高橋 在也

Abstract Background There is limited quantitative evidence regarding good death for people with dementia. Aims To clarify which components of good death are important for people with dementia and to identify the component structure of good death through explanatory factor analysis. Design A web‐based questionnaire survey was conducted where bereaved family members and professionals were asked to rate the importance of the 44 items identified from previous qualitative interviews as components of ‘good death’. Setting/participants A total of 618 bereaved family members of people with dementia, and 206 physicians, nurses and care workers, each, involved in dementia care. Results A total of 1236 participant responses were analyzed. The exploratory factor analysis identified the following four factors as the concepts of good death for people with dementia: ‘Comfort, security, and safety’, ‘Relationships’, ‘Independence’, and ‘Personhood care’. The top five items that bereaved families indicated as important were ‘dying at peace’ (97%), ‘being free from pain and physical distress’ (97%), ‘being calm’ (96%), ‘being clean’ (96%), and ‘receiving necessary daily living assistance’ (96%). The items with the lowest scores were ‘being cared for by family’ (53%), ‘living with faith’ (54%), and ‘remaining in people's memory after one's death’ (67%). We found only small differences between the opinions of the bereaved family members and medical professionals. Conclusions The components of good death which stakeholders consider important provide useful information for developing care implementation strategies for dying people with dementia.

The effectiveness of interdisciplinary home healthcare service consisting of at least two or more healthcare providers, such as a nurse, physician and physiotherapist, for community-dwelling older adults remains unclear. This systematic review assesses the effects of interdisciplinary home care on quality of life (QOL) and health outcomes in older adults with chronic conditions using validated tools. Databases were searched using CINAHL Plus with Full Text, PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, and OpenGrey from inception to January 25, 2021. Eligibility criteria included (i) an interdisciplinary home care approach, (ii) participants aged 65 years and older with chronic conditions, (iii) randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and (iv) original literature in English. The study reviewer's dyad independently screened the literature and assessed the study quality using the Cochrane's Risk of Bias 2 tool. The analysis employed qualitative and quantitative integration and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. This study included 13 RCTs with 4709 participants. Four RCTs indicated that interdisciplinary home healthcare services reduced hospital admissions during the initial 6 months after the start of home care interventions (risk ratio [RR] = 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.61-0.88; p < 0.001; I2 = 0%). However, evidence certainty was moderate; QOL and mortality showed low certainty; and institutionalization and adherence showed moderate certainty of evidence. This study suggests that the interdisciplinary home care approach reduces hospital admissions but lacks effects on other outcomes. More robust studies are required to evaluate this evidence. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2024; ••: ••-••.

BACKGROUND: Generative artificial intelligence (GAI), represented by large language models, have the potential to transform health care and medical education. In particular, GAI's impact on higher education has the potential to change students' learning experience as well as faculty's teaching. However, concerns have been raised about ethical consideration and decreased reliability of the existing examinations. Furthermore, in medical education, curriculum reform is required to adapt to the revolutionary changes brought about by the integration of GAI into medical practice and research. OBJECTIVE: This study analyzes the impact of GAI on medical education curricula and explores strategies for adaptation. METHODS: The study was conducted in the context of faculty development at a medical school in Japan. A workshop involving faculty and students was organized, and participants were divided into groups to address two research questions: (1) How does GAI affect undergraduate medical education curricula? and (2) How should medical school curricula be reformed to address the impact of GAI? The strength, weakness, opportunity, and threat (SWOT) framework was used, and cross-SWOT matrix analysis was used to devise strategies. Further, 4 researchers conducted content analysis on the data generated during the workshop discussions. RESULTS: The data were collected from 8 groups comprising 55 participants. Further, 5 themes about the impact of GAI on medical education curricula emerged: improvement of teaching and learning, improved access to information, inhibition of existing learning processes, problems in GAI, and changes in physicians' professionality. Positive impacts included enhanced teaching and learning efficiency and improved access to information, whereas negative impacts included concerns about reduced independent thinking and the adaptability of existing assessment methods. Further, GAI was perceived to change the nature of physicians' expertise. Three themes emerged from the cross-SWOT analysis for curriculum reform: (1) learning about GAI, (2) learning with GAI, and (3) learning aside from GAI. Participants recommended incorporating GAI literacy, ethical considerations, and compliance into the curriculum. Learning with GAI involved improving learning efficiency, supporting information gathering and dissemination, and facilitating patient involvement. Learning aside from GAI emphasized maintaining GAI-free learning processes, fostering higher cognitive domains of learning, and introducing more communication exercises. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the profound impact of GAI on medical education curricula and provides insights into curriculum reform strategies. Participants recognized the need for GAI literacy, ethical education, and adaptive learning. Further, GAI was recognized as a tool that can enhance efficiency and involve patients in education. The study also suggests that medical education should focus on competencies that GAI hardly replaces, such as clinical experience and communication. Notably, involving both faculty and students in curriculum reform discussions fosters a sense of ownership and ensures broader perspectives are encompassed.