Dementia Care Mapping reconsidered: exploring the reliability and validity of the observational tool

Abstract

Questions were raised regarding the reliability and validity of DCM as used by routine care staff. Possible reasons for this, and suggestions for amendments are made.

Dementia care mapping as a research tool

“…As shown in Table 3, higher WIB scores are associated with being more cognitively intact, non-agitated, non-depressed, and socially engaged, relationships that have been reported previously (Brooker et al, 1998;Chung, 2004;Edelman et al, 2004;Kuhn et al, 2004;Thornton et al, 2004). However, such a relationship is not unique to DCM, but is characteristic of many QOL measures (Sloane et al, 2005).…”

Person-centered Climate Questionnaire-Patient in English: A psychometric evaluation study in long-term care settings

“…Dementia Care Mapping has significant value for assessing person-centered care from a proxy view of nursing home residents who have dementia. However, there are concerns about its resource intensive nature (Fossey, Lee, & Ballard, 2002;Sloane et al, 2007;Thornton, Hatton, & Tatham, 2004) and the reliability and validity of the instrument (Chenoweth & Jeon, 2007;Sloane et al, 2007;Thornton et al, 2004). Although Dementia Care Mapping has grown in popularity for use with long-term care residents in many European countries (Fulton, Edelman, & Kuhn, 2006), this assessment method is not an efficient means of assessing person-centered care and is inppropriate for persons who do not have moderate to severe dementia.…”

Monitoring and improving the quality of person-centred care in health and social settings using Dementia Care Mapping (DCM): Staff experiences of implementation barriers and supports

“…DCM has been criticised for being a complex tool and studies have, therefore, suggested a lack of coding consistency between mappers is of concern, raising concerns about the potential usefulness DCM data as a robust evidence-based measure of care quality or quality of life (19). DCM guidance (2) recommends that mappers establish inter-rater reliability (IRR) (minimum 70% concordance across BCC and ME values) with any co-mapper ahead of use, and that every mapper conduct an IRR map at least once per year.…”

“…DCM guidance (2) recommends that mappers establish inter-rater reliability (IRR) (minimum 70% concordance across BCC and ME values) with any co-mapper ahead of use, and that every mapper conduct an IRR map at least once per year. Published literature highlights that while a number of research studies have examined IRR and demonstrated it can be established effectively between experienced mappers in research contexts (10,20), relatively little is really known about IRR between mappers in everyday practice or whether IRR checks are completed regularly (19). In one study, Thornton et al examined IRR in the context of everyday mapping.…”