with few complications. The results did not change when cases with delirium were excluded from both groups. Conclusions BPSD are common in older hospital patients with dementia and associated with considerable distress in nursing staff, as well as a wide range of special treatments needs and additional behavioural and medical complications. Management strategies are needed to improve the situation for both patients and hospital staff.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Hessler, J. B., Schäufele, M., Hendlmeier, I., Junge, M. N., Leonhardt, S., Weber, J., et al. (2018). Behavioural and psychological symptoms in general hospital patients with dementia, distress for nursing staff and complications in care: results of the General Hospital Study. Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences. https://doi.org/10.1017/s2045796016001098

Vancouver

Hessler JB, Schäufele M, Hendlmeier I, Junge MN, Leonhardt S, Weber J, et al. Behavioural and psychological symptoms in general hospital patients with dementia, distress for nursing staff and complications in care: results of the General Hospital Study. Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences. 2018. doi:10.1017/s2045796016001098. PMID: 28065176.

BibTeX

@article{hessler2018-28065176,
  author  = {Hessler, J. B. and Schäufele, M. and Hendlmeier, I. and Junge, M. N. and Leonhardt, S. and Weber, J. and Bickel, H.},
  title   = {{Behavioural and psychological symptoms in general hospital patients with dementia, distress for nursing staff and complications in care: results of the General Hospital Study}},
  journal = {Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences},
  year    = {2018},
  doi     = {10.1017/s2045796016001098},
  pmid    = {28065176},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1017/s2045796016001098}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 55/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 4 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 3 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomized / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multicenter collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 32 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 55 of 100. Total 55 of 100.32 of the 58 points we could judge = 55 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a snapshot of people at one point in time. Scored zero for effect reported and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 32 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 55 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 4 / 12 A snapshot of people at one point in time
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 2 / 5 2018 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 3 / 4 1,469 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomized / blinded 0 / 2 No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multicenter collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 28065176)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 32 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 32 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 55 out of 100.
Total 55 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Related studies in Clinical safety

Also tagged “prevalence”

1,223 studies in the library carry the topic tag “prevalence”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,223 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Clinical safety

See all studies in Clinical safety →