Table 3 Characteristics of included descriptive studies

Study 7: Wilkinson et al. 1995 [67]

Australia

To evaluate the comparative suitability of a range of words or symbols to label a toilet for people with dementia

Setting

Phase 1: Hostel care for ambulant people with dementia (n = 24/28, rr 86%)

Phase 2: Aged care complex with hostel and nursing home facilities (n = 28) and an acute hospital ward (n = 20)

Participants

Phase 1: n = 24 institutions

Phase 2: n = 24 patients

Gender

No details provided

Age (years)

80.4 (95% CI 77.1–83.1)

Mental status

Folstein MSE

Normal cognition (n = 21)

Mild dementia (n = 11)

Moderate dementia (n = 16)

Severe dementia excluded

The study comprised two phases and questionnaires were used in both

Data collection

Phase 1: questions posed to hostel management on what word and/or symbols were already in use in that institution to label toilet and/or bathroom facilities

Phase 2: questions asking preference for toilet door labelling

Outcome measures

Preferred symbol according to cognitive state

Preferred word according to cognitive state

MMAT score: 100%

Study 12: Shih et al. 2015 [68]

Taiwan

To understand and compare the behavioural characteristics of bowel movement and urination needs in patients with dementia

Setting

Long-term care facilities (n = 8)

Day centre (n = 1)

Participants

Residents (n = 187)

Gender: female (59%)

Age (mean + SD) years

80.1 + 9.6/range 70 to 90

Mental status

AD 38.5%

Unspecified dementia 32.6%

Vascular dementia 18.7%

Other dementia 10.2%

Data collection

Behaviour checklist for bowel and urination developed for the study

Outcomes measures

Symptom’s and signs of bowel movement and urination expressed by the patient

MMAT score: 100%

Study 13: Iliffe et al. 2015 [69]

UK

Phase 4

The aim of this study was to develop and test a continence assessment tool and supporting resources for people with dementia, to be used by primary care professionals, primarily community nurses (p. 95)

Setting

Community

Participants

Stage 1

Carers and professionals (n = 10)

Stage 2

Carers and professionals (n = 10)

Specialist continence professionals (n = 10)

Stage 3

Carers (n = 8)

General Practitioner (n = 2),

Geriatrician/psychogeriatrician (n = 1)

Continence nurse specialist (n = 3)

District nurse/community nurse (n = 7)

Occupational therapist (n = 2)

Other (n = 3)

(rr = 26/50)

Not applicable

Mental status

Dementia

Data Collection

Stage 1: Face to face consultations were facilitated to describe a broad range of principles and issues that would underpin an assessment tool designed to address the needs of people with dementia

Stage 2: A prototype dementia-focused continence assessment tool was developed using the data generated in stage 1, asking for agreement or disagreement to items plus suggestions for further items. This was used to consult, in writing, both the expert group in stage 1 and also a further group of carers and specialist continence professionals. The prototype was further adapted.

Stage 3: A different, wider group of experts (carers and professionals) was consulted in writing. They were sent the draft dementia-focused assessment tool together with a questionnaire to test its face and content validity.

Outcome measures

Recipients were asked (1) whether or not the tool would improve recognition of the problems (face validity) and (b) to rate each item for importance and identify missing or unnecessary items (content validity)

MMAT score: 75%