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.
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.
Background Despite increasing numbers of men living in isolation with dementia in the community, uptake of supportive interventions remains low. This may be because of limited availability of activities suited to men’s interests. One organisation reporting higher attendance from men is Sporting Memories, offering inclusive sports-based reminiscence and physical activities for men living with dementia. This study aimed to explore the impact of the Sporting Memories intervention on men living with dementia. Method This study was an ethnography employing techniques of participant observation, informal conversations and semi-structured interviews with group participants. Data were woven into a series of narratives using creative non-fiction, to bring life to the first-hand accounts of participants and experiences within a typical group setting. Findings The groups provided an environment for men with dementia to explore, reflect upon and reinforce their masculine identities through the subject of sport. Physical activities further facilitated this embodied demonstration for some, although this was not a feature of all sessions. Conclusions The content of Sporting Memories group sessions provides a vehicle for men to retain an important aspect of personhood. They also hold the potential to present opportunities for men to feel a sense of value by contributing to sessions in varied ways. Facilitators and volunteers require support and training to ensure this benefit is maintained.
Background Despite people living with dementia representing a significant proportion of health and social care users, until recently in the United Kingdom (UK) there were no prescribed standards for dementia education and training. This audit sought to review the extent and nature of dementia education and training offered to health and social care staff in the UK against the standards described in the 2015 Dementia Training Standards Framework, which describes the knowledge and skills required of the UK dementia workforce. Methods This audit presents national data concerning the design, delivery, target audience, length, level, content, format of training, number of staff trained and frequency of delivery within existing dementia training programmes offered to health and social care staff. The Dementia Training Standards Framework was used as a reference for respondents to describe the subjects and learning outcomes associated with their training. Results The findings are presented from 614 respondents offering 386 training packages, which indicated variations in the extent and quality of training. Many training packages addressed the subjects of ‘person-centred care’, ‘communication’, ‘interaction and behaviour in dementia care’, and ‘dementia awareness’. Few training packages addressed subjects concerning ‘pharmacological interventions in dementia care’, ‘leadership’ and ‘end of life care’. Fewer than 40% of The Dementia Training Standards Framework learning outcomes targeted to staff with regular contact with people with dementia or in leadership roles were covered by the reported packages. However, for training targeted at increasing dementia awareness more than 70% of the learning outcomes identified in The Dementia Training Standards Framework were addressed. Many training packages are not of sufficient duration to derive impact; although the majority employed delivery methods likely to be effective. Conclusions The development of new and existing training and education should take account of subjects that are currently underrepresented and ensure that training reflects the Training Standard Framework and evidence regarding best practice for delivery. Lessons regarding the limitations of training in the UK serve as a useful illustration of the challenge of implementing national dementia training standards; particularly for countries who are developing or have recently implemented national dementia strategies.
Background Up to 80% of care home residents have dementia. Ensuring this workforce is appropriately trained is of international concern. Research indicates variable impact of training on a range of resident and staff outcomes. Little is still known about the most effective approaches to the design, delivery and implementation of dementia training. This study aimed to investigate the features and contextual factors associated with an effective approach to care home staff training on dementia. Methods An embedded, collective case study was undertaken in three care home provider organisations who had responded to a national training audit. Data collected included individual or small group interviews with training leads, facilitators, staff attending training, managers, residents and their relatives. Observations of care practice were undertaken using Dementia Care Mapping. Training delivery was observed and training materials audited. A within case analysis of each site, followed by cross case analysis using convergence coding was undertaken. Results All sites provided bespoke, tailored training, delivered largely using face-to-face, interactive methods, which staff and managers indicated were valuable and effective. Self-study booklets and on-line learning where were used, were poorly completed and disliked by staff. Training was said to improve empathy, knowledge about the lived experience of dementia and the importance of considering and meeting individual needs. Opportunities to continually reflect on learning and support to implement training in practice were valued and felt to be an essential component of good training. Practice developments as a result of training included improved communication, increased activity, less task-focussed care and increased resident well-being. However, observations indicated positive well-being and engagement was not a consistent experience across all residents in all sites. Barriers to training attendance and implementation were staff time, lack of dedicated training space and challenges in gaining feedback on training and its impact. Facilitators included a supportive organisational ethos and skilled training facilitation. Conclusions Effective training is tailored to learners’, delivered face-to-face by an experienced facilitator, is interactive and is embedded within a supportive organisational culture/ethos. Further research is needed on the practical aspects of sustainable and impactful dementia training delivery and implementation in care home settings. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12877-019-1186-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
As there is currently no cure for dementia, providing psycho-social support is imperative. Counselling and psychotherapeutic interventions offer a way to provide individualised support for people with dementia and their families. However, to date, there has not been a systematic review examining the research evidence for these interventions. This review aimed to examine the following research questions: (1) Are counselling/psychotherapeutic interventions effective for people with dementia?, (2) Are counselling/psychotherapeutic interventions effective for care-givers of people with dementia? and (3) Which modes of delivery are most effective for people with dementia and care-givers of people with dementia? A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE (via PubMed), PsycINFO and CINAHL in March 2019. Keyword searches were employed with the terms ‘dement*’, ‘counsel*’, ‘psychotherapy’, ‘therap*’, ‘care’ and ‘outcome’, for the years 2000–2019. Thirty-one papers were included in the review, from seven countries. Twenty studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or adopted a quasi-experimental design. The remaining studies were qualitative or single-group repeated-measures design. The review identified variation in the counselling/psychotherapeutic approaches and mode of delivery. Most interventions adopted either a problem-solving or cognitive behavioural therapy approach. Mixed effectiveness was found on various outcomes. The importance of customised modifications for people with dementia was highlighted consistently. Understanding the dyadic relationships between people with dementia and their care-givers is essential to offering effective interventions and guidance for practitioners is needed. Information about the cognitive impairment experienced by participants with dementia was poorly reported and is essential in the development of this research area. Future studies should consider the impact of cognitive impairment in developing guidance for counselling/psychotherapeutic intervention delivery for people with dementia.
BackgroundWith 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.MethodsAn 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.ResultsInitially, 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.ConclusionsThe 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.
Background Self-harm is an important public health problem but therapeutic interventions, particularly for people who have a history of multiple repetition, are not always taken up or effective when they are. The aim of this review is to explore first-hand accounts of what helps outside therapy and identify actions and processes, which can support the reduction or cessation of self-harm. Methods A systematic review and thematic meta-synthesis of the first-person accounts of what has helped to reduce or stop self-harm reported in primary studies. Results The meta-synthesis combined 546 participant excerpts from 56 studies. Two over-arching themes were identified: (i) breaking the chain incorporated actions taken to break the link between a person’s current psychological or social state and the act of self-harm and (ii) building a new foundation for change captured actions over the longer-term, focusing on practical changes in relationships and in a person’s way of life, such as work or living arrangements. Conclusions The results emphasize the importance of interpersonal change in reducing or stopping self-harm. While interpersonal factors are acknowledged as important reasons behind self-harm, they are often under-represented in self-management advice and therapeutic interventions that focus on individual psychopathology.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.