Dataset Information

Achieving Quality and Effectiveness in Dementia Using Crisis Teams (AQUEDUCT): a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of a Resource Kit.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Improving care at home for people with dementia is a core policy goal in the dementia strategies of many European countries. A challenge to effective home support is the occurrence of crises in the care of people with dementia which arise from changes in their health and social circumstances. Improving the management of these crises may prevent hospital admissions and facilitate better and longer care at home. This trial is part of a National Institute for Health Research funded programme, AQUEDUCT, which aims to improve the quality and effectiveness of teams working to manage crises in dementia.

Methods/design

It is a pragmatic randomised controlled trial of an online Resource Kit to enhance practice in teams managing crises in dementia care. Thirty teams managing mental health crises in dementia in community settings will be randomised between the Resource Kit intervention and treatment as usual. The primary outcome measure is psychiatric admissions to hospital for people with dementia in the teams' catchment area recorded 6 months after randomisation. Other outcomes include quality of life measures for people with dementia and their carers, practitioner impact measures, acute hospital admissions and costs. To enhance understanding of the Resource Kit intervention, qualitative work will explore staff, patient and carers' experience.

Discussion

The Resource Kit intervention reflects current policy to enable home-based care for people with dementia by addressing the management of crises which threaten the viability of care at home. It is based upon a model of best practice for managing crises in dementia designed to enhance the quality of care, developed in partnership with people with dementia, carers and practitioners. If the Resource Kit is shown to be clinically and cost-effective in this study, this will enhance the probability of its incorporation into mainstream practice.

Trial registration

ISRCTN 42855694 ; Registered on 04/03/2021; Protocol number: 127686/2020v9; Research Ethics Committee, 09/03/2021, Ref 21/WM/0004; IRAS ID: 289982.

SUBMITTER: Coleston-Shields DM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8764492 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTeams working in the community to manage crisis in dementia currently exist, but with widely varying models of practice, it is difficult to determine the effectiveness of such teams.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to develop a "best practice model" for dementia services managing crisis, as well as a set of resources to help teams implement this model to measure and improve practice delivery. These will be the best practice tool and toolkit to be utilized by teams to improve the effectiveness of crisis teams working with older people with dementia and their caregivers. This paper describes the protocol for a prospective study using qualitative methods to establish an understanding of the current practice to develop a "best practice model."MethodsParticipants (people with dementia, caregivers, staff members, and stakeholders) from a variety of geographical areas, with a broad experience of crisis and noncrisis work, will be purposively selected to participate in qualitative approaches including interviews, focus groups, a consensus workshop, and development and field testing of both the best practice tool and toolkit.ResultsData were collected between October 2016 and August 2018. Thematic analysis will be utilized to establish the current working of teams managing crisis in dementia in order to draw together elements of the best practice.ConclusionsThis is the first study to systematically explore the requirements needed to fulfill effective and appropriate home management for people with dementia and their caregivers at the time of mental health crisis, as delivered by teams managing crisis in dementia. This systematic approach to development will support greater acceptability and validity of the best practice tool and toolkit and lay the foundation for a large scale trial with teams managing crisis in dementia across England to investigate the effects on practice and impact on service provision, as well as the associated experiences of people with dementia and their caregivers.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR1-10.2196/14781.

Project description:Theory:Individuals have different qualities, levels of willingness, and degrees of engagement for working in teams. This behaviour is termed 'Collective Orientation' (CO). Collective orientation can be trained and has a positive influence on team processes. Here, we investigated the effect of a simulator-based, Crisis Resource Management team training upon the participants' CO. Hypotheses:We hypothesized (1) the scales of CO and Presence for lab-based microworld research (PLBMR) are applicable to the German anaesthesia teams, (2) the CO can be influenced by means of simulation training, (3) the training effect is dependent on sex and/or profession, and (4) the change of CO depends on the perceived presence of the participants in the scenario. Method:In a pre-post study, 66 nurses and doctors from various anaesthetic departments took part in a 1-day training course to improve non-technical skills. The primary outcome was the mean difference between the CO measured (via questionnaires) immediately before (T1) and after (T2) training. The change was then tested for dependence upon other variables, such as sex, professional group, and immersion into the simulation scenarios. Results:Collective orientation improved significantly after training (mean difference: 0.2; P?<?.001; dz?=?0.53). Considering the subscales, affiliation increased significantly (P?<?.001; dz?=?0.59), whereas dominance remained unchanged. Furthermore, no correlation was found regarding sex, professional group, or immersion into the simulation scenarios. Conclusions:Our study demonstrated that simulation-based training improves the participants' COs, primarily by increasing affiliation. Subjective scenario reality did not significantly influence this. Nonetheless, it remains unclear as to what factors categorically resulted in this benefit. The shared experience in the course by all team members might trigger the effects. However, further studies are needed to identify the modifiable factors that can improve teamwork attitudes.

