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:BackgroundThe 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.Methods/designThe 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.DiscussionTo improve care, a reduction of the current high prescription rate of antipsychotics in nursing homes by the intervention programme is expected.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02295462.

Project description:BackgroundAgitation 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 findingsThis 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.ConclusionsThese 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 registrationISRCTN 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:IntroductionHealthcare is changing due to the ageing of the general population, complex care demands and growing attention to person-centred care. To deal with these changes and provide the best possible person-centred care, the different professionals in nursing homes should all collaborate intensively. However, most professionals work within the field of their own expertise and share very little knowledge, experiences and insights. A lack of an interprofessional learning and working culture also prevents professionals with different expertise from working and learning intensively together to achieve high-quality person-centred care. There is a gap of knowledge about how to develop such a culture. Our aim is to provide insights into what actions, in what context and to what extent can contribute to an impactful development of an interprofessional learning and working culture.Methods and analysisThe realist action research design will be applied. It consists of three iterative steps: plan, act and observe, and reflect. First, we will formulate the theory about interprofessional learning and working culture and measure this culture by means of interviews, focus groups and questionnaires. Second, we will apply the nine principles of Practice Development to coach professionals from six Dutch nursing homes to improve their interprofessional learning and working culture. Finally, we will evaluate the impact of the changed attitudes and skills on healthcare practice.Ethics and disseminationApproval for the project was given by the Hogeschool van Arnhem en Nijmegen (HAN) Research Ethics Committee, the Netherlands, registration number EACO 164.12/19. All organisations, professionals and residents/family members will be informed verbally and by letter about the study and asked for informed consent. The results will be presented in peer-reviewed scientific journals, professional journals and at symposia and conferences. The findings will be transferred to an online toolbox and e-learning modules for graduated professionals and students.

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:IntroductionMealtime is a critical daily activity to ensure nutrition, hydration, function and socialisation. Interactions between staff and residents during mealtimes are complex and dynamic processes including verbal and/or nonverbal communication that can be positive/neutral or challenging. This study examined characteristics of and relationships between person-centred and task-centred care and positive/neutral and challenging mealtime behaviours in persons with dementia.MethodsThis study was a secondary behavioural analyses of videotaped mealtime observations (n = 110) involving 42 unique staff-resident dyads (29 staff and 25 residents with dementia) in nine nursing homes. The refined Cue Utilization and Engagement in Dementia mealtime video-coding scheme was used to code videos during 2019-2020. Dependent variables representing resident mealtime behaviours included positive verbal behaviours, positive/neutral nonverbal behaviours, functional impairments (nonverbal) and resistive behaviours (verbal and nonverbal). Independent variables were staff person-centred and task-centred approaches (verbal and nonverbal). Relationships between resident mealtime behaviours and staff approaches were examined using bivariate analysis and logistic regression.ResultsStaff person-centred verbal approaches were associated with resident positive verbal behaviours (OR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.09-1.76), functional impairments (OR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.66-1.00) and resistive behaviours (OR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.18-2.31). Staff person-centred nonverbal approaches were associated with resident functional impairments (OR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.02-1.74). Staff task-centred approaches were not associated with resident positive/neutral or challenging mealtime behaviours.ConclusionThis study characterised staff approaches and resident behaviours during mealtime care and provided preliminary support on associations between staff person-centred approaches and resident positive and challenging behaviours. Person-centred mealtime care practice is recommended by focusing on support of common, challenging behaviours and reinforcement of positive behaviours with adequate consideration of individual needs and preferences.

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.

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

Tweets