Dataset Information

Effect of person-centred care on antipsychotic drug use in nursing homes (EPCentCare): a cluster-randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:antipsychotic drugs are regularly prescribed as first-line treatment for neuropsychiatric symptoms in persons with dementia although guidelines clearly prioritise non-pharmacological interventions. OBJECTIVE:we investigated a person-centred care approach, which has been successfully evaluated in nursing homes in the UK, and adapted it to German conditions. DESIGN:a 2-armed 12-month cluster-randomised controlled trial. SETTING:nursing homes in East, North and West Germany. METHODS:all prescribing physicians from both study arms received medication reviews for individual patients and were offered access to 2 h of continuing medical education. Nursing homes in the intervention group received educational interventions on person-centred care and a continuous supervision programme. Primary outcome: proportion of residents receiving at least one antipsychotic prescription after 12 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes: quality of life, agitated behaviour, falls and fall-related medical attention, a health economics evaluation and a process evaluation. RESULTS:the study was conducted in 37 nursing homes with n = 1,153 residents (intervention group: n = 493; control group: n = 660). The proportion of residents with at least one antipsychotic medication changed after 12 months from 44.6% to 44.8% in the intervention group and from 39.8 to 33.3% in the control group. After 12 months, the difference in the prevalence was 11.4% between the intervention and control groups (95% confidence interval: 0.9-21.9; P = 0.033); odds ratio: 1.621 (95% confidence interval: 1.038-2.532). CONCLUSIONS:the implementation of a proven person-centred care approach adapted to national conditions did not reduce antipsychotic prescriptions in German nursing homes. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02295462.

SUBMITTER: Richter C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6503937 | biostudies-literature | 2019 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of person-centred care on antipsychotic drug use in nursing homes (EPCentCare): a cluster-randomised controlled trial.

Richter Christin C Berg Almuth A Langner Henriette H Meyer Gabriele G Köpke Sascha S Balzer Katrin K Wolschon Eva-Maria EM Silies Katharina K Sönnichsen Andreas A Löscher Susanne S Haastert Burkhard B Icks Andrea A Wolf Ursula U Fleischer Steffen S

Age and ageing 20190501 3

<h4>Background</h4>antipsychotic drugs are regularly prescribed as first-line treatment for neuropsychiatric symptoms in persons with dementia although guidelines clearly prioritise non-pharmacological interventions.<h4>Objective</h4>we investigated a person-centred care approach, which has been successfully evaluated in nursing homes in the UK, and adapted it to German conditions.<h4>Design</h4>a 2-armed 12-month cluster-randomised controlled trial.<h4>Setting</h4>nursing homes in East, North a ...[more]

