What really is nontokenistic fully inclusive patient and public involvement/engagement in research?

Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) is critically important in healthcare research. A useful starting point for researchers to understand the scope of PPIE is to review the definition from the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) as, 'research being carried out "with" or "by" members of the public rather than "to", "about" or "for" them'. PPIE does not refer to participation in research, but to actively shaping its direction. The 'Effectiveness of a decision support tool to optimise community-based tailored management of sleep for people living with dementia or mild cognitive impairment (TIMES)' study is funded through the NIHR programme grant for applied research. TIMES has thoroughly embraced PPIE by ensuring the person's voice is heard, understood, and valued. This editorial showcases how the TIMES project maximised inclusivity, and we share our experiences and top tips for other researchers. We base our reflections on the six key UK standards for public involvement; Inclusive Opportunities, Working Together, Support and Learning, Communications, Impact and Governance. We present our work, which had been co-led by our PPIE leads, academics and partners including, together in dementia everyday, Innovations in Dementia, The UK Network of Dementia Voices (Dementia Engagement & Empowerment Project) and Liverpool Chinese Wellbeing. We have a Lived Experience Advisory Forum on Sleep, which includes people with dementia, family carers, representatives of the South Asian Community and the Chinese community.

Sleep disturbance in people living with dementia or mild cognitive impairment: a realist review of general practice.

BACKGROUND: Sleep disturbance is a prevalent condition among people living with dementia (PLwD) or mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Its assessment and management within primary care is complex because of the comorbidities, older age, and cognitive impairment typical of this patient group. AIM: To explore how primary care clinicians assess, understand, and manage sleep disturbance for PLwD or MCI; if and why such initiatives work; and how people and their carers experience sleep disturbance and its treatment. DESIGN AND SETTING: A realist review of existing literature conducted in 2022. METHOD: Six bibliographic databases were searched. Context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs) were developed and refined. RESULTS: In total, 60 records were included from 1869 retrieved hits and 19 CMOCs were developed. Low awareness of and confidence in the treatment of sleep disturbance among primary care clinicians and patients, combined with time and resource constraints, meant that identifying sleep disturbance was difficult and not prioritised. Medication was perceived by clinicians and patients as the primary management tool, resulting in inappropriate or long-term prescription. Rigid nursing routines in care homes were reportedly not conducive to good-quality sleep. CONCLUSION: In primary care, sleep disturbance among PLwD or MCI is not adequately addressed. Over-reliance on medication, underutilisation of non-pharmacological strategies, and inflexible care home routines were reported as a result of low confidence in sleep management and resource constraints. This does not constitute effective and person-centred care. Future work should consider ways to tailor the assessment and management of sleep disturbance to the needs of individuals and their informal carers without overstretching services.

Activity provider-facilitated patient and public involvement with care home residents.

BACKGROUND: In care home research, residents are rarely included in patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) despite their lived experiences of day-to-day care. This paper reports on a novel approach to PPIE, developed in response to Covid-19, and utilised in a large UK-based study focused on care homes. PPIE sessions were facilitated on behalf of the research team by Activity Providers (APs) already working within the care homes. This paper provides an account of how PPIE with care home residents can be achieved. METHODS: An exploratory design was used to see if it was possible to support "in-house" PPIE, with researchers working at a distance in partnership with care home staff. The National Activity Providers Association recruited five APs working in care homes. A series of optional discussion or activity sessions were developed by the research team in partnership with APs, tailored to reflect the research topics of interest and to make sessions accessible to residents with differing needs. RESULTS: APs facilitated four rounds of PPIE with up to 56 residents per topic, including individuals living with cognitive and communication impairments. Topics discussed included residents' views on data use, measuring quality of life and the prioritisation of care-related data for study collection. Feedback from the residents was observed to have unexpected and positive changes to participating care homes' practice. APs valued participation and working with researchers. They identified acquisition of new skills and insights into residents' thoughts and preferences as direct benefits. Challenges included time pressures on APs and managing emotive feedback. APs were able to approach residents at times convenient to them and in ways that best suited their individual needs. PPIE with residents provided different perspectives, particularly with respect to the importance of different types of data, and constructive challenge about some of the research team's assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: PPIE with APs as research partners is a promising approach to working in an inclusive and participatory way with care home residents. The voices of older care home residents, including those living with cognitive or communicative impairments, are important for the successful and meaningful completion of research.

