Implementation of interventions to maintain and promote the functional mobility of nursing home residents - a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: To provide an overview of the available evidence on the implementation of direct and capacity-building interventions to promote and maintain the functional mobility of nursing home residents. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review following the methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews as described by the Joanna Briggs Institute. We searched for studies in MEDLINE (via PubMed) and CINAHL (via EBSCO). We conducted a qualitative content analysis of the included studies with deductive categories based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). RESULTS: Ultimately, we included 8 studies on direct interventions, 6 studies on capacity-building interventions, and 2 studies on both types of interventions in our review. Seven studies provided evidence on implementation strategies comprising discrete as well as multifaceted, multilevel strategies. Most of the studies did not systematically evaluate the strategies but remained at a descriptive level. All 16 studies provided evidence of influencing factors. We identified 32 of the 37 influencing factors of the CFIR. The five most frequent influencing factors were available resources (n = 14), access to knowledge and information (n = 12), patient needs and resources (n = 10), knowledge and beliefs about the intervention (n = 10) and compatibility (n = 9). CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence on the implementation of functional mobility interventions in nursing homes is rather limited. This emphasizes the need for further research. Regarding implementation strategies, the systematic evaluation and further development of the reported promising approaches might be a starting point.

Implementation of dementia care management in routine care (RoutineDeCM): a study protocol for process evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Dementia care management is a complex intervention intended to support persons with dementia and their (caring) relatives in home-based care arrangements. Dementia care management was developed in the federal state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania in Germany and subsequently adapted for the German region of Siegen-Wittgenstein, where it will now be implemented. Four different service providers will carry out the implementation process. This study protocol describes the planned procedures for the parallel evaluation of the implementation process. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multiple embedded case study design was chosen for the planned process evaluation. Data collection and analysis will be informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change, the Medical Research Council framework for conducting process evaluations of complex interventions and the Taxonomy of Outcomes for Implementation Research. Information (qualitative and quantitative) will be collected from all stakeholders involved in the dementia care management intervention (ie, dementia care managers, general practitioners, people with dementia). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The process evaluation is conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, the recommendations on good scientific practice, the research ethics principles of the Code of Ethics of the German Society of Nursing Science, and on the basis of ethical approval from the Clinical Ethics Committee of University Medicine Greifswald (BB 110/22). The results of the process evaluation will be disseminated through reports to the funders of the study and also as a summary of recommendations for the sustainable implementation of dementia care management for future implementers. We also plan to publish the results of this process evaluation in an international peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05529277, Registered 7 September 2022, https://beta. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/study/NCT05529277.

Mapping implementation strategies of evidence-based interventions for three preselected phenomena in people with dementia-a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Caring for people with dementia is complex, and there are various evidence-based interventions. However, a gap exists between the available interventions and how to implement them. The objectives of our review are to identify implementation strategies, implementation outcomes, and influencing factors for the implementation of evidence-based interventions that focus on three preselected phenomena in people with dementia: (A) behavior that challenges supporting a person with dementia in long-term care, (B) delirium in acute care, and (C) postacute care needs. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review according to the description of the Joanna Briggs Institute. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. For the data analysis, we conducted deductive content analysis. For this analysis, we used the Expert Recommendations for Implementation Change (ERIC), implementation outcomes according to Proctor and colleagues, and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). RESULTS: We identified 362 (A), 544 (B), and 714 records (C) on the three phenomena and included 7 (A), 3 (B), and 3 (C) studies. Among the studies, nine reported on the implementation strategies they used. Clusters with the most reported strategies were adapt and tailor to context and train and educate stakeholders. We identified one study that tested the effectiveness of the applied implementation strategy, while ten studies reported implementation outcomes (mostly fidelity). Regarding factors that influence implementation, all identified studies reported between 1 and 19 factors. The most reported factors were available resources and the adaptability of the intervention. To address dementia-specific influencing factors, we enhanced the CFIR construct of patient needs and resources to include family needs and resources. CONCLUSIONS: We found a high degree of homogeneity across the different dementia phenomena, the evidence-based interventions, and the care settings in terms of the implementation strategies used, implementation outcomes measured, and influencing factors identified. However, it remains unclear to what extent implementation strategies themselves are evidence-based and which intervention strategy can be used by practitioners when either the implementation outcomes are not adjusted to the implementation strategy and/or the effects of implementation strategies are mostly unknown. Future research needs to focus on investigating the effectiveness of implementation strategies for evidence-based interventions for dementia care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The review protocol was prospectively published (Manietta et al., BMJ Open 11:e051611, 2021).