PMID: 30806453

Similar Datasets

Project description:The majority of nursing home residents with dementia experience behavioural and psychological symptoms like apathy, agitation, and anxiety. According to analyses of prescription prevalence in Germany, antipsychotic drugs are regularly prescribed as first-line treatment of neuropsychiatric symptoms in persons with dementia, although guidelines clearly prioritise non-pharmacological interventions. Frequently, antipsychotic drugs are prescribed for inappropriate reasons and for too long without regular reviewing. The use of antipsychotics is associated with adverse events like increased risk of falling, stroke, and mortality. The aim of the study is to investigate whether a person-centred care approach, successfully evaluated in nursing homes in the United Kingdom, can be implemented in German nursing homes and, in comparison with a control group, can result in a clinically relevant reduction of the proportion of residents with antipsychotic prescriptions.The study is a cluster-randomised controlled trial comparing an intervention group (two-day initial training on person-centred care and ongoing training and support programme) with a control group. Both study groups will receive, as optimised usual care, a medication review by an experienced psychiatrist/geriatrician providing feedback to the prescribing physician. Overall, 36 nursing homes in East, North, and West Germany will be randomised. The primary outcome is the proportion of residents receiving at least one antipsychotic prescription (long-term medication) after 12 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes are residents' quality of life, agitated behaviour, as well as safety parameters like falls and fall-related medical attention. A health economic evaluation and a process evaluation will be performed alongside the study.To improve care, a reduction of the current high prescription rate of antipsychotics in nursing homes by the intervention programme is expected.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02295462.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Agitation is a common, challenging symptom affecting large numbers of people with dementia and impacting on quality of life (QoL). There is an urgent need for evidence-based, cost-effective psychosocial interventions to improve these outcomes, particularly in the absence of safe, effective pharmacological therapies. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a person-centred care and psychosocial intervention incorporating an antipsychotic review, WHELD, on QoL, agitation, and antipsychotic use in people with dementia living in nursing homes, and to determine its cost. METHODS AND FINDINGS:This was a randomised controlled cluster trial conducted between 1 January 2013 and 30 September 2015 that compared the WHELD intervention with treatment as usual (TAU) in people with dementia living in 69 UK nursing homes, using an intention to treat analysis. All nursing homes allocated to the intervention received staff training in person-centred care and social interaction and education regarding antipsychotic medications (antipsychotic review), followed by ongoing delivery through a care staff champion model. The primary outcome measure was QoL (DEMQOL-Proxy). Secondary outcomes were agitation (Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory [CMAI]), neuropsychiatric symptoms (Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home Version [NPI-NH]), antipsychotic use, global deterioration (Clinical Dementia Rating), mood (Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia), unmet needs (Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly), mortality, quality of interactions (Quality of Interactions Scale [QUIS]), pain (Abbey Pain Scale), and cost. Costs were calculated using cost function figures compared with usual costs. In all, 847 people were randomised to WHELD or TAU, of whom 553 completed the 9-month randomised controlled trial. The intervention conferred a statistically significant improvement in QoL (DEMQOL-Proxy Z score 2.82, p = 0.0042; mean difference 2.54, SEM 0.88; 95% CI 0.81, 4.28; Cohen's D effect size 0.24). There were also statistically significant benefits in agitation (CMAI Z score 2.68, p = 0.0076; mean difference 4.27, SEM 1.59; 95% CI -7.39, -1.15; Cohen's D 0.23) and overall neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPI-NH Z score 3.52, p < 0.001; mean difference 4.55, SEM 1.28; 95% CI -7.07,-2.02; Cohen's D 0.30). Benefits were greatest in people with moderately severe dementia. There was a statistically significant benefit in positive care interactions as measured by QUIS (19.7% increase, SEM 8.94; 95% CI 2.12, 37.16, p = 0.03; Cohen's D 0.55). There were no statistically significant differences between WHELD and TAU for the other outcomes. A sensitivity analysis using a pre-specified imputation model confirmed statistically significant benefits in DEMQOL-Proxy, CMAI, and NPI-NH outcomes with the WHELD intervention. Antipsychotic drug use was at a low stable level in both treatment groups, and the intervention did not reduce use. The WHELD intervention reduced cost compared to TAU, and the benefits achieved were therefore associated with a cost saving. The main limitation was that antipsychotic review was based on augmenting processes within care homes to trigger medical review and did not in this study involve proactive primary care education. An additional limitation was the inherent challenge of assessing QoL in this patient group. CONCLUSIONS:These findings suggest that the WHELD intervention confers benefits in terms of QoL, agitation, and neuropsychiatric symptoms, albeit with relatively small effect sizes, as well as cost saving in a model that can readily be implemented in nursing homes. Future work should consider how to facilitate sustainability of the intervention in this setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN62237498.

Project description:BackgroundPerson-centred care (PCC) has been suggested as the preferred model of dementia care in all settings. The EPCentCare study showed that an adapted PCC approach was difficult to implement and had no effect on prescription of antipsychotics in nursing home residents in Germany. This paper reports the qualitative process evaluation to identify facilitators and barriers of the implementation of PCC in German nursing homes from the perspective of participating practice development champions.MethodsFive individual and 14 group interviews were conducted with 66 participants (staff and managers) from 18 nursing homes. The analysis was based on inductive coding to identify factors influencing the PCC implementation process. Identified factors were systematised and structured by mapping them to the four constructs (coherence, cognitive participation, collective action, reflexive monitoring) of the Normalization Process Theory (NPT) as a framework that explains implementation processes.ResultsFacilitating implementation factors included among others broadening of the care perspective (coherence), tolerance development within the care team regarding challenging behaviour (cognitive participation), testing new approaches to solutions as a multi-professional team (collective action), and perception of effects of PCC measures (reflexive monitoring). Among the facilitating factors reported in all the NPT constructs, thus affecting the entire implementation process, were the involvement of relatives, multi-professional teamwork and effective collaboration with physicians. Barriers implied uncertainties about the implementation and expectation of a higher workload (coherence), concerns about the feasibility of PCC implementation in terms of human resources (cognitive participation), lack of a person-centred attitude by colleagues or the institution (collective action), and doubts about the effects of PCC (reflexive monitoring). Barriers influencing the entire implementation process comprised insufficient time resources, lack of support, lack of involvement of the multi-professional team, and difficulties regarding communication with the attending physicians.ConclusionsThe findings provide a comprehensive and detailed overview of facilitators and barriers structured along the implementation process. Thus, our findings may assist both researchers and clinicians to develop and reflect more efficiently on PCC implementation processes in nursing homes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02295462 ; November 20, 2014.