In recent years there has been increasing interest in research relating to care homes. It is relatively rare that care home residents are given the chance to influence this research; often, family members or care home staff are asked to speak on their behalf. Research can influence residents' future care, and it is important to find ways of involving residents in research that are meaningful and enjoyable. This research paper discusses a new approach to involving care home residents in research. It begins by recounting how the approach came about, then covers how well it has worked so far, finally reflecting on the benefits and challenges of working in a new way. The researchers originally planned to go into care homes themselves to speak to residents, but with the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic this was no longer possible. Instead, Activity Providers already working in care homes were recruited via the National Activity Providers Association (NAPA) to help. They used activities and discussion prompts developed with the research team to speak to residents about the study. The research team hoped to make getting involved in research meaningful and interesting for residents. The team also wanted to make sure that as many people as possible living with conditions like dementia could get involved too. Comments and suggestions from residents were fed back to the research team to help them make decisions about how the research should be done.

Nurturing attentiveness: a naturalistic observation study of personal care interactions between people with advanced dementia and their caregivers.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Personal care interactions can provide vital opportunities for caregivers to engage with a person living with advanced dementia. However, interactions may also be a contentious experience, what makes this so is not fully understood. We aimed to examine features of personal care interactions between caregivers and people with advanced dementia to understand how care may be improved. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a naturalistic observation study using one-off video-recorded observations of personal care interactions between fourteen people with advanced dementia and twelve caregivers (n=7 care-home staff, n=5 family carers) in the UK (total observation time 03:01:52). Observations were analysed with observational video coding to determine the frequency of actions of people with dementia and qualitative content analysis for in-depth examination. RESULTS: Refusals of care were present in 32% of video sections. Active engagement of people with dementia was observed in 66% of sections. Rare contentious interactional components were characterised by the person with dementia appearing to show uneasiness and caregivers being flustered and uncertain. However, caregivers typically emanated a nurturing attentiveness, were attuned to the person and skilled in seamlessly supporting them through care activities. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Findings draw on real-world empirical evidence to reinvigorate the notion of person-centredness in dementia care. The findings provide much needed insight into practical ways to improve care interactions for people with advanced dementia and enhance their personhood. Appropriate training/guidance for caregivers could support positive personal care experiences for both the person with dementia and caregiver.

Outcome measures from international older adult care home intervention research: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Care homes are increasingly important settings for intervention research to enhance evidence-informed care. For such research to demonstrate effectiveness, it is essential that measures are appropriate for the population, setting and practice contexts. OBJECTIVE: To identify care home intervention studies and describe the resident outcome measures used. DESIGN: Scoping review. METHODS: We reviewed international care home research published from 2015 to August 2022. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and ASSIA. We included any intervention study conducted in a care home, reporting resident outcomes. We extracted resident outcome measures, organised these using the domains of an adapted framework and described their use. RESULTS: From 7,330 records screened, we included 396 datasets reported in 436 publications. These included 12,167 care homes and 836,842 residents, with an average of 80 residents per study. The studies evaluated 859 unique resident outcomes 2,030 times using 732 outcome measures. Outcomes were evaluated between 1 and 112 times, with 75.1% of outcomes evaluated only once. Outcome measures were used 1-120 times, with 68.4% of measures used only once. Only 14 measures were used ≥20 times. Functional status, mood & behaviour and medications were the commonest outcome domains assessed. More than half of outcomes were assessed using scales, with a fifth using existing records or administrative data. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant heterogeneity in the choice and assessment of outcomes for intervention research in care homes. There is an urgent need to develop a consensus on useful and sensitive tools for care homes, working with residents, families and friends and staff.

