Weaving Evidence into Action for Veterans with dementia (WEAVE): Codesigning the implementation of nonpharmacological interventions for programme fidelity and sustainability.

RATIONALE: Challenges associated with translating evidence into practice are well recognised and calls for effective strategies to reduce the time lag and successfully embed evidence-based practices into usual care are loud and clear. While a plethora of nonpharmacological interventions for people with dementia exist; few are based on strong evidence and there is little consideration for programme operationalisation in the complex environment of long-term care. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: This paper describes the preparation for the implementation of the Weaving Evidence into Action for Veterans with dementia project, incorporating the codesign of delivery of four evidence-based, nonpharmacological interventions. METHOD: Implementation preparation for this type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation project was underpinned by the Implementation Framework for Aged Care (IFAC). A sociocultural-political contextual scan was undertaken, and reflection on the IFAC question 'why change?' with key stakeholders. Delivery of the four interventions of music therapy, exercise, reminiscence therapy and sensory modulation was explored using codesign methodology. Preparation of both intervention delivery personnel and recipients was via training, establishment of a change team and promotional/awareness-raising strategies. RESULTS: The contextual scan revealed Australian government reforms and organisational imperatives facing long-term care services, while reflections on 'why change' flagged best practice dementia care at the local care home level. Several codesign sessions involved veterans with dementia, family members, care home staff members and volunteers to ensure programme alignment with needs and preferences, accounting for existing activities. Training was designed and delivered before programme commencement. A change team was established and strategies to support behaviour change instigated. Implementation evaluation is reported elsewhere. CONCLUSION: The extended preparatory period for implementation, afforded by the COVID-19 pandemic on programme commencement, enabled time for widespread understanding of the programme and necessary upskill of staff. Comprehensive codesign with all stakeholders of programme components identified core and flexible elements necessary for fidelity of implementation.

Weaving Evidence into Action for Veterans with Dementia (WEAVE): Evaluation of implementation into long-term care practice.

RATIONALE: Veterans living with dementia in long-term care have complex needs, with variable manifestation of symptoms of dementia that interact with their lived experience. Best practice dementia care prioritises nonpharmacological interventions; of which few have strong evidence. Implementation of evidence is complex, with evaluation of outcomes and processes necessary. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: This paper details the evaluation of implementation, at veteran and organisational level, of the Weaving Evidence into Action for Veterans with Dementia (WEAVE) programme. METHODS: A Type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation design was used, underpinned by the Implementation Framework for Aged Care (IFAC). Programme intervention incorporated music therapy, exercise, reminiscence therapy and/or sensory modulation, offered over a 24-week period. Evaluation components included: (1) programme effectiveness for veterans with dementia for responsive behaviour, physical wellbeing, cognitive status, emotional state, medications and falls (at baseline, 8-week, 16-week and 24-week); and (2) implementation outcomes of reach and adoption, feasibility and acceptability, fidelity (via interviews) and a preliminary cost analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-eight veterans participated in the 24-week programme, with high levels of engagement in interventions of their choice. Statistically significant improvements were seen across all veteran-level outcome measures, for functional capacity and reduced neuro-psychiatric and depressive symptoms. Ten staff members were interviewed, highlighting co-designed core elements were feasible and acceptable, and the momentum generated by resident and staff enthusiasm. Cost analysis included costs of programme set-up and running the 24-week intervention. CONCLUSION: Key components of programme success were the therapeutic leaders, adherence to core elements of programme design, and veterans' choice in meaningful activity. Cost analysis supports deliberations for upscale across further care homes.

Risk Negotiation With People With Dementia: From Co-designed Paper Version to Implementation Preparation of an Electronic Conversation Tool.

The home care workforce provides essential support for older people with dementia to live a life of fulfillment. "Enabling Choices," an evidence-informed conversation tool, aims to negotiate risk around everyday activities between home care workers, people with dementia and their informal carers. This paper describes tool conversion into electronic format and preparation for implementation throughout a large Australian health and aged care service provider, utilizing the Implementation Framework for Aged Care (IFAC). Using codesign principles, the tool was converted from paper-based to electronic format involving frontline, operational and Information Management Services staff, and people with dementia/carers. Focus groups and interviews identified tool acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness. For implementation preparation, the wider socio-cultural-political context was mapped, and key questions of the IFAC addressed. Environment, workflow, and training requirements were determined, and strategies for behavior change ascertained. Numerous opportunities and challenges exist for the widespread upscale of an evidence-informed tool into practice.