Project description:Objective: Determine the accuracy of nursing home self-reported antipsychotic prescribing before and after implementation of a Medicare campaign to reduce use.Methods: Quasi-experimental study comparing trends in self-reported antipsychotic prescribing relative to claims-based prescribing. Setting is a nationwide sample of 11,912 facilities, 2011-2013. Participants are long-stay nursing home residents (n?=?586,281) with prescribing data in Medicare Minimum Data Set 3.0 and Medicare Part D claims database. Verified with a pharmacy dispensing database. Main outcomes are the discrepancies in quarterly prevalence of antipsychotic prescribing between nursing home self-reports and claims data and the characteristics of facilities and residents where discrepancies were identified.Results: Nursing homes underreport their antipsychotic prescribing levels, on average, by 1 percentage point per quarter relative to Medicare Part D claims (0.013, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.012-0.015; p<.001). After the Medicare campaign, the underreporting gap increased by another half a percentage point (0.004, 95% CI .003-.005; p = .012). Nursing home residents with dementia, Alzheimer's disease or bipolar disorders were at the highest risk for underreported antipsychotic prescribing before the campaign (Adjusted Odds ratio (AOR) 1.385, 95% CI: 1.330-1.444; AOR 1.234, 95% CI: 1.172-1.300; AOR 1.574, 95% CI: 1.444-1.716, respectively) and afterwards. After the launch of the Medicare campaign, underreported antipsychotic prescribing occurred most in for-profit nursing homes (AOR 1.088, 95% CI: 1.005-1.178) and facilities in the US South (AOR 1.262, 95% CI: 1.145-1.391). Agreement was high between claims and dispensing data (99.7%).Conclusion: Nursing homes did not identify up to 6,000 residents per calendar quarter as having received antipsychotics despite these prescriptions being paid by Medicare and dispensed by a pharmacy. Nursing home rates of antipsychotic prescribing from self-reported data may be biased.

Project description:BackgroundDementia-care mapping (DCM) is a cyclic intervention aiming at reducing neuropsychiatric symptoms in people with dementia in nursing homes. Alongside an 18-month cluster-randomized controlled trial in which we studied the effectiveness of DCM on residents and staff outcomes, we investigated differences in costs of care between DCM and usual care in nursing homes.MethodsDementia special care units were randomly assigned to DCM or usual care. Nurses from the intervention care homes received DCM training, a DCM organizational briefing day and conducted the 4-months DCM-intervention twice during the study. A single DCM cycle consists of observation, feedback to the staff, and action plans for the residents. We measured costs related to health care consumption, falls and psychotropic drug use at the resident level and absenteeism at the staff level. Data were extracted from resident files and the nursing home records. Prizes were determined using the Dutch manual of health care cost and the cost prices delivered by a pharmacy and a nursing home. Total costs were evaluated by means of linear mixed-effect models for longitudinal data, with the unit as a random effect to correct for dependencies within units.Results34 units from 11 nursing homes, including 318 residents and 376 nursing staff members participated in the cost analyses. Analyses showed no difference in total costs. However certain changes within costs could be noticed. The intervention group showed lower costs associated with outpatient hospital appointments over time (p = 0.05) than the control group. In both groups, the number of falls, costs associated with the elderly-care physician and nurse practitioner increased equally during the study (p<0.02).ConclusionsDCM is a cost-neutral intervention. It effectively reduces outpatient hospital appointments compared to usual care. Other considerations than costs, such as nursing homes' preferences, may determine whether they adopt the DCM method.Trial registrationDutch Trials Registry NTR2314.

