The goal of this commentary is to highlight the ageism that has emerged during the COVID-19 pandemic. Over 20 international researchers in the field of ageing have contributed to this document. This commentary discusses how older people are misrepresented and undervalued in the current public discourse surrounding the pandemic. It points to issues in documenting the deaths of older adults, the lack of preparation for such a crisis in long-term care homes, how some ‘protective’ policies can be considered patronising and how the initial perception of the public was that the virus was really an older adult problem. This commentary also calls attention to important intergenerational solidarity that has occurred during this crisis to ensure support and social-inclusion of older adults, even at a distance. Our hope is that with this commentary we can contribute to the discourse on older adults during this pandemic and diminish the ageist attitudes that have circulated.

Atypical and early-onset dementias can be particularly problematic for family caregivers, and support groups aimed at memory loss and Alzheimer's disease are not always helpful. Unfortunately, little has been developed specifically for caregivers of individuals with atypical dementias such as the frontotemporal dementias. Compounding the lack of access to interventions targeted specifically at caregivers of individuals with atypical and early-onset dementias are the unique needs of rural caregivers. Due to the relative infrequency of these particular dementias and the large geographical distances between rural caregivers, technology-facilitation is required for any group-based intervention. This paper describes the development of a secure telehealth videoconferenced support group for rural spouses of individuals with atypical and early-onset dementias. In addition, we provide preliminary evidence of effectiveness and describe a template for future groups based on the key therapeutic aspects of this novel technology-facilitated intervention.

Introduction Despite the urgent need for remote neurobehavioral assessment of individuals with cognitive impairment, guidance is lacking. Our goal is to provide a multi‐dimensional framework for remotely assessing cognitive, functional, behavioral, and physical aspects of people with cognitive impairment, along with ethical and technical considerations. Methods Literature review on remote cognitive assessment and multidisciplinary expert opinion from behavioral neurologists, neuropsychiatrists, neuropsychologists, and geriatricians was integrated under the auspices of the Alzheimer Society of Canada Task Force on Dementia Care Best Practices for COVID‐19. Telephone and video approaches to assessments were considered. Results Remote assessment is shown to be acceptable to patients and caregivers. Informed consent, informant history, and attention to privacy and autonomy are paramount. A range of screening and domain‐specific instruments are available for telephone or video assessment of cognition, function, and behavior. Some neuropsychological tests administered by videoconferencing show good agreement with in‐person assessment but still lack validation and norms. Aspects of the remote dementia‐focused neurological examination can be performed reliably. Discussion Despite challenges, current literature and practice support implementation of telemedicine assessments for patients with cognitive impairment. Convergence of data across the clinical interview, reliable and brief remote cognitive tests, and remote neurological exam increase confidence in clinical interpretation and diagnosis.

Background Technology use has become the most critical approach to maintaining social connectedness during the COVID-19 pandemic. Older adults (aged >65 years) are perceived as the most physiologically susceptible population to developing COVID-19 and are at risk of secondary mental health challenges related to the social isolation that has been imposed by virus containment strategies. To mitigate concerns regarding sampling bias, we analyzed a random sample of older adults to understand the uptake and acceptance of technologies that support socialization during the pandemic. Objective We aimed to conduct a population-based assessment of the barriers and facilitators to engaging in the use of technology for web-based socialization among older adults in the Canadian province of British Columbia during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional, population-based, regionally representative survey by using the random-digit dialing method to reach participants aged >65 years who live in British Columbia. Data were analyzed using SPSS (IBM Corporation), and open-text responses were analyzed via thematic analysis. Results Respondents included 400 older adults aged an average of 72 years, and 63.7% (n=255) of respondents were female. Most respondents (n=358, 89.5%) were aware of how to use technology to connect with others, and slightly more than half of the respondents (n=224, 56%) reported that, since the beginning of the pandemic, they used technology differently to connect with others during the pandemic. Additionally, 55.9% (n=223) of respondents reported that they adopted new technology since the beginning of the pandemic. Older adults reported the following key barriers to using technology: (1) a lack of access (including finance-, knowledge-, and age-related issues); (2) a lack of interest (including a preference for telephones and a general lack of interest in computers); and (3) physical barriers (resultant of cognitive impairments, stroke, and arthritis). Older adults also reported the following facilitators: (1) a knowledge of technologies (from self-teaching or external courses); (2) reliance on others (family, friends, and general internet searches); (3) technology accessibility (including appropriate environments, user-friendly technology, and clear instructions); and (4) social motivation (everyone else is doing it). Conclusions Much data on older adults’ use of technology are limited by sampling biases, but this study, which used a random sampling method, demonstrated that older adults used technology to mitigate social isolation during the pandemic. Web-based socialization is the most promising method for mitigating potential mental health effects that are related to virus containment strategies. Providing telephone training; creating task lists; and implementing the facilitators described by participants, such as facilitated socialization activities, ar...