Adapting a Dementia Care Management Intervention for Regional Implementation: A Theory-Based Participatory Barrier Analysis.

Dementia is a leading cause of disability and dependency in older people worldwide. As the number of people affected increases, so does the need for innovative care models. Dementia care management (DCM) is an empirically validated approach for improving the care and quality of life for people with dementia (PwD) and caregivers. The aim of this study is to investigate the influencing factors and critical pathways for the implementation of a regionally adapted DCM standard in the existing primary care structures in the German region of Siegen-Wittgenstein (SW). Utilizing participatory research methods, five local health care experts as co-researchers conducted N = 13 semi-structured interviews with 22 local professionals and one caregiver as peer reviewers. Data collection and analysis were based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Our results show that among the most mentioned influencing factors, three CFIR constructs can be identified as both barriers and facilitators: Patients' needs and resources, Relative advantage, and Cosmopolitanism. The insufficient involvement of relevant stakeholders is the major barrier and the comprehensive consideration of patient needs through dementia care managers is the strongest facilitating factor. The study underlines the vital role of barrier analysis in site-specific DCM implementation.

Theoretical approaches to process evaluations of complex interventions in health care: a systematic scoping review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Complex interventions in health care are characterized by multiple interacting components as well as by numerous nonlinear interactions with the social systems within which they are being implemented. The process of developing, evaluating and implementing complex interventions is therefore challenging. Established guidance such as the MRC (Medical Research Council) framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions refers to process evaluations as an integral part of the development of complex evidence-based interventions. Even though the need for process evaluations is recognized, the realization of such approaches is challenging because methodological instruction is sparse, and the phenomenon of interest is complex. A number of theoretical approaches indicating how to conduct process evaluations of complex interventions in health care exist, but a systematic and comprehensive overview of these is missing. Thus, the objective of the systematic scoping review described herein is to provide an overview and analysis of theoretical approaches suitable for the planning and conducting of process evaluations. METHODS: The design and conduct of this review will follow the procedures of a systematic scoping review. The search strategy will be developed following the BeHEMoTh (Behaviour of interest; Health context; Exclusions; Models or Theories) template which has been conceptualized for structured reviews of theory. The systematic search of the MEDLINE (via PubMed), CINAHL (via EBSCO) and PsycInfo (via EBSCO) electronic databases will be complemented by "hand searching" techniques. Study selection, data extraction, and data analysis will be performed by tandems of two researchers independently of each other. Divergent decisions and judgements between the two researchers will be discussed by the whole review team. DISCUSSION: The findings from this scoping review will provide an overview and comparison of theoretical approaches suitable for process evaluations of complex interventions in health care. The review results will support researchers in choosing the theoretical approach that best fits the respective focus of their process evaluation study. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This study has been registered with PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) under registration number CRD42020211732 .

Organizational Capacity Building in Nursing Facilities to Promote Resident Mobility: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the present systematic review was to investigate the effects of organizational capacity building interventions on the environment, nursing staff capacity, and mobility of residents in nursing facilities. DESIGN: Systematic review. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Nursing facilities, staff, and residents. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review according to the methods of the Cochrane Collaboration. The systematic review was prospectively registered in the PROSPERO database of systematic reviews (registration number CRD42020202996). We searched for studies in MEDLINE (via PubMed), CINAHL (via EBSCO), the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), and the Cochrane Library (07/20). A narrative synthesis was conducted because of the high heterogeneity of the included studies. RESULTS: We identified 6747 records and included 14 studies in our review. We clustered the 14 interventions into 3 different categories (environmental modification, nursing staff capacity, and multifactorial interventions). Three studies assessed outcomes at the nursing staff level, and all studies reported outcomes at the resident level. We found highly heterogeneous and inconsistent effects of organizational capacity building on increasing nursing staff capacity and/or resident mobility. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The findings emphasize the need for further research focusing on an international understanding and definition of organizational capacity building. Additionally, research and intervention development for organizational capacity building interventions to promote resident mobility are needed while applying the framework of the Medical Research Council. Furthermore, studies should assess outcomes regarding the environment and nursing staff to better understand if and how environmental structures and nursing staff capacity effect resident mobility.

Protocol for conducting scoping reviews to map implementation strategies in different care settings: focusing on evidence-based interventions for preselected phenomena in people with dementia.

INTRODUCTION: Various evidence-based interventions are available to improve the care of people with dementia in different care settings, many of which are not or are only partially implemented in routine care. Different implementation strategies have been developed to support the implementation of interventions in routine care; however, the implementation of complex interventions remains challenging. The aim of our reviews is to identify promising strategies for, significant facilitators of and barriers to the implementation of evidence-based interventions for very common dementia care phenomena: (A) behaviour that challenges supporting a person with dementia in long-term care, (B) delirium in acute care and (C) the postacute care needs of people with dementia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct one scoping review for each preselected dementia care phenomenon (A, B and C). For this, three literature searches will be carried out in the following electronic databases: MEDLINE (via PubMed), CINAHL (via EBSCO) and PsycINFO (via EBSCO). Additionally, we will perform backward and forward citation tracking via reference lists and Google Scholar. Identified records will be independently screened by two reviewers (title/abstract and full text) using the defined inclusion criteria. We will include all study designs and publications in the German or English language. For the data analyses, we will conduct a deductive content analysis using two different analytical approaches: Expert Recommendations for Implementation Change and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Due to the nature of a review, ethical clearing is not required. We will disseminate our results in peer-reviewed journals, workshops with stakeholders, and (inter)national conferences.

Dementia care mapping in nursing homes: effects on caregiver attitudes, job satisfaction, and burnout. A quasi-experimental trial.

BACKGROUND: The Dementia Care Mapping (DCM) method is an internationally recognized complex intervention in dementia research and care for implementing person-centered care. The Leben-QD II trial aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of DCM with regard to caregivers. METHODS: The nine participating nursing home units were allocated to three groups: (1) DCM method experienced ≥ 1 year, (2) DCM newly introduced during this trial, and (3) regular rating of residents' quality of life (control group). Linear mixed models were fit to cluster-aggregated data after 0, 6, and 18 months, adjusting for repeated measurements and confounders. The primary outcome was the Approaches to Dementia Questionnaire (ADQ) score; the secondary outcomes were the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ) and the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI). RESULTS: The analysis included 201 caregivers with 290 completed questionnaires (all three data collection time points). The ADQ showed a significant time and time*intervention effect. At baseline, the estimated least-square means for the ADQ were 71.98 (group A), 72.46 (group B), and 71.15 (group C). The non-linear follow-up of group A indicated an estimated-least square means of 69.71 (T 1) and 68.97 (T 2); for group B, 72.80 (T 1) and 72.29 (T 2); and for group C, 66.43 (T 1) and 70.62 (T 2). CONCLUSIONS: The DCM method showed a tendency toward negatively affecting the primary and secondary outcomes; this finding could be explained by the substantial deviation in adherence to the intervention protocol.

Implementing Dementia Care Mapping to develop person-centred care: results of a process evaluation within the Leben-QD II trial.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate Dementia Care Mapping implementation in nursing homes. BACKGROUND: Dementia Care Mapping, an internationally applied method for supporting and enhancing person-centred care for people with dementia, must be successfully implemented into care practice for its effective use. Various factors influence the implementation of complex interventions such as Dementia Care Mapping; few studies have examined the specific factors influencing Dementia Care Mapping implementation. DESIGN: A convergent parallel mixed-methods design embedded in a quasi-experimental trial was used to assess Dementia Care Mapping implementation success and influential factors. METHODS: From 2011-2013, nine nursing units in nine different nursing homes implemented either Dementia Care Mapping (n = 6) or a periodic quality of life measurement using the dementia-specific instrument QUALIDEM (n = 3). Diverse data (interviews, n = 27; questionnaires, n = 112; resident records, n = 81; and process documents) were collected. Each data set was separately analysed and then merged to comprehensively portray the implementation process. RESULTS: Four nursing units implemented the particular intervention without deviating from the preplanned intervention. Translating Dementia Care Mapping results into practice was challenging. Necessary organisational preconditions for Dementia Care Mapping implementation included well-functioning networks, a dementia-friendly culture and flexible organisational structures. Involved individuals' positive attitudes towards Dementia Care Mapping also facilitated implementation. Precisely planning the intervention and its implementation, recruiting champions who supported Dementia Care Mapping implementation and having well-qualified, experienced project coordinators were essential to the implementation process. CONCLUSIONS: For successful Dementia Care Mapping implementation, it must be embedded in a systematic implementation strategy considering the specific setting. Organisational preconditions may need to be developed before Dementia Care Mapping implementation. Necessary steps may include team building, developing and realising a person-centred care-based mission statement or educating staff regarding general dementia care. The implementation strategy may include attracting and involving individuals on different hierarchical levels in Dementia Care Mapping implementation and supporting staff to translate Dementia Care Mapping results into practice. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The identified facilitating factors can guide Dementia Care Mapping implementation strategy development.

Dementia care mapping: effects on residents' quality of life and challenging behavior in German nursing homes. A quasi-experimental trial.

