Care-home residents with dementia can experience behavioural and psychological symptoms such as aggression, agitation, anxiety, wandering, calling out and sexual disinhibition. Care-home staff have a duty to keep residents safe. However, residents with dementia can pose particular challenges in this area. In this paper, we draw on a study which explored how care-home staff manage dementia-related behaviours. In-depth ethnographic case studies at four separate care homes were conducted in England. These involved interviews with 40 care-home staff and 384 hours of participant observation. Our analysis showed that some residents with dementia experience behaviours which can either create risks for, or negatively impact on, themselves and/or other residents or staff members. It emerged that the consequences of the behaviours, rather than the behaviours themselves, created difficulties for staff. To cope with the risk and impact of behaviours, staff employed multiple strategies such as surveillance, resident placement, restrictions and forced care. Using the data, we explore how actions taken by staff to manage the risk and impact of behaviours in these communal settings relate to residents’ human rights. Our findings have particular relevance for care-home staff who need support and guidance in this area, for service development worldwide and for the global ageing population whose valued human rights may become under threat, if they require long-term care.

Background: In this paper, we aim to test the long-term benefit of an integrative reactivation and rehabilitation (IRR) program compared to usual care in terms of improved psychogeriatric patients on multiple psychiatric symptoms (MPS) and of caregivers on burden and competence. Improvement was defined as >30% improvement (≥ a half standard deviation) compared to baseline.

Methods: We used the following outcome variables: difference in the number of improved patients on MPS (Neuropsychiatric Inventory, NPI) and improved caregivers on burden (Caregiver Burden, CB) and competence (Caregiver Competence List, CCL). Assessments were taken after intake (T1) and after six months of follow-up (T3). Risk ratios (RR), number needed to treat (NNT), and odds ratios (ORs) were calculated.

Results: IRR had a significant positive effect on NPI-cluster hyperactivity (RR 2.64; 95% CI: 1.26–5.53; NNT 4.07). In the complete cases analysis, IRR showed significant ORs of 2.80 on the number of NPI symptoms and 3.46 on the NPI-sum-severity; up to 76% improved patients. For caregivers, competence was a significant beneficiary in IRR (RR 2.23; 95% CI: 1.07–4.62; NNT 5.07). In the complete cases analysis, the ORs were significantly in favor of IRR on general burden and competence (ORs range: 2.40–4.18), with up to 71% improved caregivers.

Conclusion: IRR showed a significantly higher probability of improvement with a small NNT of four on multiple psychiatric symptoms in psychogeriatric patients. The same applies to the higher probability to improve general burden and competence of the caregiver with an NNT of five. The results were even more pronounced for those who fully completed the IRR program. (Inter)national psychogeriatric nursing home care and ambulant care programs have to incorporate integrative psychotherapeutic interventions.