Inclusion of adults with conditions that have the potential to affect capacity and or communication in research: triangulation from a mixed-methods study of current practice and values across multiple stakeholders.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to: (A) describe researcher decision-making when including or excluding adults with conditions that have the potential to affect capacity and/or communication in research and (B) explore the underlying values and reasoning of stakeholders in research which falls under the provisions of the Mental Capacity Act, 2005. DESIGN: The mixed-methods design included semistructured interviews with adults with conditions that have the potential to affect capacity and/or communication, supporters, researchers, research ethics committee members and an online survey with researchers. Triangulation was used to integrate the data and examine the complementarity of the findings. SETTING: England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: There were 61 participants who took part in semistructured interviews, of which 39 were adults with conditions with potential to affect capacity and/or communication, 6 were in support roles for adults with conditions with potential to affect capacity and/or communication (including family members and professionals in advocacy organisations), 8 were members of research ethics committees flagged under the Mental Capacity Act to review research where there could be issues of mental capacity and 8 were researchers with experience of working with adults with conditions that have the potential to affect capacity and/or communication. The online survey had 128 participants, researchers with experience of working with adults with conditions that have the potential to affect capacity and/or communication. RESULTS: All stakeholders were supportive of the genuine inclusion of adults with conditions that have the potential to affect capacity and/or communication in research, and exclusion was seen as a form of discrimination. Many researchers were daunted by meeting the threshold within the legislation for including participants who may lack capacity. CONCLUSION: Further training, expertise and resources are required to promote the successful inclusion in research of adults with conditions that have the potential to affect capacity and/or communication.

Piloting of a minimum data set for older people living in care homes in England: protocol for a longitudinal, mixed-methods study.

INTRODUCTION: Health and care data are routinely collected about care home residents in England, yet there is no way to collate these data to inform benchmarking and improvement. The Developing research resources And minimum data set for Care Homes' Adoption and use study has developed a prototype minimum data set (MDS) for piloting. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A mixed-methods longitudinal pilot study will be conducted in 60 care homes (approximately 960 residents) in 3 regions of England, using resident data from cloud-based digital care home records at two-time points. These will be linked to resident and care home level data held within routine National Health Service and social care data sets. Two rounds of focus groups with care home staff (n=8-10 per region) and additional interviews with external stakeholders (n=3 per region) will explore implementation and the perceived utility of the MDS. Data will be assessed for completeness and timeliness of completion. Descriptive statistics, including percentage floor and ceiling effects, will establish data quality. For validated scales, construct validity will be assessed by hypothesis testing and exploratory factor analysis will establish structural validity. Internal consistency will be established using Cronbach's alpha. Longitudinal analysis of the pilot data will demonstrate the value of the MDS to each region. Qualitative data will be analysed inductively using thematic analysis to understand the complexities of implementing an MDS in care homes for older people. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received ethical approval from the London Queen's Square Research Ethics Committee (22/LO/0250). Informed consent is required for participation. Findings will be disseminated to: academics working on data use and integration in social care, care sector organisations, policy makers and commissioners. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals. Partner NIHR Applied Research Collaborations, the National Care Forum and the British Geriatrics Society will disseminate policy briefs.

Most Common Refusals of Personal Care in Advanced Dementia: Psychometric Properties of the Refusal of Care Informant Scale.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Refusals of care in dementia can be a source of distress for people with dementia and their caregivers. Informant-based measures to examine refusals of care are limited and often measure other behaviors such as agitation. We aimed to assess the validity and reliability of the newly developed, 14-item, Refusal of Care Informant Scale (RoCIS) and then use the scale to verify the most common refusal behaviors. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data from 129 dyads were analyzed. Dyad was defined as a person with advanced dementia either living in a care home or supported in their own home and their caregiver. Data about the person with dementia were gathered using informant-based questionnaires. The psychometric properties of the RoCIS were investigated using Rasch analysis to determine validity and reliability. RESULTS: Following Rasch analysis, the item "upset" was removed from the RoCIS. The reduced 13-item RoCIS is unidimensional and achieved a reliability index of 0.85 (Cronbach's alpha 0.88). Sixty-eight percent of people with dementia had refused care in the last month, with "verbally refused" the most common type of refusal behavior. People in the "very severe/profound" stage of dementia showed more refusal behaviors than those in the "severe" stage. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Results provide initial evidence that the RoCIS is a valid and reliable informant-based scale measuring refusals of care in advanced dementia. Results indicate a need to develop new approaches and techniques to make assistance with personal care more acceptable to people with dementia.

