Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Not Yet Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT07251088

Dyadic, App-supported Collaborative Care Intervention Trial for Family Caregivers of People Living With Dementia

In Germany, approximately 1.8 million individuals are living with dementia, representing a considerable share of those requiring long-term care. Many people with dementia (PlwD) express the desire to remain in their home environment for as long as possible. However, the progressive cognitive and physical decline associated with the disease renders caregiving increasingly time-intensive and places a substantial burden on family members. In the absence of sufficient support structures, maintaining home-based care becomes difficult, creating additional strain on the health care system.

The study aims to address these challenges through an innovative intervention. Its primary objectives are: (1) to evaluate whether a dyadic care management model, delivered by specialized nurses with expertise in dementia care and supported by a mobile health application that provides direct access to caregiving experts and memory clinics, can help stabilize the home care situation; (2) to determine whether this approach reduces caregiver burden; and (3) to assess its effectiveness in alleviating neuropsychiatric symptoms in PlwD, compared to usual care.

Not Yet Recruiting

Trial opening soon.

Get Notified

Key information

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Institut für Technik der Informationsverarbeitung, Karlsruhe, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany

Loading trial locations.

About this study

In Germany, approximately 84% of the five million individuals in need of care are supported at home by informal caregivers, most commonly family members. Only 21% receive professional assistance from care or support services, highlighting the substantial responsibility placed on families. People living with dementia (PlwD) constitute a particularly large share of these care recipients. On average, they require around 36 hours of informal care per week-considerably more than individuals affected by conditions such as cancer (16 hours/week) or stroke (24 hours/week).

Both PlwD and their caregivers, often conceptualized as a dyad, frequently express a strong preference for remaining in their home environment and sustaining home-based care for as long as possible. While many caregivers provide support over extended periods and may even perceive their role as meaningful, the progressive cognitive and physical decline of PlwD, combined with neuropsychiatric symptoms and caregivers' perceived sense of obligation, can result in considerable psychological and physical strain. Such strain is commonly associated with depression, anxiety, diminished subjective well-being, reduced self-efficacy, and social withdrawal. Consequently, the sustainability of home care is often precarious. Indeed, 40% of caregivers of community-dwelling PlwD report being unable to maintain care for longer than one year, leading to institutionalization.

Although support services for caregivers have been steadily expanded in recent years, their utilization remains limited. Barriers include a lack of awareness, organizational hurdles, and, paradoxically, the high demands of caregiving itself, which can hinder access to such services. In the absence of sufficient support, informal care is increasingly substituted by professional long-term care, thereby intensifying pressure on already limited workforce and financial resources within the health care system. This transition is also frequently accompanied by feelings of guilt among caregivers.

Evidence regarding the effectiveness of interventions to support caregivers is mixed. Randomized controlled trials have only partly demonstrated significant reductions in caregiver burden. A meta-analysis indicated that individualized, structured multicomponent interventions-comprising various support modules-are most effective. While there is some evidence for cost-effectiveness, it is constrained by small sample sizes. A model-based analysis suggests that dyadic interventions, which target both PlwD and caregivers, may prolong the feasibility of home-based care and could be cost-effective. However, findings remain inconsistent: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials reported positive outcomes in 13 studies but no effect in 9 others. Effectiveness appears to depend strongly on the duration and intensity of interventions. One explanation may be that caregiver needs during periods of heightened burden were not adequately or promptly addressed.