Non-pharmacological interventions for people with dementia: A review of reviews.

OBJECTIVE: Aged care services increasingly respond to the needs of people with dementia. Non-pharmacological approaches are preferable to reduce responsive behaviours, improve/maintain functional capacity and reduce emotional disorders. This rapid review of systematic reviews aimed to consolidate the evidence for non-pharmacological interventions and determine outcome effectiveness. METHODS: Systematic review literature was comprehensively searched for non-pharmacological interventions for dementia in residential care. Quality ratings used adapted GRADE methodology, and ease of implementation assessed. RESULTS: Of 629 abstracts screened, 81 full-text articles were retrieved, 38 articles included. The strongest evidence for reducing responsive behaviours was music, sensory stimulation, simulated presence and validation therapies. Exercise and light therapy improved/maintained activities of daily living, while cognitive stimulation and reminiscence improved cognition. Strongest evidence for reducing emotional disorders was music, psychological interventions and reminiscence. CONCLUSION: Much evidence of varying quality exists, with resource-constrained residential care providers now able to make evidence-based decisions about non-pharmacological interventions.

Understanding the conceptualisation of risk in the context of community dementia care.

Risk has become a ubiquitous presence in modern society. For individuals diagnosed with dementia this preoccupation with risk can affect their day-to-day life in many ways. Maintaining autonomy while balancing risks is a continual struggle not only for those living with the disease, but also their carers, family and health professionals. To understand how these different groups of individuals conceptualise the issue of risk for those living with dementia, 83 semi-structured interviews were conducted with people living with dementia, carers, older people without significant experience of dementia, and registered nurses, and staff from a community nursing organisation. These interviews were analysed using Thematic Analysis, which suggested that the risks identified by each group were grounded in their experiences and perspective on dementia. Furthermore, context and understanding of the individual living with dementia and their preferences was central to effectively managing risk in a balanced way, ensuring that 'acceptable risks' were taken to ensure an acceptable quality of life for all involved. These findings highlight that there is no single approach to risk which can be applied to all individuals; rather, a negotiation needs to take place that takes into account the individual's preferences alongside their available resources and means.

Development of a discussion tool to enable well-being by providing choices for people with dementia: a qualitative study incorporating codesign and participatory action research.

OBJECTIVE: To codesign a discussion tool to facilitate negotiation of risk between health professionals, people with dementia and carers. METHODS: A qualitative approach using codesign. Thematic analysis was used to analyse interviews and focus groups with people with dementia, carers, healthcare staff and healthy older people exploring the issue of risk in dementia, the acceptability and development of a discussion tool. RESULTS: Sixty-one participants identified the breadth, depth and complexity of risk in dementia care and the need for individualised solutions. They also deemed a discussion tool to facilitate negotiation of risk was acceptable and responses informed the tool development. Twenty-two participants provided feedback that was used to refine the final version. CONCLUSION: Our discussion tool enables choices for people with dementia by focusing on abilities rather than deficits and assists health professionals to deliver person-centred care. Flash cards prompt concerns and the tool provides a range of strategies to address these issues.

An evaluation of Snoezelen(®) compared to 'common best practice' for allaying the symptoms of wandering and restlessness among residents with dementia in aged care facilities.

Snoezelen has become an increasingly popular therapy in residential aged care facilities in Australia and elsewhere, despite no conclusive evidence of its clinical efficacy. This paper reports on an evaluation of the use of Snoezelen compared to 'common best practice' for allaying the dementia related behaviors of wandering and restlessness in two residential aged care facilities in Victoria, Australia. Sixteen residents had their behavior and responses to Snoezelen or 'common best practice' observed and recorded over three time periods. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test showed there was a significant improvement in behaviors immediately after the intervention and after 60 min. However, no significant differences were found between residents receiving Snoezelen and 'common best practice' interventions for the reduction of the dementia related behaviors.