Collaboration for Developing and Sustaining Community Dementia-Friendly Initiatives: A Realist Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Dementia-friendly communities (DFCs) are seen as key to the inclusion and participation of people with dementia and carers. Dementia-friendly initiatives (DFIs) are important building blocks for the growth of DFCs. The collaboration between different stakeholders is a central aspect in developing and sustaining DFIs. AIM: This study tests and refines an initial theory about collaborating for DFIs with special attention for the involvement of people with dementia and their carers during the collaboration for DFIs. The realist approach is used for deepening contextual aspects, mechanisms, outcomes, and its explanatory power. METHODS: A participatory case study design using qualitative data (focus groups, observations, reflections, minutes from meetings, and exit interviews) was executed in four Dutch municipalities that have ambitions to become dementia- friendly communities. RESULTS: The refined theory on the collaboration for DFIs incorporates contextual aspects such as diversity, shared insights, and clarity. It draws attention to the importance of mechanisms such as the recognition of efforts and progress, informal distributed leadership, interdependency, belonging, significance, and commitment. These mechanisms resonate with feeling useful and feeling collectively powerful in the collaboration. The outcomes of collaboration were activation, getting new ideas, and fun. Our findings address how stakeholders' routines and perspectives impact the involvement of people with dementia and their carers during collaboration. CONCLUSION: This study provides detailed information about collaboration for DFIs. The collaboration for DFIs is largely influenced by feeling useful and collectively powerful. Further research is needed to understand how these mechanisms can be triggered with the involvement of people with dementia and their carers in the heart of the collaboration.

A Qualitative Study on the Experiences of Therapists Delivering the Promoting Activity, Independence and Stability in Early Dementia (PrAISED) Intervention During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The Promoting Activity, Independence and Stability in Early Dementia (PrAISED) intervention is a programme of physical activity and exercise designed to maintain participation in activities of daily living, mobility, and quality of life for people living with dementia. During the COVID-19 pandemic first national lockdown in England, the PrAISED physiotherapists, occupational therapists, and rehabilitation support workers adapted to delivering the intervention remotely via telephone or video conferencing. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore therapists' experience of delivering the PrAISED intervention during the COVID-19 pandemic and derive implications for clinical practice. METHODS: Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 therapists using purposive sampling. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the transcripts. RESULTS: Therapists reported a change in the relationship between themselves, the person with dementia and the caregiver, with an increased reliance on the caregiver and a loss of autonomy for the person living with dementia. There was concern that this would increase the burden on the caregiver. The therapists reported using creativity to adapt to different modes of delivery. They felt their sessions were mostly focused on providing social and emotional support, and that assessing, progressing, and tailoring the intervention was difficult. CONCLUSION: It is possible to deliver some elements of a physical intervention using remote delivery, but a dual modal approach including remote and face-to-face delivery would optimize treatment efficacy. Educational support would be required to enable people living with dementia and their caregivers to overcome barriers relating to digital literacy.

A non-randomised feasibility study of the Rehabilitation Potential Assessment Tool (RePAT) in frail older people in the acute healthcare setting.

BACKGROUND: Rehabilitation potential involves predicting who will benefit from rehabilitation. Decisions about rehabilitation potential must take into account personal, clinical and contextual factors, a process which is complicated in the presence of acute ill-health and frailty. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the Rehabilitation Potential Assessment Tool (RePAT) - a 15 item holistic, person-centred assessment tool and training package - in the acute hospital setting. METHODS: A non-randomised feasibility study with nested semi-structured interviews explored whether RePAT was feasible and acceptable. Feasibility was tested by recruiting physiotherapy and occupational therapy participants delivering the RePAT intervention to patients alongside usual clinical care. Acceptability was tested by conducting semi-structured interviews with staff, patient and carer participants. Staff and patient characteristics were analysed using descriptive statistics. Interview data were analysed thematically. Fidelity of completed RePAT items was assessed against a priori criteria on how closely they matched tool guidance by two researchers. Mean values of the two scores were calculated. RePAT content was analysed and supported with verbatim quotes. RESULTS: Six staff participants were recruited and trained. They assessed 26 patient participants using RePAT. Mean (SD) patient age was 86.16 (±6.39) years. 32% were vulnerable or mildly frail, 42% moderately frail and 26% severely or very severely frail using the Clinical Frailty Scale. Mean (SD) time to complete RePAT was 32.7 (±9.6) minutes. RePAT fidelity was good where 13 out of 15 items achieved a priori fidelity. RePAT was acceptable and tolerated by staff and patients. Staff participants reported RePAT enabled them to consider rehabilitation decisions in a more structured and consistent way. Patients and carer participants, although unable to comment directly on RePAT, reported being satisfied with their rehabilitation assessments which were found to embrace a person-centred approach. CONCLUSIONS: RePAT was found to be acceptable and feasible by staff, carers and patients. It allowed clinicians to make explicit their reasoning behind rehabilitation assessments and encouraged them to become more cognisant of factors which affected their clinical decision-making. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ID ISRCTN31938453 . Registered 05/10/2021.