What are the factors associated with people with advanced dementia refusing assistance with personal care?

BACKGROUND: People with dementia sometimes refuse assistance with personal care activities such as washing or dressing. We aimed to investigate the factors associated with refusals of care in advanced dementia. METHODS: A cross-sectional study using informant-based measures. Participants were people with advanced dementia and their caregivers (family carers or care-home staff) (n = 260, 130 dyads) in the UK. Mixed effects linear models were used to examine the effects of neuropsychiatric behaviours, ability with activities of daily living, professional input, co-morbidities, psychotropic medications, environment modifications, and caregiver factors including type and training status on refusals of care. The Refusal of Care Informant Scale was used, range 1-13; higher scores indicate more refusal behaviours. RESULTS: Higher independence in activities of daily living was associated with less refusal behaviours (coefficient = -0.11, p < 0.001 [95% confidence interval -0.15, -0.07]). Higher agitation was associated with more refusal behaviours (0.11, p < 0.001 [0.06, 0.15]). No other statistically significant differences were found. There was no demonstrable evidence of differences in number of refusals of care between family and care-home caregivers or between dementia-trained or -untrained caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest refusals of care have similar prevalence regardless of caregiver type (family or care home) or dementia training status, indicating that current dementia training has no impact on refusals of care or may not be implemented as intended. Improving independence in activities of daily living and reducing agitations may help prevent refusals of care. To establish causality, future research should consider embedding these factors into interventions targeting refusal of care.

English care home staff morale and preparedness during the COVID pandemic: A longitudinal analysis.

BACKGROUND: Staff actions to prevent infection introduction and transmission in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) were key to reducing morbidity and mortality from COVID-19. Implementing infection control measures (ICMs) requires training, adherence and complex decision making while trying to deliver high quality care. We surveyed LTCF staff in England about their preparedness and morale at 3 timepoints during the COVID-19 epidemic. METHODS: Online structured survey targeted at LTCF workers (any role) administered at 3 timepoints (November 2020-January 2021; August-November 2021; March-May 2022). Narrative summary of answers, narrative and statistical summary (proportionality with Pearson's chi-square or Fisher's Exact Test) of possible differences in answers between waves. RESULTS: Across all 3 survey waves, 387 responses were received. Morale, attitudes towards working environment and perception about colleague collaboration were mostly positive at all survey points. Infection control training was perceived as adequate. Staff felt mostly positive emotions at work. The working environment remained challenging. Masks were the single form of PPE most consistently used; eye protection the least used. Mask-wearing was linked to poorer communication and resident discomfort as well as mild negative health impacts on many staff, such as dehydration and adverse skin reactions. Hand sanitizer caused skin irritation. CONCUSIONS: Staff morale and working practices were generally good even though the working environment provided many new challenges that did not exist pre-pandemic.

Understanding primary care diagnosis and management of sleep disturbance for people with dementia or mild cognitive impairment: a realist review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The increasingly ageing population is associated with greater numbers of people living with dementia (PLwD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). There are an estimated 55 million PLwD and approximately 6% of people over 60 years of age are living with MCI, with the figure rising to 25% for those aged between 80 and 84 years. Sleep disturbances are common for this population, but there is currently no standardised approach within UK primary care to manage this. Coined as a 'wicked design problem', sleep disturbances in this population are complex, with interventions supporting best management in context. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The aim of this realist review is to deepen our understanding of what is considered 'sleep disturbance' in PLwD or MCI within primary care. Specifically, we endeavour to better understand how sleep disturbance is assessed, diagnosed and managed. To co-produce this protocol and review, we have recruited a stakeholder group comprising individuals with lived experience of dementia or MCI, primary healthcare staff and sleep experts. This review will be conducted in line with Pawson's five stages including the development of our initial programme theory, literature searches and the refinement of theory. The Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards (RAMESES) quality and reporting standards will also be followed. The realist review will be an iterative process and our initial realist programme theory will be tested and refined in response to our data searches and stakeholder discussions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this review. We will follow the RAMESES standards to ensure we produce a complete and transparent report. Our final programme theory will help us to devise a tailored sleep management tool for primary healthcare professionals, PLwD and their carers. Our dissemination strategy will include lay summaries via email and our research website, peer-reviewed publications and social media posts. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022304679.

