Background
Dementia affects a large proportion of society and places a significant burden on older people and healthcare systems internationally. Managing symptoms at the end of life for people with dementia is complex. Participatory action research can offer an approach that helps to encourage implementation of evidence‐based practices in long‐term care settings.
Methods
Three evidence‐based guidance documents (pain assessment and management, medication management, nutrition and hydration management) were introduced in three long‐term care settings for older people. Data generated from work‐based learning groups were analysed using a critical hermeneutic approach to explore the use of participatory action research to support the implementation of guidance documents in these settings.
Results
Engagement and Facilitation emerged as key factors which both enabled and hindered the PAR processes at each study site.
Conclusions
This study adds to the body of knowledge that emphasises the value of participatory action research in enabling practice change. It further identifies key practice development approaches that are necessary to enable a PAR approach to occur in care settings for older people with dementia. The study highlights the need to ensure that dedicated attention is paid to strategies that facilitate key transformations in clinical practice.
BackgroundPoor diets lead to negative health outcomes, including increased risk of noncommunicable diseases. Food systems, most notably agriculture, contribute to greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE) that lead to climate change. Meat consumption plays a role in both health and environmental burden. Consumption of meat alternatives may reduce these harms. The aim was to compare meat products and their plant‐based alternatives on nutritional parameters, GHGE and price to examine if it is feasible and beneficial for policymakers and health professionals to recommend meat alternatives.MethodsData on nutritional information and cost for 99 selected products were collected from five UK supermarkets. Estimates for GHGEs for 97 of these products were found through secondary articles. Median values for nutritional value, GHGE (kgCO2e) and price per 100 g were calculated to allow comparisons between meat products and their alternatives. Mann–Whitney U tests were used to look for significant differences for each nutrient, emissions and price.ResultsMeat alternatives contained significantly more fibre and sugar and were significantly higher in price compared to the equivalent meat products. Meat alternatives had a significantly lower number of calories, saturated fat, protein and kgCO2e than meat products. There was no significant difference in the amount of salt between meat and meat alternatives.ConclusionsOverall, this paper found that meat alternatives are likely to be better for health according to most parameters, while also being more environmentally friendly, with lower GHGEs. However, the higher price of these products may be a barrier to switching to meat alternatives for the poorest in society.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.