A systematic review of interventions to improve acute hospital care for people with dementia

The effect of pressure injury prevention care bundles on pressure injuries in hospital patients: A complex intervention systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Numerous interventions for pressure injury prevention have been developed, including care bundles.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the effectiveness of pressure injury prevention care bundles on pressure injury prevalence, incidence, and hospital-acquired pressure injury rate in hospitalised patients.

DATA SOURCES

The Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (via PubMed), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EMBASE, Scopus, the Cochrane Library and two registries were searched (from 2009 to September 2023).

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies with a comparison group published in English after 2008 were included. Studies reporting on the frequency of pressure injuries where the number of patients was not the numerator or denominator, or where the denominator was not reported, and single subgroups of hospitalised patients were excluded. Educational programmes targeting healthcare professionals and bundles targeting specific types of pressure injuries were excluded.

PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS

Bundles with ≥3 components directed towards patients and implemented in ≥2 hospital services were included.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessments were undertaken independently by two researchers. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted. The certainty of the body of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation.

RESULTS

Nine studies (seven non-randomised with historical controls; two randomised) conducted in eight countries were included. There were four to eight bundle components; most were core, and only a few were discretionary. Various strategies were used prior to (six studies), during (five studies) and after (two studies) implementation to embed the bundles. The pooled risk ratio for pressure injury prevalence (five non-randomised studies) was 0.55 (95 % confidence intervals 0.29-1.03), and for hospital-acquired pressure injury rate (five non-randomised studies) it was 0.31 (95 % confidence intervals 0.12-0.83). All non-randomised studies were at high risk of bias, with very low certainty of evidence. In the two randomised studies, the care bundles had non-significant effects on hospital-acquired pressure injury incidence density, but data could not be pooled.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS

Whilst some studies showed decreases in pressure injuries, this evidence was very low certainty. The potential benefits of adding emerging evidence-based components to bundles should be considered. Future effectiveness studies should include contemporaneous controls and the development of a comprehensive, theory and evidence-informed implementation plan.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42023423058.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Pressure injury prevention care bundles decrease hospital-acquired pressure injuries, but the certainty of this evidence is very low.

The impact of a hospital-based special care unit on behavioural and psychological symptoms in older people living with dementia

BACKGROUND

Hospital patients with behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) are vulnerable to a range of adverse outcomes. Hospital-based Special Care Units (SCUs) are secure dementia-enabling environments providing specialised gerontological care. Due to a scarcity of research, their value remains unconfirmed.

OBJECTIVE

To compare hospital based SCU management of BPSD with standard care.

DESIGN

Single-case multiple baseline design.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

One-hundred admissions to an 8-bed SCU over 2 years in a large Australian public hospital.

METHODS

Repeated measures of BPSD severity were undertaken prospectively by specialist dementia nurses for patients admitted to a general ward (standard care) and transferred to the SCU. Demographic and other clinical data, including diagnoses, medication use, and care-related outcomes were obtained from medical records retrospectively. Analysis used multilevel models to regress BPSD scores onto care-setting outcomes, adjusting for time and other factors.

RESULTS

When receiving standard care, patients' BPSD severity was 6.8 (95% CI 6.04-7.64) points higher for aggression, 15.6 (95% CI 13.90-17.42) points higher for the neuropsychiatric inventory, and 5.8 (95% CI 5.14-6.50) points higher for non-aggressive agitation compared to SCU. Patients receiving standard care also experienced increased odds for patient-to-nurse violence (OR 2.61, 95% CI 1.67-4.09), security callouts (OR 5.39 95% CI 3.40-8.52), physical restraint (OR 17.20, 95% CI 7.94-37.25) and antipsychotic administration (OR 3.41, 95% CI 1.60-7.24).

CONCLUSION

Clinically significant reductions in BPSD and psychotropic administration were associated with SCU care relative to standard ward care. These results suggest more robust investigation of hospital SCUs, and dementia-enabling design are warranted.

Facilitators and barriers to implementing a specialized care unit for persons with cognitive impairment in an acute geriatric hospital: a process evaluation

BACKGROUND

Implementing dementia care interventions in an acute hospital poses multiple challenges. To understand factors influencing the implementation, in-depth knowledge about specific facilitators and barriers is necessary. The aim of this study was to identify facilitators and barriers to implementing an interprofessional, multicomponent intervention of a specialized unit for persons with cognitive impairment in an acute geriatric hospital.

