Implementation of a complex intervention to improve participation in older people with joint contractures living in nursing homes: a process evaluation of a cluster-randomised pilot trial

Effectiveness of an individually tailored complex intervention to improve activities and participation in nursing home residents with joint contractures (JointConEval): a multicentre pragmatic cluster-randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to examine the effects of the individually tailored complex intervention Participation Enabling Care in Nursing (PECAN) on activities and participation of residents with joint contractures.

DESIGN

Multicentre pragmatic cluster-randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

35 nursing homes in Germany (August 2018-February 2020).

PARTICIPANTS

562 nursing home residents aged ≥65 years with ≥1 major joint contracture (303 intervention group, 259 control group).

INTERVENTIONS

Nursing homes were randomised to PECAN (18 clusters) or optimised standard care (17 clusters) with researcher-concealed cluster allocation by facsimile. The intervention targeted impairments in activities and participation. Implementation included training and support for selected staff. Control group clusters received brief information.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary endpoint PaArticular Scales combined residents' activities and participation at 12 months. The secondary outcome comprised quality of life. Safety measures were falls, fall-related consequences and physical restraints. Residents, staff and researchers were unblinded. Data collection, data entry and statistical analysis were blinded. Primary analyses were intention-to-treat at cluster level and individual level using a generalised mixed-effect regression model and imputation of missing data.

RESULTS

Primary outcome analyses included 301 intervention group residents and 259 control group residents. The mean change on the Activities Scale was -1.47 points (SD 12.2) in the intervention group and 0.196 points (SD 12.5) in the control group and -3.87 points (SD 19.7) vs -3.18 points (SD 20.8) on the Participation Scale. The mean differences of changes between the groups were not statistically significant: Activities Scale: -1.72 (97.5% CI -6.05 to 2.61); Participation Scale: -1.24 (97.5% CI -7.02 to 4.45). We found no significant difference in the secondary outcome and no effects on safety measures.

CONCLUSION

The complex intervention did not improve the activities and participation of nursing home residents on the PaArticular Scales at 12 months. Current nursing conditions in Germany may hamper implementation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

DRKS00015185.

Incomplete reporting of complex interventions: a call to action for journal editors to review their submission guidelines

Reporting of intervention research has been inadequate for many years. The development and promotion of freely available checklists aims to address this problem by providing researchers with a list of items that require reporting to enable study interpretation and replication. In this commentary, we present evidence from a recent systematic review of 51 randomised controlled trials published 2015-2020 that inadequate intervention reporting remains a widespread issue and that checklists are not being used to describe all intervention components. In 2022, we assessed the submission guidelines of 33 journals that published articles included in our review and found that just one at the time encouraged the use of reporting checklists for all intervention components. To drive progress, we contacted the editors of the other 32 journals and requested that they update their submission guidelines in response. We conclude by highlighting the waste associated with current practices and encourage journals from all fields to urgently review their submission guidelines. Only through collective action can we build an evidence base that is fit for purpose.

Factors associated with joint contractures in adults: a systematic review with narrative synthesis

PURPOSE

The primary objective of the review was to collate the available evidence on factors associated with joint contractures in adults.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted on MEDLINE, CINAHL, AMED, and EMBASE. Studies that involved participants aged ≥18 and assessed joint contracture as a primary or secondary outcome were included. Two independent reviewers screened studies against the eligibility criteria, performed data extraction, and assessed the quality of evidence. A narrative synthesis by domain and sub-domain was undertaken. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO: CRD42019145079.

RESULTS

Forty-seven studies were included in the review. Identified factors were broadly classified into three major domains: sociodemographic factors, physical factors, and proxies for bed confinement. Sociodemographic factors were not associated with joint contractures. Functional ability, pain, muscle weakness, physical mobility, and bed confinement provided the most consistent evidence of association with joint contractures. The evidence regarding the relationship between spasticity and joint contractures remains unclear. Other factors might be important, but there was insufficient evidence to make inferences.

CONCLUSIONS

The review identified and collated evidence on factors associated with joint contractures, which can be utilised to develop effective prevention and management strategies. Implications for rehabilitationClinical interventions based on the timely identification of risks related to joint contractures in vulnerable adults have the potential to prevent or ameliorate their development or progression.Quality and consistency of care for vulnerable adults would be enhanced by developing effective joint contracture prevention and rehabilitation strategies based on the evidence presented in this review.As many vulnerable adults are located in the community or non-acute care settings, strategies should target these loci of care.Structured risk assessments that can support non-physiotherapy staff working in these loci of care to identify risks related to joint contractures would provide an important resource for risk management.

