scholarly journals The Implementation of Dementia Care Mapping in a Randomized Controlled Trial in Long-Term Care: Results of a Process Evaluation

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 390-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire A. Surr ◽  
Alys W. Griffiths ◽  
Rachael Kelley ◽  
Ivana Holloway ◽  
Rebecca E. A. Walwyn ◽  
...  

This study explored intervention implementation within a pragmatic, cluster randomized controlled trial of Dementia Care Mapping™ (DCM) in UK care homes. DCM is a practice development tool comprised of a 5 component cycle (staff briefing, mapping observations, data analysis and reporting, staff feedback, and action planning) that supports delivery of person-centered care. Two staff from the 31 intervention care homes were trained in DCM and asked to deliver 3 cycles over a 15-month period, supported by a DCM expert during cycle 1. Implementation data were collected after each mapping cycle. There was considerable variability in DCM implementation fidelity, dose, and reach. Not all homes trained 2 mappers on schedule, and some found it difficult to retain mappers. Only 26% of homes completed more than 1 cycle. Future DCM trials in care home settings should consider additional methods to support intervention completion including intervention delivery being conducted with ongoing external support.

PLoS ONE ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. e67325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geertje van de Ven ◽  
Irena Draskovic ◽  
Eddy M. M. Adang ◽  
Rogier Donders ◽  
Sytse U. Zuidema ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alys Wyn Griffiths ◽  
Olivia C. Robinson ◽  
Emily Shoesmith ◽  
Rachael Kelley ◽  
Claire A. Surr

Abstract Background Dementia Care Mapping™ (DCM) is a widely used, staff-led, psychosocial intervention to support the implementation of person-centred care. Efficacy evaluations in care homes have produced mixed outcomes, with implementation problems identified. Understanding the experiences of staff trained to lead DCM implementation is crucial to understanding implementation challenges, yet this has rarely been formally explored. This study aimed to examine the experiences of care home staff trained to lead DCM implementation, within a large cluster randomised controlled trial. Methods Process evaluation including, semi-structured interviews with 27 trained mappers from 16 intervention allocated care homes. Data were analysed using template variant of thematic analysis. Results Three main themes were identified 1) Preparedness to lead - While mappers overwhelmingly enjoyed DCM training, many did not have the personal attributes required to lead practice change and felt DCM training did not adequately equip them to implement it in practice. For many their expectations of the mapper role at recruitment contrasted with the reality once they began to attempt implementation; 2) Transferring knowledge into practice – Due to the complex nature of DCM, developing mastery required regular practice of DCM skills, which was difficult to achieve within available time and resources. Gaining engagement of and transferring learning to the wider staff team was challenging, with benefits of DCM largely limited to the mappers themselves, rather than realised at a care home level; and 3) Sustaining DCM - This required a perception of DCM as beneficial, allocation of adequate resources and support for the process which was often not able to be provided, for the mapper role to fit with the staff member’s usual duties and for DCM to fit with the home’s ethos and future plans for care. Conclusions Many care homes may not have staff with the requisite skills to lead practice change using DCM, or the requisite staffing, resources or leadership support required for sustainable implementation. Adaptations to the DCM tool, process and training may be required to reduce its complexity and burden and increase chances of implementation success. Alternatively, models of implementation not reliant on care home staff may be required.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabella Bablok ◽  
◽  
Harald Binder ◽  
Dominikus Stelzer ◽  
Klaus Kaier ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Most people with dementia (PwD) are cared for at home, with general practitioners (GPs) playing a key part in the treatment. However, primary dementia care suffers from a number of shortcomings: Often, diagnoses are made too late and therapies by GPs do not follow the guidelines. In cases of acute crises, PwD are too often admitted to hospital with adverse effects on the further course of the disease. The aim of this study is to implement and evaluate a new GP-based, complex dementia care model, DemStepCare. DemStepCare aims to ensure demand-oriented, stepped care for PwD and their caregivers. Methods/design In a cluster randomized controlled trial, the care of PwD receiving a complex intervention, where the GP is supported by a multi-professional team, is compared to (slightly expanded) usual care. GPs are clustered by GP practice, with 120 GP practices participating in total. GP practices are randomized to an intervention or a control group. 800 PwD are to be included per group. Recruitment takes place in Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany. In addition, a second control group with at least 800 PwD will be formed using aggregated routine data from German health insurance companies. The intervention comprises the training of GPs, case management including repeated risk assessment of the patients’ care situation, the demand-oriented service of an outpatient clinic, an electronic case record, external medication analyses and a link to regional support services. The primary aims of the intervention are to positively influence the quality of life for PwD, to reduce the caregivers’ burden, and to reduce the days spent in hospital. Secondary endpoints address medication adequacy and GPs’ attitudes and sensitivity towards dementia, among others. Discussion The GP-based dementia care model DemStepCare is intended to combine a number of promising interventions to provide a complex, stepped intervention that follows the individual needs of PwD and their caregivers. Its effectiveness and feasibility will be assessed in a formative and a summative evaluation. Trial registration German Register of Clinical Trials (Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien, DRKS), DRKS00023560. Registered 13 November 2020 - Retrospectively registered. HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00023560.


2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (6) ◽  
pp. 114-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Андрей Ивченко ◽  
Andrey Ivchenko ◽  
Андрей Шведов ◽  
Andrey Shvedov ◽  
Олег Ивченко ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document