Towards improved decision support in the assessment and management of pain for people with dementia in hospital: a systematic meta-review and observational study

A systematic meta-review of systematic reviews on attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

BACKGROUND

There are now hundreds of systematic reviews on attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) of variable quality. To help navigate this literature, we have reviewed systematic reviews on any topic on ADHD.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science and performed quality assessment according to the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis. A total of 231 systematic reviews and meta-analyses met the eligibility criteria.

RESULTS

The prevalence of ADHD was 7.2% for children and adolescents and 2.5% for adults, though with major uncertainty due to methodological variation in the existing literature. There is evidence for both biological and social risk factors for ADHD, but this evidence is mostly correlational rather than causal due to confounding and reverse causality. There is strong evidence for the efficacy of pharmacological treatment on symptom reduction in the short-term, particularly for stimulants. However, there is limited evidence for the efficacy of pharmacotherapy in mitigating adverse life trajectories such as educational attainment, employment, substance abuse, injuries, suicides, crime, and comorbid mental and somatic conditions. Pharmacotherapy is linked with side effects like disturbed sleep, reduced appetite, and increased blood pressure, but less is known about potential adverse effects after long-term use. Evidence of the efficacy of nonpharmacological treatments is mixed.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite hundreds of systematic reviews on ADHD, key questions are still unanswered. Evidence gaps remain as to a more accurate prevalence of ADHD, whether documented risk factors are causal, the efficacy of nonpharmacological treatments on any outcomes, and pharmacotherapy in mitigating the adverse outcomes associated with ADHD.

Physicians' and nurses' experience of using the Abbey Pain Scale (APS) in people with advanced cancer: a qualitative content analysis

BACKGROUND

The Abbey Pain Scale (APS), an observational scale used to assess pain in people with end-stage dementia, is also widely used in Sweden to assess pain in patients with advanced cancer. It is unclear whether the APS is appropriate in this context. This study aims to explore physicians' and nurses' experiences of using a Swedish translation of the APS (the APS-SE) in people with advanced cancer.

METHODS

Conventional qualitative content analysis was used to analyse interviews with physicians (n = 6) and nurses (n = 6) working in oncology and specialised palliative care about their experiences of using the APS-SE.

RESULTS

Three categories were created: fills a need, not always on target, and does not fully suit the clinical situation. Participants reported that although the APS-SE provides support in a challenging situation, it sometimes misses the mark: it does not distinguish well between pain and other types of suffering and its pain score tends not to reflect professionals' intuitive perceptions of patients' suffering. Some parts of the APS-SE were not considered useful, and others were perceived as ethically questionable.

CONCLUSION

Health professionals greatly need an observational pain assessment tool for people with advanced cancer. The APS-SE is helpful in this context, but participants did not perceive it as ideal. Its problems seem inherent to the original APS rather than related to its translation from English to Swedish. Further research is needed to provide a more suitable pain assessment tool for patients with advanced cancer.

Psychometric evaluation of the Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia scale in an acute general hospital setting

BACKGROUND

People with dementia are at risk of unplanned hospital admissions and commonly have painful conditions. Identifying pain is challenging and may lead to undertreatment. The psychometric properties of the Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia (PAINAD) scale, in medical inpatients with dementia have not been evaluated.

METHODS

A secondary data analysis from a longitudinal study of 230 people with dementia admitted to two acute general hospitals in London, UK. Internal consistency, inter-rater reliability, test-retest reliability, concurrent validity, construct validity and discriminant validity of PAINAD were tested at rest and in movement.

RESULTS

This predominantly female (65.7%) sample had a mean age of 87.2 (Standard Deviation; SD = 5.92) years. Inter-rater reliability showed an intra-class correlation (ICC) of 0.92 at rest and 0.98 in movement, test-retest reliability ICC was 0.54 at rest and 0.66 in movement. Internal consistency was 0.76 at rest and 0.80 in movement (Cronbach's α). Concurrent validity was weak between PAINAD and a self-rating level of pain (Kendall's Tau; τ = 0.29; p > 0.001). There was no correlation between PAINAD and a measure of behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia, suggesting no evidence of convergent validity. PAINAD scores were higher during movement than rest, providing evidence of discriminant validity (z = -8.01, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

We found good inter-rater reliability and internal consistency. The test-retest reliability was modest. This study raises concerns about the validity of the PAINAD in general acute hospitals. This provides an insight into pain assessment in general acute hospitals which may inform further refinements of the PAINAD.

Pain Assessment for Individuals with Advanced Dementia in Care Homes: A Systematic Review

Pain is prevalent in older people, especially in those with advanced dementia who have communication impairments. Although pain is recognised to be present in this population, it is often under-assessed and ineffectively managed. The assessment of pain in advanced dementia is extremely challenging and complex, particularly in institutional settings such as care homes. This study systematically reviews the literature to examine and characterise the evidence for the use of pain assessment tools in care homes with individuals living with advanced dementia. Relevant publications were sourced from electronic bibliometric medical databases including AMED, CINAHL Plus, Medline, PsycINFO, EMBASE, TRIP Pro, Google Scholar, and HINARI. The database search was supplemented by screening citations and reference lists, in addition to a grey literature searches. The search identified 2221 studies, among which 26 were included in the review. The majority of the studies were observational, which created a rich source of data to create four major themes. The findings were informed and shaped by working with key stakeholders to develop a conceptual model that can contribute to developing evidence-based practice. This highlights the importance of a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary approach to pain assessment in this population, which is beyond the use of tools.