Contextual factors influencing complex intervention research processes in care homes: a systematic review and framework synthesis

Background

Care homes are complex settings to undertake intervention research. Barriers to research implementation processes can threaten studies’ validity, reducing the value to residents, staff, researchers and funders. We aimed to (i) identify and categorise contextual factors that may mediate outcomes of complex intervention studies in care homes and (ii) provide recommendations to minimise the risk of expensive research implementation failures.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review using a framework synthesis approach viewed through a complex adaptive systems lens. We searched: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ASSIA databases and grey literature. We sought process evaluations of care home complex interventions published in English. Narrative data were indexed under 28 context domains. We performed an inductive thematic analysis across the context domains.

Results

We included 33 process evaluations conducted in high-income countries, published between 2005 and 2019. Framework synthesis identified barriers to implementation that were more common at the task and organisational level. Inductive thematic analysis identified (i) avoiding procedural drift and (ii) participatory action and learning as key priorities for research teams. Research team recommendations include advice for protocol design and care home engagement. Care home team recommendations focus on internal resources and team dynamics. Collaborative recommendations apply to care homes’ individual context and the importance of maintaining positive working relationships.

Discussion

Researchers planning and undertaking research with care homes need a sensitive appreciation of the complex care home context. Study implementation is most effective where an intervention is co-produced, with agreed purpose and adequate resources to incorporate within existing routines and care practices.

Factors Associated with Development of New Joint Contractures in Long-Term Care Residents

OBJECTIVE

Limb contractures are associated with poor outcomes and quality of life in long-term care (LTC) residents. This study examined the rate of developing new joint contracture in the LTC residents and associated risk factors to formulate effective interventions in this critical but understudied area.

DESIGN

This is an observational study with data obtained from the Hong Kong Longitudinal Study on LTC Residents between 2005 and 2016.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Trained assessors (nurses, social workers, and therapists) used the Minimum Data Set Resident Assessment Instrument (MDS-RAI 2.0) to collect the data of the residents from 9 residential LTC facilities.

MEASURES

Limb contractures were defined as a functional limitation in the range of motion involving the upper or lower limbs. Primary outcomes included annual prevalence of joint contractures and factors that were associated with the development of new joint contractures.

RESULTS

We analyzed the data for 1914 older residents (674 males, mean age 83.4 years). During the first 5 years since admission, the annual prevalence of upper limb contractures increased from 29.8% to 36.5%, and lower limb contractures increased from 41.5% to 57.4%. Overall, the increment of the prevalence rate of joint contractures per year ranged from 0.7% to 3.2% for the upper limbs and 0.3% to 6.0% per year for the lower limbs. Impaired mobility, presence of neurologic diseases, and older age were the leading independent risk factors for the development of new joint contractures.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Joint contractures are highly prevalent among residents admitted to the LTC facilities, and many residents develop new contractures during the first 5 years of their admission. Immobility appears to be the main modifiable risk factor. Further studies are needed to identify potential strategies to prevent new contractures in this vulnerable group.

Implementation of a complex intervention to improve hospital discharge: process evaluation of a cluster randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To study the implementation of a cluster randomised controlled effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial testing the effectiveness of a medication review at hospital discharge combined with a communication stimulus between hospital physicians (HPs) and general practitioners (GPs) on rehospitalisation of multimorbid older patients.

DESIGN

Extension of Grant's mixed method process evaluation framework to trials with multilevel clustering.

SETTING

General internal medicine wards in Swiss hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Convenience samples of 15 chief physicians (of 21 hospitals participating in the effectiveness trial), 60 (74) senior HPs, 65 (164) junior HPs and 187 (411) GPs.

IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY

Two-hour teaching sessions for senior HPs on a patient-centred, checklist-guided discharge routine.

PROCESS EVALUATION COMPONENTS

Data collection on recruitment, delivery and response from chief physicians (semistructured interviews), senior HPs, junior HPs, GPs (surveys) and patients (via HPs). Quantitative data were summarised using descriptive statistics, and interviews analysed using thematic analysis.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Intervention dose (quantitative), implementation fidelity (qualitative), feasibility and acceptability, facilitators and barriers, implementation support strategies.

RESULTS

Recruitment of hospitals was laborious but successful, with 21 hospitals recruited. Minimal workload and a perceived benefit for the clinic were crucial factors for participation. Intervention dose was high (95% of checklist activities carried out), but intervention fidelity was limited (discharge letters) or unknown (medication review). Recruitment and retention of patients was challenging, partly due to patient characteristics (old, frail) and the COVID-19 pandemic: Only 612 of the anticipated 2100 patients were recruited, and 31% were lost to follow-up within the first month after discharge. The intervention was deemed feasible and helpful by HPs, and the relevance of the topic appreciated by both HPs and GPs.

