Impact of a person-centred dementia care training programme on hospital staff attitudes, role efficacy and perceptions of caring for people with dementia: A repeated measures study.

Background: People with dementia occupy up to one quarter of acute hospital beds. However, the quality of care delivered to this patient group is of national concern. Staff working in acute hospitals report lack of knowledge, skills and confidence in caring for people with dementia. There is limited evidence about the most effective approaches to supporting acute hospital staff to deliver more person-centred care. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a specialist training programme for acute hospital staff regarding improving attitudes, satisfaction and feelings of caring efficacy, in provision of care to people with dementia. Design: A repeated measures design, with measures completed immediately prior to commencing training (T1), after completion of Foundation level training (T2: 4-6 weeks post-baseline), and following Intermediate level training (T3: 3-4 months post-baseline). Setting: One NHS Trust in the North of England, UK. Participants: 40 acute hospital staff working in clinical roles, the majority of whom (90%) were nurses. Methods: All participants received the 3.5 day Person-centred Care Training for Acute Hospitals (PCTAH) programme, comprised of two levels, Foundation (1/2 day) and Intermediate (3 days), delivered over a 3-4 month period. Staff demographics and previous exposure to dementia training was collected via a questionnaire. Staff attitudes were measured using the Approaches to Dementia Questionnaire (ADQ), satisfaction in caring for people with dementia was captured using the Staff Experiences of Working with Demented Residents questionnaire (SEWDR) and perceived caring efficacy was measured using the Caring Efficacy Scale (CES). Results: The training programme was effective in producing a significant positive change on all three outcome measures following intermediate training compared to baseline. A significant positive effect was found on the ADS between baseline and after completion of Foundation level training, but not for either of the other measures. Conclusions: Training acute hospital staff in Intermediate level person-centred dementia care is effective in producing significant improvements in attitudes towards and satisfaction in caring for people with dementia and feelings of caring efficacy. Foundation level training is effective in changing attitudes but does not seem to be sufficient to bring about change in satisfaction or caring efficacy

Monitoring and improving the quality of person-centred care in health and social settings using Dementia Care Mapping (DCM): Staff experiences of implementation barriers and supports

Dementia Care Mapping (DCM) is a person-centred care quality monitoring and improvement tool used for nearly 20 years in formal dementia care settings and there are thousands of people trained in its use internationally. However, little is known about if and how DCM is used in practice or regarding application of inter-rater reliability checks to ensure data quality. This study aimed to explore the application of DCM in practice in the UK. A mixed methods design including an on-line survey and in-depth, semi-structured interviews was employed. There were 98 survey respondents, representing 71 health and social care, University/research and training/consultancy organisations. Twenty-one people participated in the semi-structured interviews. Fifty-nine percent of survey respondents had used DCM since completing training. Those working in clinical roles and in health and social care provider organisations were least likely to have used DCM. A range of barriers and supports to use of DCM in practice after training were reported, including lack of management support and time. The majority of those who had used DCM also conducted inter-rater reliability checks at least once per year or more frequently. Of the 20% who did not the main barriers to this were absence of someone to conduct the checks with and lack of time and resources. The study has shown that it is possible to apply an evidence-based quality monitoring and improvement tool such as DCM to support implementation of person-centred care in practice, despite widespread limitations on time and resources as well as identifying a range of setting conditions that can help or hinder implementation

See me, not just the dementia - Understanding people's experiences of living in a care home.

yesThis report looks at the experiences of people with dementia living in care homes in England, with a particular focus on whether their care offers dignity and respect. Most similar studies have relied on the views of carers, care staff and people in the early stages of dementia. This study examines directly the experiences of people including those with advanced dementia

The barriers and facilitators to implementing dementia education and training in health and social care services : a mixed-methods study