Identifying the key characteristics of falls management programmes in UK care homes - A scoping review of grey literature.

Trial literature on falls management in care homes may provide limited detail on current practice and instead this information may be found in grey literature. This scoping review aimed to identify the key characteristics of current falls management programmes for UK care homes identified from the grey literature. A scoping review was conducted and evidence sources were included if they were targeted at UK care homes for older people and included any component of falls management (assessment, intervention, training). Search activities included searches of electronic databases, professional websites and contacting care homes for current examples. The principles of intervention component analysis were conducted to describe the features of falls management. Forty-eight evidence sources were included (17 online resources, 10 online articles, 9 policies and standards and 12 examples provided by individual care homes). 67 themes were identified under eight domains. The core domains detailed the characteristics of Assessment, Interventions and Training. The approach taken to managing falls was an overarching domain, with supporting domains including how to report and monitor falls, when to complete assessments and interventions, governance and accountability, and involvement of the wider healthcare system.

Impact of COVID-19 and other infectious conditions requiring isolation on the provision of and adaptations to fundamental nursing care in hospital in terms of overall patient experience, care quality, functional ability, and treatment outcomes: systematic review.

AIM: This systematic review identifies, appraises and synthesizes the evidence on the provision of fundamental nursing care to hospitalized patients with a highly infectious virus and the effectiveness of adaptations to overcome barriers to care. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: In July 2020, we searched Medline, PsycINFO (OvidSP), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), BNI (ProQuest), WHO COVID-19 Database (https://search.bvsalud.org/) MedRxiv (https://www.medrxiv.org/), bioRxiv (https://www.biorxiv.org/) and also Google Scholar, TRIP database and NICE Evidence, forwards citation searching and reference checking of included papers, from 2016 onwards. REVIEW METHODS: We included quantitative and qualitative research reporting (i) the views, perceptions and experiences of patients who have received fundamental nursing care whilst in hospital with COVID-19, MERS, SARS, H1N1 or EVD or (ii) the views, perceptions and experiences of professional nurses and non-professionally registered care workers who have provided that care. We included review articles, commentaries, protocols and guidance documents. One reviewer performed data extraction and quality appraisal and was checked by another person. RESULTS: Of 3086 references, we included 64 articles; 19 empirical research and 45 review articles, commentaries, protocols and guidance documents spanning five pandemics. Four main themes (and 11 sub-themes) were identified. Barriers to delivering fundamental care were wearing personal protective equipment, adequate staffing, infection control procedures and emotional challenges of care. These barriers were addressed by multiple adaptations to communication, organization of care, staff support and leadership. CONCLUSION: To prepare for continuation of the COVID-19 pandemic and future pandemics, evaluative studies of adaptations to fundamental healthcare delivery must be prioritized to enable evidence-based care to be provided in future. IMPACT: Our review identifies the barriers nurses experience in providing fundamental care during a pandemic, highlights potential adaptations that address barriers and ensure positive healthcare experiences and draws attention to the need for evaluative research on fundamental care practices during pandemics.