A suite of evaluation resources for Dementia Friendly Communities: Development and guidance for use.

OBJECTIVES: In the context of a growing number of dementia friendly communities (DFCs) globally, a need remains for robust evaluation, and for tools to capture relevant evidence. This paper reports the development of a suite of evaluation resources for DFCs through a national study in England. METHODS: Fieldwork took place in six diverse case study sites across England. A mixed methods design was adopted that entailed documentary analysis, focus groups, interviews, observations, and a survey. Participants were people affected by dementia and practice-based stakeholders. A national stakeholder workshop was held to obtain input beyond the research sites. A workshop at the end of the study served to check the resonance of the findings and emerging outputs with stakeholders from the case study DFCs. RESULTS: The study had three key outputs for the evaluation of DFCs: First, an evaluation framework that highlights thematic areas to be considered in evaluating DFCs. Second, a Theory of Change that presents inputs into a DFC and short, medium and longer term outcomes. Third, a matrix for assessing a DFC's degree of maturity, which enables a sense of the kinds of outcomes a DFC might realistically aspire to. These three outputs form a suite of interlinking and complementary evaluation resources for DFCs. CONCLUSIONS: The study has contributed evidence-based resources for monitoring and evaluation that complement existing frameworks. They can be applied to arrive at a detailed assessment of how well a DFC works for people affected by dementia, and at insights into the underlying factors that can guide future policy and practice.

How do family carers and care-home staff manage refusals when assisting a person with advanced dementia with their personal care?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Caregivers may encounter, or inadvertently cause, refusals of care by a care recipient. Managing refusals of care can be challenging and have potential negative consequences. We aimed to examine caregivers' (care-home staff and family carers) experiences of managing refusals of personal care in advanced dementia. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: One-to-one semi-structured interviews with 12 care assistants from six care homes and 20 family carers who were physically assisting a person with advanced dementia with their personal care in the UK. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim, with data analysed using qualitative content analysis. FINDINGS: Core to the caregiver experience of refusals of care was knowing the person. This underpinned five key themes identified as caregivers' strategies used in preventing or managing refusals of care: (1) finding the right moment to care; (2) using specific communication strategies; (3) being tactful: simplifying, leaving, or adapting care; (4) having confidence in care; and (5) seeking support from others when safety is at risk. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Different caregiver relationships with the person with dementia influenced how they managed refusals of care. Refusals of care can place caregivers in tough situations with tensions between providing care when it is seemingly not wanted and leaving care incomplete. Both caregiver groups require support such as coaching, mentoring and/or advice from other health and social care practitioners to manage difficult personal care interactions before crisis points occur.

Risks and risk mitigation in homecare for people with dementia-A two-sided matter: A systematic review.

Policy guidance promotes supporting people to live in their own homes for as long as possible with support from homecare services. People living with dementia who need such support can experience a range of physical and cognitive difficulties, which can increase the risks associated with homecare for this group. We aimed to examine risk and safety issues for people with dementia and their homecare workers and risk mitigation practices adopted by homecare workers to address identified risks. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ASSIA and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases 5 March 2021. Included studies focussed on homecare for people with dementia and had a risk or safety feature reported. Risk of bias was assessed with the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools. Two authors assessed articles for potential eligibility and quality. A narrative synthesis combines the findings. The search identified 2259 records; 27 articles, relating to 21 studies, met the eligibility criteria. The review identified first-order risks that homecare workers in the studies sought to address. Two types of risk mitigation actions were reported: harmful interventions and beneficial interventions. Actions adopted to reduce risks produced intended benefits but also unintended consequences, creating second-order risks to both clients with dementia and homecare workers, placing them at greater risk. Risk mitigation interventions should be person-centred, the responsibility of all relevant professions, and planned to minimise the creation of unintended risks.