Project description:IntroductionAntipsychotics are used for managing behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) but have risks. Anticholinergics can worsen outcomes in dementia. The Improving Antipsychotic Appropriateness in Dementia Patients educational program (IA-ADAPT) and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Partnership to Improve Dementia Care (CMS Partnership) promote improved care for BPSD. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of these programs on medication use and BPSD among nursing home residents.MethodsThis quasi-experimental longitudinal study used Medicare and assessment data for Iowa nursing home residents from April 2011 to December 2012. Residents were required to be eligible for six continuous months for inclusion. Antipsychotic use and anticholinergic use were evaluated on a monthly basis, and changes in BPSD were tracked using assessment data. Results are presented as odds ratios (ORs) per month after exposure to the IA-ADAPT or the start of the CMS Partnership.ResultsOf 426 eligible Iowa nursing homes, 114 were exposed to the IA-ADAPT in 2012. Nursing home exposure to the IA-ADAPT was associated with reduced antipsychotic use (OR [95% CI] = 0.92 [0.89-0.95]) and anticholinergic use (OR [95% CI] = 0.95 [0.92-0.98]), reduced use of excessive antipsychotic doses per CMS guidance (OR [95% CI] = 0.80 [0.75-0.86]), increased odds of a potentially appropriate indication among antipsychotic users (OR [95% CI] = 1.04 [1.00-1.09]), and decreased documentation of verbal aggression (OR [95% CI] = 0.96 [0.94-0.99]). Facilities with two or more IA-ADAPT exposures had greater reductions in antipsychotic and anticholinergic use than those with only one. The CMS Partnership was associated with reduced antipsychotic use (OR [95% CI] = 0.96 [0.94-0.98]) and decreased documentation of any measured BPSD (OR [95% CI] = 0.98 [0.97-0.99]) as well as delirium specifically (OR [95% CI] = 0.98 [0.96-0.99]).DiscussionThis study suggests that the IA-ADAPT and the CMS Partnership improved medication use with no adverse impact on BPSD.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To explore how nurses in hospitals enact person-centred fundamental care delivery. BACKGROUND:Effective person-centred care is at the heart of fundamental nursing care, but it is deemed to be challenging in acute health care as there is a strong biomedical focus and most nurses are not trained in person-centred fundamental care delivery. We therefore need to know if and how nurses currently incorporate a person-centred approach during fundamental care. DESIGN:Focused ethnography approach. METHODS:Observations of 30 nurses on three different wards in two Dutch hospitals during their morning shift. Data were collected through passive observations and analysed using framework analysis based on the fundamentals of care framework. The COREQ guideline was used for reporting. RESULTS:Some nurses successfully integrate physical, psychosocial and relational elements of care in patient interactions. However, most nurses were observed to be mainly focused on physical care and did not take the time at their patients' bedside to care for their psychosocial and relational needs. Many had a task-focused way of working and communicating, seldom incorporating patients' needs and experiences or discussing care planning, and often disturbing each other. CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrates that although some nurses manage to do so, person-centred fundamental care delivery remains a challenge in hospitals, as most nurses have a task-focused approach and therefore do not manage to integrate the physical, relational and physical elements of care. For further improvement, attention needs to be paid to integrated fundamental care and clinical reasoning skills. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE:Although most nurses have a compassionate approach, this study shows that nurses do not incorporate psychosocial care or encourage patient participation when helping patients with their physical fundamental care needs, even though there seems to be sufficient opportunity for them to do so.

Project description:AIM:The aims of this literature review were to better understand the current literature about person-centred care (PCC) and identify a clear definition of the term PCC relevant to nursing practice. METHOD/DATA SOURCES:An integrative literature review was undertaken using The Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Medline, Scopus and Pubmed databases. The limitations were English language, full text articles published between 1998 and 2018 within Australian, New Zealand, Canada, USA, Europe, Ireland and UK were included. The international context off PCC is then specifically related to the Australian context. REVIEW METHODS:The review adopted a thematic analysis to categorise and summarise themes with reference to the concept of PCC. The review process also adhered to the Preferred Reporting System for Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) and applied the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tools to ensure the quality of the papers included for deeper analysis. RESULTS:While definitions of PCC do exist, there is no universally used definition within the nursing profession. This review has found three core themes which contribute to how PCC is understood and practiced, these are People, Practice and Power. This review uncovered a malalignment between the concept of PCC and the operationalisation of the term; this misalignment was discovered at both the practice level, and at the micro, meso and micro levels of the healthcare service. CONCLUSION:The concept of PCC is well known to nurses, yet ill-defined and operationalised into practice. PCC is potentially hindered by its apparent rhetorical nature, and further investigation of how PCC is valued and operationalised through its measurement and reported outcomes is needed. Investigation of the literature found many definitions of PCC, but no one universally accepted and used definition. Subsequently, PCC remains conceptional in nature, leading to disparity between how it is interpreted and operationalised within the healthcare system and within nursing services.

Dataset Information

Effect of person-centred care on antipsychotic drug use in nursing homes (EPCentCare): a cluster-randomised controlled trial.

Publications

Effect of person-centred care on antipsychotic drug use in nursing homes (EPCentCare): a cluster-randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure