JMIR Form Res. 2026 Jul 29;10:e71746. doi: 10.2196/71746.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: People with dementia and their caregivers experience significant psychological distress, which may increase their vulnerability to trauma across the dementia diagnostic and caregiving trajectory. Specialist dementia helplines offer immediate emotional support, information, and signposting; however, little empirical evidence exists about how call handlers account for potential trauma in their responses.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the extent to which call handlers’ responses on the United Kingdom’s only 24-hour dementia helpline reflected trauma-informed (TI) principles of safety, trust, choice, collaboration, and empowerment and to describe caller characteristics and reasons for contact during the COVID-19 pandemic.
METHODS: No participants were actively recruited. Instead, the study analyzed 198 anonymized, routinely collected helpline call logs (out of 200 randomly selected) drawn from 7357 calls received by Alzheimer Scotland’s 24-hour helpline between April 2020 and April 2021. A retrospective deductive framework analysis mapped narrative summaries to 5 TI principles (safety, trustworthiness and transparency, choice, collaboration, and empowerment). Double‑coding and calibration were undertaken in line with established guidance on intercoder reliability for qualitative research. Descriptive statistics summarized caller characteristics and theme frequencies; no inferential testing was conducted due to the exploratory nature of the analysis, sample properties, and the subjective nature of theme ratings.
RESULTS: Most calls were made during daytime hours (159/198, 79.5%) and were made by carers, family members, or friends (n=179, 89.5%). Emotional support was the most frequently recorded reason for contact (91 instances), followed by carer stress (66 instances) and information on caring (51 instances). Across call handlers’ responses, collaboration (126/179, 70.4%) and empowerment (108/179, 60.3%) were the most frequently observed TI principles, followed by safety (105/179, 58.7%), choice (66/179, 37.4%), and trust (56/179, 31.3%). Safety-focused responses were more prevalent in nighttime calls than daytime calls (76.9% vs 56%). Illustrative call log excerpts demonstrated empathetic listening, validation, shared problem-solving, and signposting practices aligned with TI principles.
CONCLUSIONS: In this exploratory retrospective evaluation, responses from a national dementia helpline commonly reflected TI principles, despite call handlers receiving primarily awareness-level TI content within their wider role preparation. Findings should be interpreted as descriptive and hypothesis-generating because they are based on call log summaries rather than recorded interactions and were obtained within the unique context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The results suggest that TI principles may be feasible and relevant in dementia helpline services and highlight the potential value of more structured approaches to TI workforce development. Future prospective research incorporating richer data sources such as recorded calls and call-reported outcomes is warranted to support service development and evaluation.
PMID:42529812 | DOI:10.2196/71746
