Influence of freedom of movement on the health of people with demnetia:A systematic review

Background and Objectives To protect residents with dementia from harm, nursing homes (NHs) often have closed-door policies. However, current research suggests a positive influence of freedom of movement, that is, the right to (decide to) independently move from one place to another, on the health of NH residents with dementia. This systematic review aims to collate, summarize, and synthesize the scientific evidence published to date on the influence of freedom of movement on health among NH residents with dementia. Research Design and Methods Multiple databases were searched up until March 2021. Peer-reviewed qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies were included. Health was operationalized using the Positive Health framework, encompassing 6 dimensions: bodily functions, mental functions and perception, existential dimension, quality of life, social and societal participation, and daily functioning. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Results Sixteen studies were included of good to excellent quality. Compared to closed NHs, freedom of movement in semiopen and open NHs may have a positive influence on bodily functions, mental functions and perception, quality of life, and social and societal participation. The influence on daily functioning and on the existential dimension remains unclear. Discussion and Implications Freedom of movement of NH residents with dementia is often studied as part of a larger context in which other factors may contribute to health benefits. More research is therefore needed to unravel the underlying mechanisms of the positive influence of freedom of movement on health

Development of a self-scan to evaluate and improve person-centered care in nursing homes:A Delphi study

Background and objective: Person centered care (PCC) has become the gold standard for providing care in nursing homes (NHs). Therefore, it is important for healthcare professionals in NHs to learn PCC-skills and to be supported to learn about- and improve the quality of PCC they provide. At this moment an instrument to support healthcare professionals in NHs to monitor and evaluate PCC is limited. The aim of the study was to develop a self-evaluation tool that provides healthcare professionals in NHs insight into the extent to which they provide PCC to residents, so that they can learn and further improve their current ways of working in a person-centered way. Methods: A three-round Delphi study with an expert panel (n = 25) in the domains of PCC, quality of NH care and education of caring staff. Findings were validated by residents and relatives during semi-structured interviews. Thematic analysis and descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. Results: In the first round the experts did not provide measuring instruments, but we identified 18 key aspects of PCC. In the second round, three clusters were identified, and a scale was added, to enable assessment. In the third round, we deduplicated, restructured and used more clear language. This led to 14 key aspects of PCC, 24 measures, grouped into five clusters: knowing the resident, establishing relationship, a respectful approach, making decisions jointly and personal development. The result is a PCC self-scan for healthcare professionals in NHs. Residents and relatives, agreed with all aspects and stated that no aspects were missing. Conclusions: In this study we developed an accessible self-report learning tool for healthcare professionals that makes it possible to evaluate and improve their PCC-skills and improve the quality of PCC in NHs

How do practically trained (student) caregivers in nursing homes learn?:A scoping review

Background and objective: Practically trained (student) caregivers (further: caregivers) make up the majority of care staff in nursing homes (NHs). To keep up with the fast-changing healthcare environment and ensure a high quality of care, it is important to know how to stimulate continuous work-based learning (WBL) among this group. The purpose of the study was to systematically study the scientific literature published to date on (1) how caregivers learn in NHs and (2) what facilitates or impedes their learning. Methods: A scoping review was carried out, systematically searching six scientific databases. A total of 35 studies published from January 2009 to February 2021 were included. Study characteristics, learning mechanisms, facilitators, and barriers to learning were extracted and synthesized. Results: None of the studies specifically focused on how caregivers learn. Yet, we identified various learning mechanisms, and found that learning by theory or supervision was most frequently engaged in. Most learning mechanisms used among the groups in the included studies were planned and formal and developed and initiated by others out of the context. Three main themes were identified among the facilitators and barriers of WBL: individual learning, collective learning, and resources for learning. An interdependency between (sub)themes was found. Conclusions: The way caregivers in NHs learn is understudied. Moreover, both their informal learning and the support they receive to be(come) active learners has been overlooked. As WBL provides caregivers with opportunities to learn within a real-life setting, we suggest more research on informal learning mechanisms

Types, aspects, and impact of relocation initiatives deployed within and between long-term care facilities:A scoping review