How are adults with capacity-affecting conditions and associated communication difficulties included in ethically sound research? A documentary-based survey of ethical review and recruitment processes under the research provisions of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) for England and Wales.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the characteristics of ethical review and recruitment processes, concerning the inclusion of adults with capacity-affecting conditions and associated communication difficulties in ethically sound research, under the provisions of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA, 2005) for England and Wales. DESIGN: A documentary-based survey was conducted focusing on adults with capacity-affecting conditions and associated communication difficulties. The survey investigated: (1) retrospective studies during the implementation period of the MCA (2007-2017); (2) prospective applications to MCA-approved Research Ethics Committees (RECs) during a 12-month period (2018-19); (3) presentational and linguistic content of participant information sheets used with this population. SETTING: Studies conducted and approved in England and Wales. SAMPLE: Studies focused on adults with the following capacity-affecting conditions: acquired brain injury; aphasia after stroke; autism; dementia; intellectual disabilities; mental health conditions. The sample comprised: (1) 1605 studies; (2) 83 studies; (3) 25 participant information sheets. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the inclusion/exclusion of adults with capacity-affecting conditions from studies. The secondary outcome was the provisions deployed to support their inclusion. RESULTS: The retrospective survey showed an incremental rise in research applications post-MCA implementation from 2 (2012) to 402 (2017). The prospective survey revealed exclusions of people on the bases of: 'lack of capacity' (n=21; 25%); 'communication difficulties' (n=5; 6%); 'lack of consultee' (n=11; 13%); and 'limited English' (n=17; 20%). REC recommendations focused mainly on participant-facing documentation. The participant information sheets were characterised by inconsistent use of images, typography and layout, volume of words and sentences; some simplified language content, but variable readability scores. CONCLUSIONS: People with capacity-affecting conditions and associated communication difficulties continue to be excluded from research, with recruitment efforts largely concentrated around participant-facing documentation. There is a need for a more nuanced approach if such individuals are to be included in ethically sound research.

Contextual factors influencing complex intervention research processes in care homes: a systematic review and framework synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Care homes are complex settings to undertake intervention research. Barriers to research implementation processes can threaten studies' validity, reducing the value to residents, staff, researchers and funders. We aimed to (i) identify and categorise contextual factors that may mediate outcomes of complex intervention studies in care homes and (ii) provide recommendations to minimise the risk of expensive research implementation failures. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review using a framework synthesis approach viewed through a complex adaptive systems lens. We searched: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ASSIA databases and grey literature. We sought process evaluations of care home complex interventions published in English. Narrative data were indexed under 28 context domains. We performed an inductive thematic analysis across the context domains. RESULTS: We included 33 process evaluations conducted in high-income countries, published between 2005 and 2019. Framework synthesis identified barriers to implementation that were more common at the task and organisational level. Inductive thematic analysis identified (i) avoiding procedural drift and (ii) participatory action and learning as key priorities for research teams. Research team recommendations include advice for protocol design and care home engagement. Care home team recommendations focus on internal resources and team dynamics. Collaborative recommendations apply to care homes' individual context and the importance of maintaining positive working relationships. DISCUSSION: Researchers planning and undertaking research with care homes need a sensitive appreciation of the complex care home context. Study implementation is most effective where an intervention is co-produced, with agreed purpose and adequate resources to incorporate within existing routines and care practices.

Developing a minimum data set for older adult care homes in the UK: exploring the concept and defining early core principles.

Reforms to social care in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, in the UK and internationally, place data at the heart of proposed innovations and solutions. The principles are not well established of what constitutes core, or minimum, data to support care home residents. Often, what is included privileges data on resident health over day-to-day care priorities and quality of life. This Personal View argues for evidence-based principles on which to base the development of a UK minimum data set (MDS) for care homes. Co-produced work involving care home staff and older people working with stakeholders is required to define and agree the format, content, structure, and operationalisation of the MDS. Implementation decisions will determine the success of the MDS, affecting aspects including data quality, completeness, and usability. Care home staff who collect the data need to benefit from the MDS and see value in their contribution, and residents must derive benefit from data collection and synthesis.

Care Home and Home Care Staff's Learning during the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beliefs about Subsequent Changes in the Future: A Survey Study in Sweden, Italy, Germany and the United Kingdom.