Project description:BackgroundThe integration of mental health and social services for people diagnosed with severe mental illness (SMI) has been a key aspect of attempts to reform mental health services in the UK and aims to minimise user and carer distress and confusion arising from service discontinuities. Community mental health teams (CMHTs) are a key component of UK policy for integrated service delivery, but implementing this policy has raised considerable organisational challenges. The aim of this study was to identify and explore facilitators and barriers perceived to influence continuity of care by health and social care professionals working in and closely associated with CMHTs.MethodsThis study employed a survey design utilising in-depth, semi-structured interviews with a proportionate, random sample of 113 health and social care professionals and representatives of voluntary organisations. Participants worked in two NHS Mental Health Trusts in greater London within eight adult CMHTs and their associated acute in-patient wards, six local general practices, and two voluntary organisations.ResultsTeam leadership, decision making, and experiences of teamwork support were facilitators for cross boundary and team continuity; face-to-face communication between teams, managers, general practitioners, and the voluntary sector were facilitators for information continuity. Relational, personal, and longitudinal continuity were facilitated in some local areas by workforce stability. Barriers for cross boundary and team continuity were specific leadership styles and models of decision making, blurred professional role boundaries, generic working, and lack of training for role development. Barriers for relational, personal, and longitudinal continuity were created by inadequate staffing levels, high caseloads, and administrative duties that could limit time spent with users. Incompatibility of information technology systems hindered information continuity. Flexible continuity was challenged by the increasingly complex needs of service users.ConclusionsSubstantive challenges exist in harnessing the benefits of integrated CMHT working to deliver continuity of care. Team support should be prioritised in terms of IT provision linked to a review of current models of administrative support. Investment in education and training for role development, leadership, workforce retention, and skills to meet service users' complex needs are recommended.

Project description:BackgroundThe Kaiser Permanente model of integrated health delivery is highly regarded for high-quality and efficient health care. Efforts to reproduce Kaiser's success have mostly failed. One factor that has received little attention and that could explain Kaiser's advantage is its commitment to and investment in nursing as a key component of organizational culture and patient-centered care.PurposeThe aim of this study was to investigate the role of Kaiser's nursing organization in promoting quality of care.MethodologyThis was a cross-sectional analysis of linked secondary data from multiple sources, including a detailed survey of nurses, for 564 adult, general acute care hospitals from California, Florida, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey in 2006-2007. We used logistic regression models to examine whether patient (mortality and failure-to-rescue) and nurse (burnout, job satisfaction, and intent-to-leave) outcomes in Kaiser hospitals were better than in non-Kaiser hospitals. We then assessed whether differences in nursing explained outcomes differences between Kaiser and other hospitals. Finally, we examined whether Kaiser hospitals compared favorably with hospitals known for having excellent nurse work environments-Magnet hospitals.FindingsPatient and nurse outcomes in Kaiser hospitals were significantly better compared with non-Magnet hospitals. Kaiser hospitals had significantly better nurse work environments, staffing levels, and more nurses with bachelor's degrees. Differences in nursing explained a significant proportion of the Kaiser outcomes advantage. Kaiser hospital outcomes were comparable with Magnet hospitals, where better outcomes have been largely explained by differences in nursing.ImplicationsAn important element in Kaiser's success is its investment in professional nursing, which may not be evident to systems seeking to achieve Kaiser's advantage. Our results suggest that a possible strategy for achieving outcomes like Kaiser may be for hospitals to consider Magnet designation, a proven and cost-effective strategy to improve process of care through investments in nursing.