Multifactorial falls prevention programme compared with usual care in UK care homes for older people: multicentre cluster randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical and cost effectiveness of a multifactorial fall prevention programme compared with usual care in long term care homes. DESIGN: Multicentre, parallel, cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Long term care homes in the UK, registered to care for older people or those with dementia. PARTICIPANTS: 1657 consenting residents and 84 care homes. 39 were randomised to the intervention group and 45 were randomised to usual care. INTERVENTIONS: Guide to Action for Care Homes (GtACH): a multifactorial fall prevention programme or usual care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measure was fall rate at 91-180 days after randomisation. The economic evaluation measured health related quality of life using quality adjusted life years (QALYs) derived from the five domain five level version of the EuroQoL index (EQ-5D-5L) or proxy version (EQ-5D-5L-P) and the Dementia Quality of Life utility measure (DEMQOL-U), which were self-completed by competent residents and by a care home staff member proxy (DEMQOL-P-U) for all residents (in case the ability to complete changed during the study) until 12 months after randomisation. Secondary outcome measures were falls at 1-90, 181-270, and 271-360 days after randomisation, Barthel index score, and the Physical Activity Measure-Residential Care Homes (PAM-RC) score at 91, 180, 270, and 360 days after randomisation. RESULTS: Mean age of residents was 85 years. 32% were men. GtACH training was delivered to 1051/1480 staff (71%). Primary outcome data were available for 630 participants in the GtACH group and 712 in the usual care group. The unadjusted incidence rate ratio for falls between 91 and 180 days was 0.57 (95% confidence interval 0.45 to 0.71, P<0.001) in favour of the GtACH programme (GtACH: six falls/1000 residents v usual care: 10 falls/1000). Barthel activities of daily living indices and PAM-RC scores were similar between groups at all time points. The incremental cost was £108 (95% confidence interval -£271.06 to 487.58), incremental QALYs gained for EQ-5D-5L-P was 0.024 (95% confidence interval 0.004 to 0.044) and for DEMQOL-P-U was 0.005 (-0.019 to 0.03). The incremental costs per EQ-5D-5L-P and DEMQOL-P-U based QALY were £4544 and £20 889, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The GtACH programme was associated with a reduction in fall rate and cost effectiveness, without a decrease in activity or increase in dependency. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN34353836.

Rehabilitation potential in older people living with frailty: a systematic mapping review.

BACKGROUND: Following periods of acute ill-health and injury, older people are frequently assessed and provided with rehabilitation services. Healthcare practitioners are required to make nuanced decisions about which patients are likely to benefit from and respond to rehabilitation. The clinical currency in which these decisions are transacted is through the term "rehabilitation potential". The aim of this study was to explore information about rehabilitation potential in older people to inform the development of an evidence-based assessment tool. METHODS: A systematic mapping review was completed to describe the extent of research and the concepts underpinning rehabilitation potential. We searched Medline, CINHAL, EMBASE, AMED, PsycINFO, PEDro, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ProQuest, Trip and EThOS from inception to December 2020. We included studies which focused on rehabilitation potential and/or assessing for rehabilitation interventions for older people with comorbidities in the hospital and community setting. Reviewer pairs independently screened articles and extracted data against the inclusion criteria. A descriptive narrative approach to analysis was taken. RESULTS: 13,484 papers were identified and 49 included in the review. Rehabilitation potential was found to encompass two different but interrelated concepts of prognostication and outcome measurement. 1. Rehabilitation potential for prognostication involved the prediction of what could be achieved in programmes of rehabilitation. 2. Rehabilitation potential as an outcome measure retrospectively considered what had been achieved as a result of rehabilitation interventions. Assessments of rehabilitation potential included key domains which were largely assessed by members of the multi-disciplinary team at single time points. Limited evidence was identified which specifically considered rehabilitation potential amongst older people living with frailty. CONCLUSIONS: Current approaches to rehabilitation potential provide a snapshot of an individual's abilities and conditions which fail to capture the dynamic nature and fluctuations associated with frailty and rehabilitation. New approaches to measures and abilities over time are required which allow for the prognostication of outcomes and potential benefits of rehabilitation interventions for older people living with frailty.

New horizons in falls prevention and management for older adults: a global initiative.

BACKGROUND: falls and fall-related injuries are common in older adults, have negative effects both on quality of life and functional independence and are associated with increased morbidity, mortality and health care costs. Current clinical approaches and advice from falls guidelines vary substantially between countries and settings, warranting a standardised approach. At the first World Congress on Falls and Postural Instability in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, in December 2019, a worldwide task force of experts in falls in older adults, committed to achieving a global consensus on updating clinical practice guidelines for falls prevention and management by incorporating current and emerging evidence in falls research. Moreover, the importance of taking a person-centred approach and including perspectives from patients, caregivers and other stakeholders was recognised as important components of this endeavour. Finally, the need to specifically include recent developments in e-health was acknowledged, as well as the importance of addressing differences between settings and including developing countries. METHODS: a steering committee was assembled and 10 working Groups were created to provide preliminary evidence-based recommendations. A cross-cutting theme on patient's perspective was also created. In addition, a worldwide multidisciplinary group of experts and stakeholders, to review the proposed recommendations and to participate in a Delphi process to achieve consensus for the final recommendations, was brought together. CONCLUSION: in this New Horizons article, the global challenges in falls prevention are depicted, the goals of the worldwide task force are summarised and the conceptual framework for development of a global falls prevention and management guideline is presented.