The aim of this study was to compare perceptions of learning from the COVID-19 pandemic and beliefs in subsequent changes for the future, among care home and home care staff, in four European countries. A 29-item on-line questionnaire was designed in English and later translated into Swedish, Italian, and German on the impact of the pandemic on stress and anxiety. Anonymous data from care staff respondents was collected in four countries between 7 October 2020 and 17 December 2010: Sweden (n = 212), Italy (n = 103), Germany (n = 120), and the United Kingdom (n = 167). While care staff in all countries reported learning in multiple areas of care practice, Italy reported the highest levels of learning and the most agreement that changes will occur in the future due to the pandemic. Conversely, care staff in Germany reported low levels of learning and reported the least agreement for change in the future. While the pandemic has strained care home and home care staff practices, our study indicates that much learning of new skills and knowledge has taken place within the workforce. Our study has demonstrated the potential of cross-border collaborations and experiences for enhancing knowledge acquisition in relation to societal challenges and needs. The results could be built upon to improve future health care and care service practices.

Dementia-friendly communities: The involvement of people living with dementia.

BACKGROUND: Dementia Friendly Communities (DFCs) offer an approach to community engagement to improve the lives of people living with dementia and their family supporters. The involvement of those living with dementia is key to creating successful DFCs. This paper examines how people affected by dementia were involved in developing and designing DFCs in England, and the impact of their involvement. METHODS: This study used a mixed method case study design in six DFCs in England. Data collection involved documentary analysis, a survey, and interviews and focus groups with service providers and people living with dementia and their supporters. FINDINGS: All six DFCs aspired to involve people living with dementia and their family supporters, but often relied on a small number of people living with dementia. The range of involvement activities in DFCs included Steering Group meetings, wider public consultations, and enabling feedback through data collection methods such as surveys and 'ad hoc' conversations. Organisations within the DFCs with experience of public consultation offered structured opportunities for involvement. There was no evidence of people living with dementia initiating or co-leading the organisation, its direction and/or the activities of the DFCs. CONCLUSION: The involvement of people living with dementia in DFCs went beyond rhetoric, with some evidence of context sensitive and meaningful participation. Approaches towards involvement should focus on involvement in strategic planning, and on harnessing expertise in delivering different involvement activities to optimise participation of a greater breadth of people living with dementia. Engagement with local organisations who work with, and for, people living with dementia, and dedicating the resources needed for involvement work, are crucial for creating DFCs. The success of DFCs are determined by how the needs of people living with dementia are identified, discussed and reviewed by those within the community who are most affected.

The uptake and use of a minimum data set (MDS) for older people living and dying in care homes: a realist review.

BACKGROUND: Care homes provide long term care for older people. Countries with standardised approaches to residents' assessment, care planning and review (known as minimum data sets (MDS)) use the aggregate data to guide resource allocation, monitor quality, and for research. Less is known about how an MDS affects how staff assess, provide and review residents' everyday care. The review aimed to develop a theory-driven understanding of how care home staff can effectively implement and use MDS to plan and deliver care for residents. METHODS: The realist review was organised according to RAMESES (Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: and Evolving Standards) guidelines. There were three overlapping stages: 1) defining the scope of the review and theory development on the use of minimum data set 2) testing and refining candidate programme theories through iterative literature searches and stakeholders' consultations as well as discussion among the research team; and 3) data synthesis from stages 1 and 2. The following databases were used MEDLINE via OVID, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), ASSIA [Applied Social Sciences Citation Index and Abstracts]) and sources of grey literature. RESULTS: Fifty-one papers informed the development of three key interlinked theoretical propositions: motivation (mandates and incentives for Minimum Data Set completion); frontline staff monitoring (when Minimum Data Set completion is built into the working practices of the care home); and embedded recording systems (Minimum Data Set recording system is integral to collecting residents' data). By valuing the contributions of staff and building on existing ways of working, the uptake and use of an MDS could enable all staff to learn with and from each other about what is important for residents' care CONCLUSIONS: Minimum Data Sets provides commissioners service providers and researchers with standardised information useful for commissioning planning and analysis. For it to be equally useful for care home staff it requires key activities that address the staff experiences of care, their work with others and the use of digital technology. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number CRD42020171323.