METHODS

We conducted a process evaluation as part of a participatory action research study. For data collection, semi-structured individual interviews with fifteen professionals involved in the implementation of the specialized unit. We further conducted two focus groups with twelve professionals working on other units of the geriatric hospital. We performed a qualitative content analysis following Kuckartz's content-structuring analysis scheme.

RESULTS

We identified the following barriers to implementing the specialized unit: uncontrollable contextual changes (e.g., COVID-19 pandemic), staff turnover in key functions, high fluctuation in the nursing team, traditional work culture, entrenched structures, inflexible and efficiency-oriented processes, monoprofessional attitude, neglect of project-related communication, and fragmentation of interprofessional cooperation. An established culture of interprofessionalism, an interprofessionally composed project group, cooperation with a research partner, as well as the project groups' motivation and competence of managing change facilitated the implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation faced numerous barriers that can be described using the key constructs of the i-PARIHS framework: context, recipients, innovation, and facilitation. Overcoming these barriers requires an organizational development approach, extended project duration and increased process orientation. Furthermore, strategically planned, precise and ongoing communication towards all persons involved seems crucial. Differences between the work cultures of the professions involved deserve particular attention with regard to project-related roles and processes.

Integrating Patient Involvement Interventions within Clinical Practice: A Mixed-Methods Study of Health Care Professional Reasoning

Background. Patient involvement interventions are complex interventions that improve patient involvement in treatment and care in health care systems. Studies report several benefits of patient involvement interventions and that health care professionals are positive about using them. However, they have not been explored as a collected group of interventions throughout the continuum of care and treatment. In addition, the relationship between patient involvement interventions and the clinical reasoning process of health care professionals has not been thoroughly studied. Design. This mixed-methods study was conducted at Aarhus University Hospital in Denmark between April and November 2022 using interview data from 12 health care professionals and survey data from 420 health care professionals. Informants were medical doctors, nurses, midwives, dietitians, physiotherapists, and occupational therapists who had direct contact with patients during their daily care and treatment. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics; qualitative data were analyzed via inductive and deductive content analysis. Results. Communication and interaction were seen as overarching aspects of patient involvement, with patient involvement interventions being defined as concrete tools and methods to enhance health care professionals' explicit clinical reasoning process. Limitations. It is unclear if results are representative of all health care professionals at the hospital or only those with a positive view of patient involvement interventions. Conclusions. Patient involvement interventions are viewed as beneficial for patients and fit with the clinical reasoning of health care professionals. Clinical reasoning may be an active ingredient in the development and implementation of patient involvement interventions. Implications. In practice, health care professionals need training in person-centered communication and the ability to articulate their clinical reasoning explicitly. In research, a more in-depth understanding of the interrelations between patient involvement interventions and clinical reasoning is needed.

Highlights

Communication and interaction are the fundamental goals of patient involvement in practice, regardless of which patient involvement intervention is being used.Clinical reasoning is often an unconscious process using tacit knowledge, but the use of patient involvement interventions may be a way for health care professionals (at both individual and group levels) to become more explicit about and aware of their reflections.Clinical reasoning can be viewed as a mechanism of change in the development and implementation of patient involvement interventions.

Contextualizing the results of an integrative review on the characteristics of dementia-friendly hospitals: a workshop with professional dementia experts

BACKGROUND

To become a dementia-friendly hospital (DFH) is increasingly being discussed in health care practice, research, politics and society. In our previous integrative review, we identified six characteristics of DFHs. To thoroughly discuss and contextualize these characteristics in relation to hospitals in Germany, we involved professional dementia experts in our review process.

METHODS

At the end of our review process, we involved professional dementia experts at the 'contributing' level of the ACTIVE framework to discuss and reflect on the six DFH characteristics we identified. We conducted a group process in the form of a one-day workshop. The workshop consisted of four steps: 1. presentation of review results (input), 2. modification of DFH characteristics and rating of their relevance in smaller working groups, 3. discussion of group results in plenary and 4. questionnaire for prioritization and rating of feasibility. The data were analyzed in MAXQDA using content analysis and descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

A total of 16 professional dementia experts working in hospitals participated in the workshop. All the previously identified characteristics of a DFH were rated as relevant or very relevant for patients with dementia, their relatives and health care professionals from the professional dementia experts' perspective. They made a few modifications of the six characteristics at the level of subcategories, aspects, and descriptions. The feasibility of the characteristics in hospitals was critically discussed regarding resources, hospital structures and processes, the role of nurses, and the current care situation of people with dementia in hospitals. More than half of the subcategories of the characteristics were considered very difficult or difficult to implement by most professional dementia experts.