Regaining Confidence after Stroke (RCAS): a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT).

BACKGROUND: The Regaining Confidence after Stroke (RCAS) course was designed to facilitate adjustment for people with stroke discharged from rehabilitation. The aim of the trial was to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a randomised trial to compare a RCAS course with usual care. The rates feasibility of screening and recruitment, rates of consent and retention, acceptability of outcome measures and the acceptability and fidelity of the intervention were evaluated. METHODS: Participants with stroke were recruited from hospital databases and community services and randomly assigned to the Regaining Confidence after Stroke (RCAS) course or usual care. The course comprised 11 weekly 2-h sessions with six-eight participants, delivered by two rehabilitation assistants. Carers were invited to attend three of the sessions. Sessions were video recorded. A six-item checklist was developed from the manual content. Each item was rated as met, partially met or not met. Fidelity was assumed if > 75% of the criteria were met. Outcomes were assessed three and six months after randomisation. Semi-structured interviews were conducted using open-ended questions to assess the acceptability of the intervention. RESULTS: Of 47 participants (mean age 66.9 years [SD 14.9]; 26 men), 22 were randomly allocated to the intervention and 25 to usual care. Participants attended a mean of 8.2 [SD 2.6] out of 11 sessions. Fidelity outcomes suggested that the content corresponded to the manual but further training of the therapist was needed. Interview findings indicated the intervention was acceptable and considered beneficial. At three months, 35 (78%) participants returned questionnaires and 30 (67%) at six months, but only 38(42%) were fully completed. CONCLUSION: The results support the feasibility of conducting a randomised trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a RCAS course compared to usual care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 36330958.

Promoting activity, independence and stability in early dementia and mild cognitive impairment (PrAISED): development of an intervention for people with mild cognitive impairment and dementia.

This series of articles for rehabilitation in practice aims to cover a knowledge element of the rehabilitation medicine curriculum. Nevertheless, they are intended to be of interest to a multidisciplinary audience. The competency addressed in this article is an understanding of how to develop an intervention for people with mild cognitive impairment and dementia to promote their independence, stability, and physical activity. INTRODUCTION: Older adults with dementia are at a high risk of falls. Standard interventions have not been shown to be effective in this patient population potentially due to poor consideration of dementia-specific risk factors. An intervention is required that addresses the particular needs of older people with dementia in a community setting. METHODS: We followed guidelines for the development of an intervention, which recommend a structured approach considering theory, evidence and practical issues. The process used 15 information sources. Data from literature reviews, clinician workshops, expert opinion meetings, patient-relative interviews, focus groups with people with dementia and clinicians, a cross-sectional survey of risk factors, a pre-post intervention study and case studies were included. Data were synthesized using triangulation to produce an intervention suitable for feasibility testing. Practical consideration of how an intervention could be delivered and implemented were considered from the outset. RESULTS: Elements of the intervention included individually tailored, dementia-appropriate, balance, strength and dual-task exercises, functional training, and activities aimed at improving environmental access, delivered using a motivational approach to support adherence and long-term continuation of activity. We focussed on promoting safe activity rather than risk or prevention of falls. CONCLUSION: We used a systematic process to develop a dementia-specific intervention to promote activity and independence while reducing falls risk in older adults with mild dementia.

Measurement of confidence: the development and psychometric evaluation of a stroke-specific, measure of confidence.