Background: The health and social care workforce requires access to appropriate education and training to provide quality care for people with dementia. Success of a training programme depends on staff ability to put their learning into practice through behaviour change. This study aimed to investigate the barriers and facilitators to implementation of dementia education and training in health and social care services using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and COM-B model of behaviour change. Methods: A mixed-methods design. Participants were dementia training leads, training facilitators, managers and staff who had attended training who worked in UK care homes, acute hospitals, mental health services and primary care settings. Methods were an online audit of care and training providers, online survey of trained staff and individual/group interviews with organisational training leads, training facilitators, staff who had attended dementia training and managers. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and thematic template analysis. Results: Barriers and facilitators were analysed according the COM-B domains. “Capability” factors were not perceived as a significant barrier to training implementation. Factors which supported staff capability included the use of interactive face-to-face training, and training that was relevant to their role. Factors that increased staff “motivation” included skilled facilitation of training, trainees’ desire to learn and the provision of incentives (e.g. attendance during paid working hours, badges/certifications). “Opportunity” factors were most prevalent with lack of resources (time, financial, staffing and environmental) being the biggest perceived barrier to training implementation. The presence or not of external support from families and internal factors such as the organisational culture and its supportiveness of good dementia care and training implementation were also influential. Conclusions: A wide range of factors may present as barriers to or facilitators of dementia training implementation and behaviour change for staff. These should be considered by health and social care providers in the context of dementia training design and delivery in order to maximise potential for implementation

The person, interactions and environment programme to improve care of people with dementia in hospital: a multisite study

Background: Improving care of people with dementia on acute hospital wards is a policy priority. Person-centred care is a marker of care quality; delivering such care is a goal for service improvement. Objectives: PIE (Person: Interaction; Environment) comprises an observation tool and systematic approach to implement and embed a person-centred approach in routine care for hospitalised patients with dementia. The study aims were to: evaluate PIE as a method to improve the care of older people with dementia on acute hospital wards; and develop insight into what person-centred care might look like in practice in this setting. Methods: We performed a longitudinal comparative case study design in ten purposively selected wards in five Trusts in three English regions; alongside an embedded process evaluation. Data was collected from multiple sources: staff, patients, relatives, organisational aggregate information and documents. Mixed methods were employed: ethnographic observation; interviews and questionnaires; patient case studies (patient observation and conversations ‘in the moment’, interviews with relatives and case records), patient and ward aggregate data. Data was synthesised to create individual case studies of PIE implementation and outcomes in context of ward structure, organisation, patient profile and process of care delivery. Cross case comparison facilitated a descriptive and explanatory account of PIE implementation in context, the pattern of variation, what shaped it and the consequences flowing from it. Quantitative data was analysed using simple descriptive statistics. Qualitative data analysis employed grounded theory methods. Results: The study furthered understanding of dimensions of care quality for older people with dementia on acute hospital wards and the environmental, organisational and cultural factors that shaped delivery. Only two wards fully implemented PIE, sustaining and embedding change over 18 months. The remaining wards either did not install PIE (‘non-implementers’); or were ‘partial implementers’. The interaction between micro-level contextual factors (aspects of leadership (drivers, facilitators, team, networks), fit with strategic initiatives and salience with valued goals) and miso and macro level organisational factors, were the main barriers to PIE adoption. Where implemented, evidence suggests that the programme directly affected improvement in ward practice with positive impact on the experience of patients and caregivers, although the heterogeneity of need and severity of impairment meant that some of the more visible changes did not affect everyone equally. Limitations: Although PIE has potential to improve the care of people with dementia when implemented, findings are indicative only: data on clinical outcomes was not systematically collected; and PIE was not adopted on most study wards. Research implications: Further research is required to identify more precisely the skill-mix and resources necessary to provide person-focused care to hospitalised people with dementia, across the spectrum of need, including those with moderate and severe impairment. Implementing innovations to change practices in complex organisations requires more in-depth understanding of contextual factors that impact the capacity of organisations to absorb and embed new practices

Components of impactful dementia training for general hospital staff: a collective case study

Background and objectives: People with dementia occupy around one quarter of general hospital beds, with concerns consistently raised about care quality. Improving workforce knowledge, skills and attitudes is a mechanism for addressing this. However little is known about effective ways of training healthcare staff about dementia. This study aimed to understand models of dementia training most likely to lead to improved practice and better care experiences for people with dementia, and to understand barriers and facilitators to implementation. Method: A collective case study was conducted in three National Health Service Acute Hospital Trusts in England. Multiple data sources were used including interviews with training leads/facilitators, ward managers and staff who had attended training; satisfaction surveys with patients with dementia and/or carers; and observations of care using Dementia Care Mapping. Results: Interactive face-to-face training designed for general hospital staff was valued. Simulation and experiential learning methods were felt to be beneficial by some staff and stressful and distressing by others. Skilled delivery by an experienced and enthusiastic facilitator was identified as important. Staff identified learning and practice changes made following their training. However, observations revealed not all staff had the knowledge, attitudes and skills needed to deliver good care. Patient and carer satisfaction with care was mixed. A major barrier to training implementation was lack of resources. Supportive managers, organisational culture and strong leadership were key facilitators. Conclusion: Dementia training can lead to improved care practices. There are a range of key barriers and facilitators to implementation that must be considered