Relocation of residents within or between long-term care facilities occurs regularly. To mitigate potential negative consequences, supportive relocation initiatives have been developed. This scoping review addresses types, aspects, and impact of relocation initiatives developed to relocate residents between or within long-term care facilities. A total of 704 articles were identified in a systematic literature search of 11 databases between April and July 2021. Using predefined eligibility criteria, two researchers independently screened titles and abstracts, resulting in 36 articles for full-text screening. Finally, six articles were included. Analysis was performed using thematic coding. Three types of relocation initiatives were identified, namely, interventions (n = 3), guidelines (n = 2), and a plan (n = 1). These initiatives described specific aspects of relocation, namely, spatial orientation (n = 3), practical assistance (n = 3), psychological support (n = 3), staff preparation (n = 2), and client engagement (n = 2). Only three intervention studies reported the impact of relocation initiatives on residents, namely, improved mental health (n = 3), spatial orientation (n = 2), self-reliance (n = 2), and social behavior (n = 1). The scope of the found relocation initiatives was often limited as they focused on specific designs, aspects, and residents. Therefore, the complexity of relocation processes is often overlooked, and more comprehensive relocation initiatives should be developed

Health impact of the first and second wave of COVID-19 and related restrictive measures among nursing home residents:A scoping review

Abstract Background and objectives COVID-19 disproportionally affects older adults living in nursing homes. The purpose of this review was to explore and map the scientific literature on the health impact of COVID-19 and related restrictive measures during the first and second wave among nursing home residents. A specific focus was placed on health data collected among nursing home residents themselves. Research design and methods In this study, best practices for scoping reviews were followed. Five databases were systematically searched for peer-reviewed empirical studies published up until December 2020 in which data were collected among nursing home residents. Articles were categorized according to the type of health impact (physical, social and/or psychological) and study focus (impact of COVID-19 virus or related restrictive measures). Findings were presented using a narrative style. Results Of 60 included studies, 57 examined the physical impact of COVID-19. All of these focused on the direct impact of the COVID-19 virus. These studies often used an observational design and quantitative data collection methods, such as swab testing or reviewing health records. Only three studies examined the psychological impact of COVID-19 of which one study focused on the impact of COVID-19-related restrictive measures. Findings were contradictory; both decreased and improved psychological wellbeing was found during the pandemic compared with before. No studies were found that examined the impact on social wellbeing and one study examined other health-related outcomes, including preference changes of nursing home residents in Advanced Care planning following the pandemic. Discussion and implications Studies into the impact of the first and second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic among nursing home residents predominantly focused on the physical impact. Future studies into the psychological and social impact that collect data among residents themselves will provide more insight into their perspectives, such as lived experiences, wishes, needs and possibilities during later phases of the pandemic. These insights can inform policy makers and healthcare professionals in providing person-centered care during the remaining COVID-19 pandemic and in future crisis periods

"Precious time together was taken away":Impact of COVID-19 restrictive measures on social needs and loneliness from the perspective of residents of nursing homes, close relatives, and volunteers

During the COVID-19 outbreak in March 2020, restrictive measures (e.g., prohibiting physical visits and group activities) were introduced in nursing homes to protect older residents. Although the importance of social contacts and social activities to fulfill social needs and avoid loneliness is known, these were challenged during the pandemic. This qualitative study specifically focused on how residents, close relatives, and volunteers in nursing homes experienced the restrictive measures in retrospect and gained insights into the impact of the restrictive measures on social needs and loneliness, and the lessons that could be learned. Thirty semi-structured, face-to-face interviews with residents and close relatives, and one online focus group with ten volunteers, were conducted. Recruitment took place at psychogeriatric and somatic units in the Northern, Eastern and Southern regions of the Netherlands and Flanders, Belgium. The interviews and focus group were transcribed verbatim, and an open, inductive approach was used for analysis. Alternative ways of social contact could not fully compensate for physical visits. Generally, participants reported that it was a difficult time, indicated by feelings of loneliness, fear, sadness, and powerlessness. A great diversity in loneliness was reported. The most important reasons for feeling lonely were missing close social contacts and social activities. The diversity in the impact of restrictive measures depended on, e.g., social needs, coping strategies, and character. Restrictive COVID-19 measures in nursing homes resulted in negative emotions and unmet social needs of residents, close relatives, and volunteers. During future outbreaks of the COVID-19 virus or another virus or bacterium, for which restrictive measures may be needed, nursing homes should actively involve residents, close relatives, and volunteers to balance safety, self-determination, and well-being