Dementia-related stigma in physicians: a scoping review of stigma-reduction interventions.

Frontiers in dementia Pub Date : 2025-07-22 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/frdem.2025.1601462
Alison Warren, Zan Wynia
{"title":"Dementia-related stigma in physicians: a scoping review of stigma-reduction interventions.","authors":"Alison Warren, Zan Wynia","doi":"10.3389/frdem.2025.1601462","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Despite progress in dementia diagnosis and treatment, physician-held stigma remains a significant barrier to early recognition and effective care. Stigmatizing attitudes among healthcare professionals can negatively impact diagnosis rates, clinical interactions, and care quality for people living with dementia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This scoping review was conducted following Arksey and O'Malley's framework. Peer-reviewed literature from 2014 to 2024 was systematically reviewed to identify and evaluate interventions aimed at reducing dementia-related stigma among physicians. A total of 14 studies met inclusion criteria, examining educational, skill-building, and person-centered approaches.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Interventions included brief workshops, online modular training, and interdisciplinary methods integrating person-centered frameworks and behavior management tools. Validated outcome measures used in the studies included the Alzheimer's Disease Knowledge Scale (ADKS), the Dementia Negative Stereotype Scale (DNS), and the General Practitioners Confidence and Attitude Scale for Dementia (GPACS-D). Across studies, interventions were found to improve clinical confidence, reduce negative stereotypes, and enhance care quality.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Findings highlight the importance of culturally sensitive and interdisciplinary interventions to address stigma, improve clinical confidence, and enhance care quality, particularly in low-resource settings. Notable gaps remain in understanding the long-term impact and scalability of such interventions. This review aims to contribute a deeper understanding of the barriers and facilitators to implementing dementia care practices, offering a conceptualization for enhanced physician education and improved health outcomes for persons with dementia. We offer recommendations for future research to develop tailored strategies that support stigma reduction and improve care delivery.</p>","PeriodicalId":520000,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in dementia","volume":"4 ","pages":"1601462"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12321845/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in dementia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frdem.2025.1601462","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Despite progress in dementia diagnosis and treatment, physician-held stigma remains a significant barrier to early recognition and effective care. Stigmatizing attitudes among healthcare professionals can negatively impact diagnosis rates, clinical interactions, and care quality for people living with dementia.

Methods: This scoping review was conducted following Arksey and O'Malley's framework. Peer-reviewed literature from 2014 to 2024 was systematically reviewed to identify and evaluate interventions aimed at reducing dementia-related stigma among physicians. A total of 14 studies met inclusion criteria, examining educational, skill-building, and person-centered approaches.

Results: Interventions included brief workshops, online modular training, and interdisciplinary methods integrating person-centered frameworks and behavior management tools. Validated outcome measures used in the studies included the Alzheimer's Disease Knowledge Scale (ADKS), the Dementia Negative Stereotype Scale (DNS), and the General Practitioners Confidence and Attitude Scale for Dementia (GPACS-D). Across studies, interventions were found to improve clinical confidence, reduce negative stereotypes, and enhance care quality.

Discussion: Findings highlight the importance of culturally sensitive and interdisciplinary interventions to address stigma, improve clinical confidence, and enhance care quality, particularly in low-resource settings. Notable gaps remain in understanding the long-term impact and scalability of such interventions. This review aims to contribute a deeper understanding of the barriers and facilitators to implementing dementia care practices, offering a conceptualization for enhanced physician education and improved health outcomes for persons with dementia. We offer recommendations for future research to develop tailored strategies that support stigma reduction and improve care delivery.

医生中与痴呆症相关的耻辱感:耻辱感减少干预措施的范围审查。
导读:尽管痴呆症的诊断和治疗取得了进展,但医生认为的耻辱感仍然是早期识别和有效治疗的重大障碍。医疗保健专业人员的污名化态度会对痴呆症患者的诊断率、临床互动和护理质量产生负面影响。方法:本综述遵循Arksey和O'Malley的框架进行。系统回顾了2014年至2024年的同行评议文献,以确定和评估旨在减少医生对痴呆症相关耻辱感的干预措施。共有14项研究符合纳入标准,检查了教育、技能培养和以人为本的方法。结果:干预措施包括简短的研讨会,在线模块化培训,以及整合以人为本的框架和行为管理工具的跨学科方法。研究中使用的有效结果测量包括阿尔茨海默病知识量表(ADKS)、痴呆症负面刻板印象量表(DNS)和全科医生痴呆症信心和态度量表(GPACS-D)。研究发现,干预措施可以提高临床信心,减少负面刻板印象,提高护理质量。讨论:研究结果强调了文化敏感性和跨学科干预措施对解决耻辱感、提高临床信心和提高护理质量的重要性,特别是在资源匮乏的环境中。在了解此类干预措施的长期影响和可扩展性方面仍存在显著差距。本综述旨在加深对痴呆症护理实践的障碍和促进因素的理解,为加强医生教育和改善痴呆症患者的健康结果提供概念化。我们为未来的研究提供建议,以制定量身定制的战略,支持减少耻辱感和改善护理服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信