BackgroundOlder Indigenous adults encounter multiple challenges as their age intersects with health inequities. Research suggests that a majority of older Indigenous adults prefer to age in place, and they will need culturally safe assistive technologies to do so.ObjectiveThe aim of this critical review was to examine literature concerning use, adaptation, and development of assistive technologies for health purposes by Indigenous peoples.MethodsWorking within Indigenous research methodologies and from a decolonizing approach, searches of peer-reviewed academic and gray literature dated to February 2016 were conducted using keywords related to assistive technology and Indigenous peoples. Sources were reviewed and coded thematically.ResultsOf the 34 sources captured, only 2 concerned technology specifically for older Indigenous adults. Studies detailing technology with Indigenous populations of all ages originated primarily from Canada (n=12), Australia (n=10), and the United States (n=9) and were coded to four themes: meaningful user involvement and community-based processes in development, the digital divide, Indigenous innovation in technology, and health technology needs as holistic and interdependent.ConclusionsA key finding is the necessity of meaningful user involvement in technology development, especially in communities struggling with the digital divide. In spite of, or perhaps because of this divide, Indigenous communities are enthusiastically adapting mobile technologies to suit their needs in creative, culturally specific ways. This enthusiasm and creativity, coupled with the extensive experience many Indigenous communities have with telehealth technologies, presents opportunity for meaningful, culturally safe development processes.

Introduction-Patient satisfaction is a key aspect of quality of care and can inform continuous quality improvement. Of the few studies that have reported on patient satisfaction with telehealth in programs aimed at individuals with memory problems, none has reported on the psychometric properties of the user satisfaction scales employed.

Objectives Compared with the general population, people living with dementia have been unequivocally affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there is a paucity of knowledge on the COVID-19 impact on people with dementia and their care partners. The objective of this scoping review was to synthesize the existing literature on the COVID-19 experiences of people with dementia and their care partners. Methods Following Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review framework, we searched five electronic databases (Scopus, PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, and Web of Science) and an online search engine (Google Scholar). Inclusion criteria consisted of English-language articles focusing on the COVID-19 experiences of people with dementia and their care partners. Synthesis Twenty-one articles met our inclusion criteria: six letters to the editor, seven commentaries, and eight original research studies. In the literature, five main themes were identified: (i) care partner fatigue and burnout; (ii) lack of access to services and supports; (iii) worsening neuropsychiatric symptoms and cognitive function; (iv) coping with COVID-19; and (v) the need for more evidence-informed research. Factors such as living alone, having advanced dementia, and the length of confinement were found to exacerbate the impact of COVID-19. Conclusion Urgent action is needed to support people living with dementia and their care partners in the pandemic. With little access to supports and services, people with dementia and their care partners are currently at a point of crisis. Collaboration and more evidence-informed research are critical to reducing mortality and supporting people with dementia during the pandemic.

Background With rural population aging there are growing numbers of people with dementia in rural and remote settings. The role of primary health care (PHC) is critical in rural locations, yet there is a lack of rural-specific PHC models for dementia, and little is known about factors influencing the development, implementation, and sustainability of rural PHC interventions. Using a community-based participatory research approach, researchers collaborated with a rural PHC team to co-design and implement an evidence-based interdisciplinary rural PHC memory clinic in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan. This paper reports barriers and facilitators to developing, implementing, and sustaining the intervention. Methods A qualitative longitudinal process evaluation was conducted over two and half years, from pre- to post-implementation. Data collection and analyses were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) which consists of 38 constructs within five domains: innovation characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, individual characteristics, and process. Data were collected via focus groups with the PHC team and stakeholders, smaller team workgroup meetings, and team member interviews. Analysis was conducted using a deductive approach to apply CFIR codes to the data and an inductive analysis to identify barriers and facilitators. Results Across all domains, 14 constructs influenced development and implementation. Three domains (innovation characteristics, inner setting, process) were most important. Facilitators were the relative advantage of the intervention, ability to trial on a small scale, tension for change, leadership engagement, availability of resources, education and support from researchers, increased self-efficacy, and engagement of champions. Barriers included the complexity of multiple intervention components, required practice changes, lack of formal incentive programs, time intensiveness of modifying the EMR during iterative development, lack of EMR access by all team members, lack of co-location of team members, workload and busy clinical schedules, inability to justify a designated dementia care manager role, and turnover of PHC team members. Conclusions The study identified key factors that supported and hindered the development and implementation of a rural-specific strategy for dementia assessment and management in PHC. Despite challenges related to the rural context, the researcher-academic partnership was successful in developing and implementing the intervention.