BackgroundAccording to the principles of Reablement, home care services are meant to be goal-oriented, holistic and person-centred taking into account the capabilities and opportunities of older adults. However, home care services traditionally focus on doing things for older adults rather than with them. To implement Reablement in practice, the ‘Stay Active at Home’ programme was developed. It is assumed that the programme leads to a reduction in sedentary behaviour in older adults and consequently more cost-effective outcomes in terms of their health and wellbeing. However, this has yet to be proven.Methods/ designA two-group cluster randomised controlled trial with 12 months follow-up will be conducted. Ten nursing teams will be selected, pre-stratified on working area and randomised into an intervention group (‘Stay Active at Home’) or control group (no training). All nurses of the participating teams are eligible to participate in the study. Older adults and, if applicable, their domestic support workers (DSWs) will be allocated to the intervention or control group as well, based on the allocation of the nursing team. Older adults are eligible to participate, if they: 1) receive homecare services by the selected teams; and 2) are 65 years or older. Older adults will be excluded if they: 1) are terminally ill or bedbound; 2) have serious cognitive or psychological problems; or 3) are unable to communicate in Dutch. DSWs are eligible to participate if they provide services to clients who fulfil the eligibility criteria for older adults. The study consists of an effect evaluation (primary outcome: sedentary behaviour in older adults), an economic evaluation and a process evaluation. Data for the effect and economic evaluation will be collected at baseline and 6 and/or 12 months after baseline using performance-based and self-reported measures. In addition, data from client records will be extracted. A mixed-methods design will be applied for the process evaluation, collecting data of older adults and professionals throughout the study period.DiscussionThis study will result in evidence about the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and feasibility of the ‘Stay Active at Home’ programme.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03293303, registered on 20 September 2017.

Background Many community-dwelling older adults experience limitations in (instrumental) activities of daily living, resulting in the need for homecare services. Whereas services should ideally aim at maintaining independence, homecare staff often take over activities, thereby undermining older adults’ self-care skills and jeopardizing their ability to continue living at home. Reablement is an innovative care approach aimed at optimizing independence. The reablement training program ‘Stay Active at Home’ for homecare staff was designed to support the implementation of reablement in the delivery of homecare services. This study evaluated the implementation, mechanisms of impact and context of the program. Methods We conducted a process evaluation alongside a 12-month cluster randomized controlled trial, using an embedded mixed-methods design. One hundred fifty-four homecare staff members (23 nurses, 34 nurse assistants, 8 nurse aides and 89 domestic workers) from five working areas received the program. Data on the implementation (reach, dose, fidelity, adaptations and acceptability), possible mechanisms of impact (homecare staff's knowledge, attitude, skills and support) and context were collected using logbooks, registration forms, checklists, log data and focus group interviews with homecare staff (n = 23) and program trainers (n = 4). Results The program was largely implemented as intended. Homecare staff's average compliance to the program meetings was 73.4%; staff members accepted the program, and particularly valued its practical elements and team approach. They experienced positive changes in their knowledge, attitude and skills about reablement, and perceived social and organizational support from colleagues and team managers to implement reablement. However, the extent to which homecare staff implemented reablement in practice, varied. Perceived facilitators included digital care plans, the organization’s lump sum funding and newly referred clients. Perceived barriers included resistance to change from clients or their social network, complex care situations, time pressure and staff shortages. Conclusions The program was feasible to implement in the Dutch homecare setting, and was perceived as useful in daily practice. Nevertheless, integrating reablement into homecare staff's working practices remained challenging due to various personal and contextual factors. Future implementation of the program may benefit from minor program adaptations and a more stimulating work environment. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier NCT03293303). Registered 26 September 2017.