Digital health interventions, such as remote, app-based solutions, offer the potential to overcome these limitations by providing flexible and immediate support at critical moments. Nevertheless, research in this field remains limited, and it is still unclear to what extent digital approaches can stabilize home care situations for PlwD and their families.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • formal dementia diagnosis
  • living in their own home for the person with dementia
  • access to a smartphone and internet for the informal caregiver
  • informed consent of the participant

Exclusion criteria

  • not able to provide written consent
  • if a legal representative is present, they may give their consent

Treatment and study plan

Experimental Arm

Other

Dyads in the intervention group will receive individualized dementia care management over a twelve-month period, with the objective of identifying and effectively addressing the unmet needs of people living with dementia (PlwD) and their caregivers. The intervention is complemented by a mobile health application used by both caregivers and Care Specialists, providing caregivers with continuous access to care managers and memory clinics whenever challenges or burdens arise. The app facilitates ongoing monitoring of caregivers' health status and burden through regular real-time data collection, aggregation, and transmission to the care manager, thereby enabling timely and needs-based interventions or re-interventions. Consequently, the frequency and intensity of the intervention are tailored to the dyads' individual circumstances and reported levels of burden.

Other names: Individualized Dementia Care Management

Primary outcomes

  1. Stability of the home care arrangement (Perseverance Time Scale)

    Time frame: 12 months after baseline assessment

    For the Perseverance Time Scale, informal caregivers are asked (self-assessment) to estimate how long they believe they can continue to provide informal care and, thus, their current care situation. Response options are: less than one week, less than one month, less than six months, less than one year, less than two years, and two years or more.

    This measure is central to evaluating the long-term stability of home-based care - an essential aspect of dementia care, given the chronic and progressive nature of the disease.

  2. Neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPI-Q)

    Time frame: 12 months after baseline assessment

    Another primary outcome is the presence of neuropsychiatric symptoms in PlwD, assessed with the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPI-Q), completed by the informal caregiver via face-to-face interviews with the study nurse. Neuropsychiatric symptoms are well-documented contributors to caregiver burden, underlining the dyadic nature of selected primary outcomes. Each of the 12 domains of the NPI-Q includes a survey item that captures the key symptom associated with that domain. For each question, respondents indicate whether the symptom has been present ("Yes") or absent ("No"). If the response is "No," the informant proceeds to the next item. If "Yes," they are asked to rate the severity of the symptom experienced during the past month on a 3-point scale, as well as the caregiver distress caused by the symptom on a 5-point scale. The NPI score can becalculated by adding the scores of the first 10 ir 12 items, higher scores indicate higher presence of psychopathology.

  3. Caregiver burden (ZBI)

    Time frame: 12 months after baseline assessment

    The third primary outcome is the caregiver burden itself, measured via the Zarit Burden Interview (12-item version), which will be self-completed by caregivers. This tool is among the most commonly applied instruments in informal dementia caregiver research, enabling comparability across studies. While the most commonly used form of the Zarit Burden Interview is a 22-item version, the shortened 12-item version has demonstrated comparable psychometric properties (Bedard et al., 2001), offering a time-efficient alternative that reduces respondent burden. Each item on the interview is a statement which the caregiver is asked to rate using a 5-point scale. Response options range from 0 (never) to 4 (nearly always). The result of the instrument is a sum between 0 and 48, higher results indicate a higher subjective level of burden.

Study contacts

Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.

Bernhard Michalowsky, PD Dr. Dr.

CONTACT

[email protected]

+49 3834 86-8530

Eva Gläser

CONTACT

[email protected]

+49 3834 86 8534

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)

Other

Collaborators

  • AGAPLESION ELISABETHENSTIFT gGmbH
  • AOK - Die Gesundheitskasse für Niedersachsen
  • Federal Joint Committee
  • Gemeinnützige Gesellschaft für Psychiatrie Reutlingen mbH
  • Georg-August-Universität Göttingen
  • IKK gesund plus
  • Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
  • Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg
  • University Medical Center Rostock
  • University Medicine Greifswald
  • Universität Konstanz
  • Universität zu Köln

Registry information

Official study title

Dyadic, App-supported Collaborative Care Intervention Trial for Family Caregivers of People Living With Dementia - The Multi-center Living@Home Study

Acronym: Living@Home

Important dates

Study start
2026
Primary completion
2028
Study completion
2028
First posted
Nov 26, 2025
Registry last updated
Nov 26, 2025

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.