Online, group, low-intensity psychological intervention for adults, children, and parents with food allergy.

BACKGROUND: Food allergy (FA) impairs psychological wellbeing because of constant vigilance, planning and preparation, dietary and social restrictions, and fear of accidental ingestion, though psychological interventions are sparse. OBJECTIVE: To examine online, group, low-intensity psychological interventions for adults, children, young people (CYP), and parents with food allergies. METHODS: The randomized controlled trials assessed the feasibility and signal of the efficacy of a psychological intervention for adults, CYP, and parents with FA. Participants were randomized to receive the psychological intervention or treatment as usual. The intervention consisted of two, 3-hour manualized online sessions spaced 1 week apart. All participants completed relevant Food Allergy Quality of Life Questionnaires (FAQLQ) and worry (Penn State Worry Questionnaires), in addition to exploratory outcomes, at baseline, 1 month, and 3 months. RESULTS: A total of 129 participants (n = 44 adults, n = 52 CYP, and n = 33 parents) were recruited and randomized; 95 (74%) (n = 36 adults, n = 35 CYP, and n = 24 parents) were retained at 3 months. Owing to baseline differences, mean change was used for parent and CYP outcomes. The psychological intervention demonstrated large FAQLQ benefits across adults (g = -1.12, 95% CI -0.41 to -1.28), CYP (g = 1.23, 95% CI 0.51-1.95), and parents (g = 1.43, 95% CI 0.54-2.30) compared with controls at 3-months. CONCLUSION: This study provides encouraging findings regarding the feasibility of online, group, low-intensity psychological interventions, in terms of recruitment and retention as well as a signal of efficacy on FAQLQ. A definitive trial including health economic analysis and FA-specific psychological measures with consideration of best routes to implementation, is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifiers: NCT04763889 (adults), NCT04770727 (CYP), and NCT04774796 (parents).

Student nurses' career preferences for working with people with dementia: A longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Internationally there are too few suitably skilled registered nurses to meet the demands for dementia care. Research has established low preferences in undergraduate nursing students for working with older people. However, there is limited research on preferences for dementia care. Understanding career preferences is one component of ensuring future workforce capacity. OBJECTIVE: To assess student nurses' preferences during undergraduate training in relation to working with people with dementia. METHODS: Data from a longitudinal survey collected at two UK universities were analysed (n = 488). Measures included career preferences, demographics, participation in a dementia educational intervention, and measures of attitude, knowledge, and empathy to dementia. Open text responses were also included to explore the students' reasons for their preferences. RESULTS: The preference for working with older people and people with dementia was low and decreased during training. A linear regression analysis supports a strong relationship of preferences with attitudes to dementia. Content analysis of students' reasons for their preferences found that perceived difficulty and lack of confidence contributes to the negative evaluation of working with people with dementia. CONCLUSION: Undergraduate nursing education needs to continue to review its contribution to preparing the dementia workforce and act to support positive attitudes to working with people with dementia across nursing specialties.

Preferences of nursing and medical students for working with older adults and people with dementia: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: A current issue in workforce planning is ensuring healthcare professionals are both competent and willing to work with older adults with complex needs. This includes dementia care, which is widely recognised as a priority. Yet research suggests that working with older people is unattractive to undergraduate healthcare students. METHODS: The aim of this systematic review and narrative synthesis is to explore the factors related to healthcare (medical and nursing) student preferences' for working with older people and people with dementia. Searches were conducted in five databases: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINHAL, BNI, ERIC. Screening, data extraction and quality appraisal were conducted by two independent reviewers. A narrative, data-based convergent synthesis was conducted. RESULTS: One thousand twenty-four papers were screened (139 full texts) and 62 papers were included for a narrative synthesis. Factors were grouped into seven categories; student characteristics, experiences of students, course characteristics, career characteristics, patient characteristics, work characteristics and the theory of planned behaviour. CONCLUSION: Health educators should review their role in cultivating student interest in working with older adults, with consideration of student preparation and the perceived value of this work. There is a lack of evidence about the career preferences of students in relation to dementia, and this warrants further research.

Acceptability and feasibility of wearing activity monitors in community-dwelling older adults with dementia.

OBJECTIVES: Measuring physical activity is complicated particularly in people with dementia, where activity levels are low and subjective measures are susceptible to inaccurate recall. Activity monitors are increasingly being used within research; however, it is unclear how people with dementia view wearing such devices and what aspects of the device effect wear time. The aim of the study was to evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of people with dementia wearing activity monitors. METHODS: Twenty-six, community-dwelling, people with mild dementia were asked to wear an activity monitor (GENEactiv Original) over a 1-month period. Perceptions of the device were measured using the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST) 2.0, alongside qualitative interviews. Device diary and activity monitor data were used to assess compliance. RESULTS: Participants tended to find wearing the activity monitors acceptable, with only three participants (12%) withdrawing prior to the study end date. Participants were generally satisfied with wearing the devices as measured by the QUEST (Mdn = 4.4, IQR = 1.1). Four themes were identified that influenced perceptions of wearing the device: external influences, design, routine, and perceived benefits. DISCUSSION: Asking people with dementia to wear a wrist-worn activity monitor for prolonged periods appears to be both feasible and acceptable. Researchers need to consider the needs and preferences of the sample population prior to selecting activity monitors.