BACKGROUND: Person-centered care (PCC) is a widely recognized concept in dementia research and care. Dementia Care Mapping (DCM) is a method for implementing PCC. Prior studies have yielded heterogeneous results regarding the effectiveness of DCM for people with dementia (PwD). We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of DCM with regard to quality of life (QoL) and challenging behavior in PwD in nursing homes (NHs). METHODS: Leben-QD II is an 18-month, three-armed, pragmatic quasi-experimental trial. The sample of PwD was divided into three groups with three living units per group: (A) DCM applied since 2009, (B) DCM newly introduced during the study, and (C) a control intervention based on a regular and standardized QoL rating. The primary outcome was QoL measured with the Quality of Life-Alzheimer's Disease (QoL-AD) proxy, and the secondary outcomes were QoL (measured with QUALIDEM) and challenging behavior (measured with the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Nursing Home version, NPI-NH). RESULTS: There were no significant differences either between the DCM intervention groups and the control group or between the two DCM intervention groups regarding changes in the primary or secondary outcomes. At baseline, the estimated least square means of the QoL-AD proxy for groups A, B, and C were 32.54 (confidence interval, hereafter CI: 29.36-35.72), 33.62 (CI: 30.55-36.68), and 30.50 (CI: 27.47-33.52), respectively. The DCM groups A (31.32; CI: 28.15-34.48) and B (27.60; CI: 24.51-30.69) exhibited a reduction in QoL values, whereas group C exhibited an increase (32.54; CI: 29.44-35.64) after T2. CONCLUSIONS: DCM exhibited no statistically significant effect in terms of QoL and challenging behavior of PwD in NHs. To increase the likelihood of a positive effect for PwD, it is necessary to ensure successful implementation of the intervention.

The effects of dementia care mapping on nursing home residents' quality of life and staff attitudes: design of the quasi-experimental study Leben-QD II.

BACKGROUND: The main objective of care for people with dementia is the maintenance and promotion of quality of life (Qol). Most of the residents in nursing homes have challenging behaviors that strongly affect their Qol. Person-centered care (PCC) is an approach that aims to achieve the best possible Qol and to reduce challenging behaviors. Dementia Care Mapping (DCM) is a method of implementing PCC that has been used in Germany for several years. However, there are no data on the effectiveness of DCM or the challenges of implementation of DCM in German nursing homes. METHODS/DESIGN: In this quasi-experimental non-randomized cluster-controlled study, the effects of DCM will be compared to 2 comparison groups. 9 nursing homes will take part: 3 will implement DCM, 3 will implement a comparison intervention using an alternative Qol assessment, and 3 have already implemented DCM. The main effect outcomes are Qol, challenging behaviors, staff attitudes toward dementia, job satisfaction and burnout of caregivers. These outcomes will be measured on 3 data points. Different quantitative and qualitative data sources will be collected through the course of the study to investigate the degree of implementation as well as facilitators of and barriers to the implementation process. DISCUSSION: This study will provide new information about the effectiveness of DCM and the implementation process of DCM in German nursing homes. The study results will provide important information to guide the national discussion about the improvement of dementia-specific Qol, quality of care in nursing homes and allocation of resources. In addition, the study results will provide information for decision-making and implementation of complex psychosocial interventions such as DCM. The findings will also be important for the design of a subsequent randomized controlled trial (e.g. appropriateness of outcomes and measurements, inclusion criteria for participating nursing homes) and the development of a successful implementation strategy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN43916381.

[The effects of DRG introduction on nursing]. / Die Auswirkungen der DRG-einführung aus Sicht der Pflege.

UNLABELLED: Nursing personnel associate Diagnosis Related Groups (DRG), implemented in German hospitals in 2004, mostly with a higher workload and with work that is set apart from their patients. Between 2003 and 2005 the Institut für Pflegewissenschaft, Universität Witten/Herdecke, conducted a longitudinal study to measure changes of working structures before, throughout and after the introduction of the case-based lump sum. At three given dates a structured questionnaire was applied to nursing staff and, partially, to doctors in three hospitals in order to assess their subjective view on the effects of DRG introduction. RESULTS were compared to the actual output by multi-moment-recording. RESULTS: The amount of paperwork decreased against expectations. Nevertheless, extra requirements became more comprehensive, while the extent of genuine nursing tasks decreased. In 2005 these tasks were given a lower amount of time than paperwork and extra requirements. Because of methodical restrictions causal relations cannot be established, but this trend has to be monitored closely. Further studies have to be carried out to examine structural changes of nursing tasks and quality of care.