Background/Objectives: Homecare staff often take over activities instead of "doing activities with" clients, thereby hampering clients from remaining active in daily life. Training and supporting staff to integrate reablement into their working practices may reduce clients' sedentary behavior and improve their independence. This study evaluated the effectiveness of the "Stay Active at Home" (SAaH) reablement training program for homecare staff on older homecare clients' sedentary behavior. Design: Cluster randomized controlled trial (c-RCT). Setting: Dutch homecare (10 nursing teams comprising a total of 313 staff members). Participants: 264 clients (aged ≥65 years).Intervention: SAaH seeks to equip staff with knowledge, attitude, and skills on reablement, and to provide social and organizational support to implement reablement in homecare practice. SAaH consists of program meetings, practical assignments, and weekly newsletters over a 9-month period. The control group received no additional training and delivered care as usual.Measurements: Sedentary behavior (primary outcome) was measured using tri-axial wrist-worn accelerometers. Secondary outcomes included daily functioning (GARS), physical functioning (SPPB), psychological functioning (PHQ-9), and falls. Data were collected at baseline and at 12 months; data on falls were also collected at 6 months. Intention-to-treat analyses using mixed-effects linear and logistic regression were performed. Results: We found no statistically significant differences between the study groups for sedentary time expressed as daily minutes (adjusted mean difference: β 18.5 (95% confidence interval [CI] À22.4, 59.3), p = 0.374) and as

Objective: Investigate protein intake patterns over the day and their association with total protein intake in older adults. Design: Cross-sectional study utilising the dietary data collected through two non-consecutive, dietary record-assisted 24-h recalls. Days with low protein intake (n 290) were defined using the RDA (<0·8 g protein/kg adjusted BW/d). For each day, the amount and proportion of protein ingested at every hour of the day and during morning, mid-day and evening hours was calculated. Amounts and proportions were compared between low and high protein intake days and related to total protein intake and risk of low protein intake. Setting: Community. Participants: 739 Dutch community-dwelling adults ≥70 years. Results: The mean protein intake was 76·3 (sd 0·7) g/d. At each hour of the day, the amount of protein ingested was higher on days with a high protein intake than on days with a low protein intake and associated with a higher total protein intake. The proportion of protein ingested during morning hours was higher (22 v. 17 %, P < 0·0001) on days with a low protein intake, and a higher proportion of protein ingested during morning hours was associated with a lower total protein intake (P < 0·0001) and a higher odds of low protein intake (OR 1·04, 95 % CI 1·03, 1·06). For the proportion of protein intake during mid-day or evening hours, opposite but weaker associations were found. Conclusions: In this sample, timing of protein intake was associated with total protein intake. Additional studies need to clarify the importance of these findings to optimise protein intake.

Background The Nurses in the Lead (NitL) programme consists of a systematic approach and training to 1) empower community nurses in implementing evidence, targeted at encouraging functional activities of older adults, and 2) train community nurses in enabling team members to change their practice. This article aims to describe the process evaluation of NitL. Methods A mixed-methods formative process evaluation with a predominantly qualitative approach was conducted. Qualitative data were collected by interviews with community nurses (n = 7), focus groups with team members (n = 31), and reviewing seven implementation plans and 28 patient records. Quantitative data were collected among community nurses and team members (N = 90) using a questionnaire to assess barriers in encouraging functional activities and attendance lists. Data analysis was carried out through descriptive statistics and content analysis. Results NitL was largely executed according to plan. Points of attention were the use and value of the background theory within the training, completion of implementation plans, and reporting in patient records by community nurses. Inhibiting factors for showing leadership and encouraging functional activities were a lack of time and a high complexity of care; facilitating factors were structure and clear communication within teams. Nurses considered the systematic approach useful and the training educational for their role. Most team members considered NitL practical and were satisfied with the coaching provided by community nurses. To optimise NitL, community nurses recommended providing the training first and extending the training. The team members recommended continuing clinical lessons, which were an implementation strategy from the community nurses. Conclusions NitL was largely executed as planned, and appears worthy of further application in community care practice. However, adaptations are recommended to make NitL more promising in practice in empowering community nurse leadership in implementing evidence.