CONCLUSIONS

The results from this evaluation will support interpretation of the findings of the effectiveness study and may inform researchers and policy makers who aim at improving hospital discharge.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN18427377.

Process Evaluation of the SImplification of Medications Prescribed to Long-tErm Care Residents (SIMPLER) Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial: A Mixed Methods Study

Complex medication regimens are highly prevalent, burdensome for residents and staff, and associated with poor health outcomes in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). The SIMPLER study was a non-blinded, matched-pair, cluster randomized controlled trial in eight Australian RACFs that investigated the one-off application of a structured 5-step implicit process to simplify medication regimens. The aim of this study was to explore the processes underpinning study implementation and uptake of the medication simplification intervention. A mixed methods process evaluation with an explanatory design was undertaken in parallel with the main outcome evaluation of the SIMPLER study and was guided by an established 8-domain framework. The qualitative component included a document analysis and semi-structured interviews with 25 stakeholders (residents, family, research nurses, pharmacists, RACF staff, and a general medical practitioner). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and reflexively thematically content analyzed. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize quantitative data extracted from key research documents. The SIMPLER recruitment rates at the eight RACFs ranged from 18.9% to 48.6% of eligible residents (38.4% overall). Participation decisions were influenced by altruism, opinions of trusted persons, willingness to change a medication regimen, and third-party hesitation regarding potential resident distress. Intervention delivery was generally consistent with the study protocol. Stakeholders perceived regimen simplification was beneficial and low risk if the simplification recommendations were individualized. Implementation of the simplification recommendations varied between the four intervention RACFs, with simplification implemented at 4-month follow-up for between 25% and 86% of residents for whom simplification was possible. Good working relationships between stakeholders and new remunerated models of medication management were perceived facilitators to wider implementation. In conclusion, the one-off implicit medication simplification intervention was feasible and generally delivered according to the protocol to a representative sample of residents. Despite variable implementation, recommendations to simplify complex regimens were valued by stakeholders, who also supported wider implementation of medication simplification in RACFs.

Improving mobility and participation of older people with vertigo, dizziness and balance disorders in primary care using a care pathway: feasibility study and process evaluation

BACKGROUND

Community-dwelling older people are frequently affected by vertigo, dizziness and balance disorders (VDB). We previously developed a care pathway (CPW) to improve their mobility and participation by offering standardized approaches for general practitioners (GPs) and physical therapists (PTs). We aimed to assess the feasibility of the intervention, its implementation strategy and the study procedures in preparation for the subsequent main trial.

METHODS

This 12-week prospective cohort feasibility study was accompanied by a process evaluation designed according to the UK Medical Research Council's Guidance for developing and evaluating complex interventions. Patients with VDB (≥65 years), GPs and PTs in primary care were included. The intervention consisted of a diagnostic screening checklist for GPs and a guide for PTs. The implementation strategy included specific educational trainings and a telephone helpline. Data for mixed-method process evaluation were collected via standardized questionnaires, field notes and qualitative interviews. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics, qualitative data using content analysis.

RESULTS

A total of five GP practices (seven single GPs), 10 PT practices and 22 patients were included in the study. The recruitment of GPs and patients was challenging (response rates: GP practices: 28%, PT practices: 39%). Ninety-one percent of the patients and all health professionals completed the study. The health professionals responded well to the educational trainings; the utilization of the telephone helpline was low (one call each from GPs and PTs). Familiarisation with the routine of application of the intervention and positive attitudes were emphasized as facilitators of the implementation of the intervention, whereas a lack of time was mentioned as a barrier. Despite difficulties in the GPs' adherence to the intervention protocol, the GPs, PTs and patients saw benefit in the intervention. The patients' treatment adherence to physical therapy was good. There were minor issues in data collection, but no unintended consequences.

CONCLUSION

Although the process evaluation provided good support for the feasibility of study procedures, the intervention and its implementation strategy, we identified a need for improvement in recruitment of participants, the GP intervention part and the data collection procedures. The findings will inform the main trial to test the interventions effectiveness in a cluster RCT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Projektdatenbank Versorgungsforschung Deutschland (German registry Health Services Research) VfD_MobilE-PHY_17_003910, date of registration: 30.11.2017; Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien (German Clinical Trials Register) DRKS00022918, date of registration: 03.09.2020 (retrospectively registered).