Dawn J Brooker1, Claire Surr. 1. Bradford Dementia Group, School of Health Studies, University of Bradford, Bradford, UK. d.j.brooker@bradford.ac.uk
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This paper describes DCM 8 and reports on the initial validation study of DCM 8. METHODS: Between 2001-2003, a series of international expert working groups were established to examine various aspects of DCM with the intention of revising and refining it. During 2004-2005 the revised tool (DCM 8) was piloted in seven service settings in the UK and validated against DCM 7th edition. RESULTS: At a group score level, WIB scores and spread of Behavioural Category Codes were very similar, suggesting that group scores are comparable between DCM 7 and 8. Interviews with mappers and focus groups with staff teams suggested that DCM 8 was preferable to DCM 7th edition because of the clarification and simplification of codes; the addition of new codes relevant to person-centred care; and the replacement of Positive Events with a more structured recording of Personal Enhancers. CONCLUSIONS: DCM 8 appears comparable with DCM 7th edition in terms of data produced and is well received by mappers and dementia care staff. Copyright (c) 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
OBJECTIVES: This paper describes DCM 8 and reports on the initial validation study of DCM 8. METHODS: Between 2001-2003, a series of international expert working groups were established to examine various aspects of DCM with the intention of revising and refining it. During 2004-2005 the revised tool (DCM 8) was piloted in seven service settings in the UK and validated against DCM 7th edition. RESULTS: At a group score level, WIB scores and spread of Behavioural Category Codes were very similar, suggesting that group scores are comparable between DCM 7 and 8. Interviews with mappers and focus groups with staff teams suggested that DCM 8 was preferable to DCM 7th edition because of the clarification and simplification of codes; the addition of new codes relevant to person-centred care; and the replacement of Positive Events with a more structured recording of Personal Enhancers. CONCLUSIONS:DCM 8 appears comparable with DCM 7th edition in terms of data produced and is well received by mappers and dementia care staff. Copyright (c) 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Authors: Geertje van de Ven; Irena Draskovic; Eddy M M Adang; Rogier A R T Donders; Aukje Post; Sytse U Zuidema; Raymond T C M Koopmans; Myrra J F J Vernooij-Dassen Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2012-01-03 Impact factor: 3.921