Factors associated with successful dementia education for practitioners in primary care: an in-depth case study

Background: With increasing numbers of people in the UK living with dementia, the provision of good quality person-centred care that meets the often complex needs of this population is required. Given the majority of people with dementia live in the community, significant care and support will be provided by primary care services. This means the primary care workforce needs appropriate education to ensure they have the right knowledge, skills and attitudes to meet these care needs. However, little is understood about the most successful approaches to dementia education in this setting. Methods: An in-depth case study was undertaken in a single primary care organisation with the aim of exploring the impact of a person-centred dementia educational programme, and identify barriers and facilitators to implementation. Data was gathered from a wide range of sources and analysed using Kirkpatrick’s evaluative framework. Results: Initially, staff learners struggled to incorporate the ‘whole-person’ approach to dementia care, but gained knowledge and confidence through self-directed learning. They reacted positively to the training and appreciated opportunities to learn from peers in other services. They identified improvements in communication and prescribing practices, despite difficulties implementing changes during busy periods. Resultant impact for service users included more timely routine appointments, and positive satisfaction ratings from patients and families. Conclusions: The findings indicate the perceived value of person-centred dementia education for primary care. Further recommendations for provision in this service setting include tailored programmes designed collaboratively with clinical service providers, and bringing together an interdisciplinary mix of learners to enhance knowledge exchange

Cost-effectiveness of Dementia Care Mapping in care home settings – Evaluation of a randomised controlled trial

Background: Behaviours such as agitation impact on the quality of life of care home residents with dementia and increase health care use. Interventions to prevent these behaviours have little evidence supporting their effectiveness or cost-effectiveness. We conducted an economic evaluation alongside a trial assessing Dementia Care Mapping™ (DCM) versus usual care for reducing agitation and highlight methodological challenges of conducting evaluations in this population and setting. Methods: RCT data over 16 months from English care home residents with dementia (intervention n = 418; control n = 308) were analysed. We conducted a cost-utility analysis from the healthcare provider perspective. We gathered resource use and utility (EQ-5D-5L and DEMQoL-Proxy-U) from people living with dementia and proxy informants (staff and relatives). Data were analysed using seemingly unrelated regression, accounting for care home clustering and bootstrapping used to capture sampling uncertainty. Results: Costs were higher in the intervention arm than control arm (incremental = £1,479) due in part to high cost outliers. There were small QALY gains (incremental = 0.024) in favour of DCM. The base case ICER (£64,380 per QALY) suggests DCM is not cost-effective versus usual care. With the exception of analyses excluding high cost outliers, which suggested a potential for DCM to be cost-effective, sensitivity analyses corroborated the base case findings. Bootstrapped estimates suggested DCM had a low probability (p<0.20 where λ=£20,000) of being cost-effective versus control. Conclusion: DCM does not appear to be a cost-effective intervention versus usual care in this group and setting. The evaluation highlighted several methodological challenges relating to validity of utility assessments, loss to follow-up and compliance. Further research is needed on handling high cost individuals and capturing utility in this group

Differential expression of ADAMTS -1, -4, -5 and TIMP -3 in rat spinal cord at different stages of acute experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis

Experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) is an animal model of inflammatory demyelination, a pathological event common to multiple sclerosis (MS). During CNS inflammation there are alterations in the extracellular matrix (ECM). A Disintegrin and Metalloproteinase with Thrombospondin motifs (ADAMTS) -1, -4 and -5 are proteases present in the CNS, which are able to cleave the aggregating chondroitin sulphate proteoglycans, aggrecan, phosphacan, neurocan and brevican. It is therefore important to investigate changes in their expression in different stages of EAE induction. We have investigated expression of ADAMTS-1, -4, -5 and Tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase (TIMP) -3, by real-time RT-PCR. We have also examined protein expression of ADAMTS-1, -4 and -5 by western blotting and immunocytochemistry in spinal cord from animals at different stages of disease progression. Our study demonstrated a decrease in ADAMTS-4 mRNA and protein expression. TIMP-3 was decreased at the mRNA level although protein levels were increased in diseased animals compared to controls. Our study identifies changes in ADAMTS expression during the course of CNS inflammation which may contribute to ECM degradation and disease progression.</p