OBJECTIVE: To design, develop and psychometrically evaluate a stroke-specific measure of confidence, the Confidence after Stroke Measure (CaSM). DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: Adults in the community. PARTICIPANTS: Stroke survivors and healthy elderly participants. METHODS: Questionnaire items were generated based on the literature and qualitative interviews and piloted with expert groups to establish face validity. A 53-item CaSM was administered to stroke survivors and healthy elderly participants in the community. A second copy was posted four weeks later. Completed questionnaires were analysed for extreme responses, missing values, construct validity (factor analysis), convergent validity, divergent validity, reliability (internal consistency and temporal stability) and comparing responses according to age and gender. RESULTS: Stroke ( n = 101) and healthy elderly participants ( n = 101) returned questionnaires. Eight items were removed that had extreme responses and large numbers of missing values. Six items had item total correlations <0.3 and were removed. A further item was removed demonstrating gender difference. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted on the remaining 38 items. A 27-item three factor solution was derived assessing Self-Confidence, Positive Attitude and Social Confidence, which explained 52% of variance. Cronbach's alpha coefficient demonstrated good internal consistency ( α = 0.94). A test re-test on the 27 items indicated good temporal stability ( r = 0.85, P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: The 27-item CaSM was a valid and reliable measure for assessing confidence in stroke survivors.

The Falls In Care Home study: a feasibility randomized controlled trial of the use of a risk assessment and decision support tool to prevent falls in care homes.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the feasibility of implementing and evaluating the Guide to Action Care Home fall prevention intervention. DESIGN: Two-centre, cluster feasibility randomized controlled trial and process evaluation. SETTING: Purposive sample of six diverse old age/learning disability, long stay care homes in Nottinghamshire, UK. SUBJECTS: Residents aged over 50 years, who had fallen at least once in the past year, not bed-bound, hoist-dependent or terminally ill. INTERVENTIONS: Intervention homes (n = 3) received Guide to Action Care Home fall prevention intervention training and support. Control homes (n = 3) received usual care. OUTCOMES: Recruitment, attrition, baseline and six-month outcome completion, contamination and intervention fidelity, compliance, tolerability, acceptance and impact. RESULTS: A total of 81 of 145 (56%) care homes expressed participatory interest. Six of 22 letter respondent homes (27%) participated. The expected resident recruitment target was achieved by 76% (52/68). Ten (19%) residents did not complete follow-up (seven died, three moved). In intervention homes 36/114 (32%) staff attended training. Two of three (75%) care homes received protocol compliant training. Staff valued the training, but advised greater management involvement to improve intervention implementation. Fall risks were assessed, actioned and recorded in care records. Of 115 recorded falls, 533/570 (93%) of details were complete. Six-month resident fall rates were 1.9 and 4.0 per year for intervention and control homes, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The Guide to Action Care Home is implementable under trial conditions. Recruitment and follow-up rates indicate that a definitive trial can be completed. Falls (primary outcome) can be ascertained reliably from care records.

A multi-centre randomised controlled trial of rehabilitation aimed at improving outdoor mobility for people after stroke: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Up to 42% of all stroke patients do not get out of the house as much as they would like. This can impede a person's quality of life. This study is testing the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of a new outdoor mobility rehabilitation intervention by comparing it to usual care. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a multi-centre parallel group individually randomised, controlled trial. At least 506 participants will be recruited through 15 primary and secondary care settings and will be eligible if they are over 18 years of age, have had a stroke and wish to get out of the house more often. Participants are being randomly allocated to either the intervention group or the control group. Intervention group participants receive up to 12 rehabilitation outdoor mobility sessions over up to four months. The main component of the intervention is repeated practice of outdoor mobility with a therapist. Control group participants are receiving the usual intervention for outdoor mobility limitations: verbal advice and provision of leaflets provided over one session.Outcome measures are being collected using postal questionnaires, travel calendars and by independent assessors. The primary outcome measure is the Social Function domain of the SF36v2 quality of life assessment six months after recruitment. The secondary outcome measures include: functional ability, mobility, the number of journeys (monthly travel diaries), satisfaction with outdoor mobility, mood, health-related quality of life, resource use of health and social care. Carer mood information is also being collected.The mean Social Function score of the SF-36v2 will be compared between treatment arms using a multiple membership form of mixed effects multiple regression analysis adjusting for centre (as a fixed effect), age and baseline Social Function score as covariates and therapist as a multiple membership random effect. Regression coefficients and 95% confidence intervals will be presented. DISCUSSION: This study protocol describes a pragmatic randomised controlled trial that will hopefully provide robust evidence of the benefit of outdoor mobility interventions after stroke for clinicians working in the community. The results will be available towards the end of 2012. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN58683841.