CONCLUSION

The involvement of professional dementia experts helped us contextualize our review findings within the German hospital setting. These results highlight the need to consider resources, funding options, influencing factors, and the current situation and culture of care provided by hospitals before implementing DFH characteristics. Beside the involvement of professional dementia experts and various health care professionals, the involvement of other stakeholders, such as people with dementia and their relatives, is necessary in future research for the development of a DFH.

Demonstrating the Value of a Standardized Cognitive Assessment Tool Through the Use of Interprofessional Rapid Safety Rounds

BACKGROUND

Understanding patients' cognitive functional status is critical to prevent adverse outcomes, such as falls and injuries. However, there is variation in nurses' proficiency in assessing patients' cognitive status, and cognitive screening tools often do not provide guidance on safety interventions to keep patients safe.

PROBLEM

Lack of appropriate cognitive screening and interventions may have contributed to increased fall rates on an acute care trauma unit.

APPROACH

A comprehensive 6-level Cognitive Pyramid, including guidance on safety interventions for each level, was developed and used during interprofessional Rapid Safety Rounds to assess patients' cognitive status.

OUTCOMES

The Cognitive Pyramid demonstrated appropriate face validity from 12 subject matter experts. After implementing the Cognitive Pyramid during interdisciplinary rounds, the fall rate decreased to 0 per 1000 admissions.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessment of patients' cognition using the Cognitive Pyramid, and implementing appropriate interventions, may help improve patient safety.

Dementia care in acute hospitals: A framework for practice development and theory-based evaluation

AIM

The aim was to generate a framework for dementia care in acute hospitals.

DESIGN

Framework development with logic modelling.

METHODS

In phase one, we identified relevant elements of the framework by analysing several sources and by critically discussing them within the research team. We created the framework with logic modelling. In phase two, we adapted the framework in expert workshops and by reanalysing the included sources. We used the first stage of CReDECI 2 checklist for reporting.

RESULTS

The framework describes necessary activities within four main bundles of measures: "developing structures and processes," "developing competences and attitudes," "building relationships" and "ensuring a social environment and adequate stimulation." The overarching outcome is a person-centred hospital culture, manifesting itself on different levels. The framework illustrates the necessity of an organization-wide person-centred culture for achieving positive outcomes for people with dementia, their relatives and health professionals.

The Characteristics and Outcomes of People with Dementia in Inpatient Mental Health Care: A Review

OBJECTIVES

Inpatient mental health beds for people with dementia are a limited resource. Practitioners need an understanding of this population to provide high-quality care and design services. This review examines the characteristics, care, and outcomes of people with dementia admitted to inpatient mental health services.

METHODS

Systematic searches of key databases were undertaken up to November 2021. Findings were grouped into categories and then synthesized into a narrative review.

RESULTS

The review identified 36 international papers, the majority of which were retrospective audits. The literature describes significant psychiatric and medical comorbidity and significant risk of change in residence and death associated with admission.

CONCLUSIONS

We found a limited literature describing the characteristics, care, and outcomes of people with dementia in inpatient mental health services. The lack of research is striking given the complexity and vulnerability of this client group. More research is needed to describe the needs of this group, current and best practice to optimize care.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Professionals working in inpatient mental health services need to be aware of the evidence base available, consider how they evaluate patient outcomes, review their staffing and skills mix, and seek the views of patients and relatives in improving services.

Patient-specific risk factors for adverse outcomes following geriatric proximal femur fractures

BACKGROUND

Proximal femur fractures (PFFs) occur frequently among geriatric patients due to diverse risk factors, such as a lower bone mineral density and the increased risk of falls.

METHODS

In this review, we focus on recent literature of patient-specific risk factors and their impact on common complications and outcome parameters in patients with PFF.

RESULTS

Patient- and treatment related factors have a significant impact on outcome and are associated with an increased risk of mortality, impairments in functional rehabilitation and complicative courses.

CONCLUSION

Geriatric patients at high risk for complications are nursing home inhabitants suffering from severe osteoporosis, dementia and sarcopenia. The early and ongoing assessment for these individual risk factors is crucial. Strategies including interdisciplinary approaches, addressing comorbidities and facilitating an optimal risk factor evaluation result in a beneficial outcome. The ongoing ambulant assessment and therapy of complicating factors (e.g., malnutrition, sarcopenia, frailty or osteoporosis) have to be improved.