Virtual models of care for people with palliative care needs living in their own home: A systematic meta-review and narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND

Access to palliative care in the community enables people to live in their preferred place of care, which is often home. Community palliative care services struggle to provide timely 24-h services to patients and family. This has resulted in calls for 'accessible and flexible' models of care that are 'responsive' to peoples' changing palliative care needs. Digital health technologies provide opportunities to meet these requirements 24-h a day.

AIM

To identify digital health technologies that have been evaluated for supporting timely assessment and management of people living at home with palliative care needs and/or their carer(s), and the evidence-base for each.

DESIGN

A systematic review of systematic reviews ('meta-review'). Systematic reviews evaluating evidence for virtual models of palliative or end-of-life care using one or more digital health technologies were included. Systematic reviews were evaluated using the Risk of Bias Tool for Systematic Reviews. A narrative approach was used to synthesise results.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Database of systematic reviews were searched for English-language reviews published between 2015 and 2020.

RESULTS

The search yielded 2266 articles, of which 12 systematic reviews met criteria. Sixteen reviews were included in total, after four reviews were found via handsearching. Other than scheduled telehealth, video-conferencing, or after-hours telephone support, little evidence was found for digital health technologies used to deliver virtual models of palliative care.

CONCLUSIONS

There are opportunities to test new models of virtual care, beyond telehealth and/or video conferencing, such as 24-h command centres, and rapid response teams.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER

Prospero CRD42020200266.

Assessing mentoring: A scoping review of mentoring assessment tools in internal medicine between 1990 and 2019

BACKGROUND

Mentoring's success in enhancing a mentee's professional and personal development, and a host organisations' reputation has been called into question, amidst a lack of effective tools to evaluate mentoring relationships and guide oversight of mentoring programs. A scoping review is proposed to map available literature on mentoring assessment tools in Internal Medicine to guide design of new tools.

OBJECTIVE

The review aims to explore how novice mentoring is assessed in Internal Medicine, including the domains assessed, and the strengths and limitations of the assessment methods.

METHODS

Guided by Levac et al.'s framework for scoping reviews, 12 reviewers conducted independent literature reviews of assessment tools in novice mentoring in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ERIC, Cochrane, GreyLit, Web of Science, Open Dissertations and British Education Index databases. A 'split approach' saw research members adopting either Braun and Clarke's approach to thematic analysis or directed content analysis to independently evaluate the data and improve validity and objectivity of the findings.

RESULTS

9662 abstracts were identified, 187 full-text articles reviewed, and 54 full-text articles included. There was consensus on the themes and categories identified through the use of the split approach, which were the domains assessed and methods of assessment.

CONCLUSION

Most tools fail to contend with mentoring's evolving nature and provide mere snap shots of the mentoring process largely from the mentee's perspective. The lack of holistic, longitudinal and validated assessments propagate fears that ethical issues in mentoring are poorly recognized and addressed. To this end, we forward a framework for the design of 'fit for purpose' multi-dimensional tools.

PRACTICE POINTS

Most tools focus on the mentee's perspective, do not consider mentoring's evolving nature and fail to consider mentoring holistically nor longitudinallyA new tool capable of addressing these gaps must also consider inputs from all stakeholders and take a longitudinal perspective of mentoring.

Supporting general hospital staff to provide dementia sensitive care: A realist evaluation

BACKGROUND

There are an increasing number of interventions to improve hospital care for patients with dementia. Evidence for their impact on staff actions and patient outcomes is, however, limited and context dependent.

OBJECTIVE

To explain the factors that support hospital staff to provide dementia sensitive care and with what outcomes for patients with dementia.

DESIGN

A realist evaluation using a two-site case study approach.

SETTING

Two hospital trusts in the East of England. Site 1 had a ward for patients with dementia that would address their medical and mental health needs. Site 2 used a team of healthcare assistants, who had support from dementia specialist nurses, to work with patients with dementia across the hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Hospital staff who had a responsibility for inpatients with dementia (healthcare assistants, nurses, medical staff, allied healthcare professionals and support staff) (n = 36), patients with dementia (n = 28), and family carers of patients with dementia (n = 2).

METHODS

A three stage realist evaluation: 1) building the programme theory of what works and when; 2) testing the programme theory through empirical data (80 h non-participant observation, 42 interviews, 28 patient medical notes, 27 neuropsychiatric inventory, and documentary review); 3) synthesis and verification of findings with key stakeholders.

FINDINGS

The programme theory comprised six interconnected context-mechanism-outcome configurations: 1) knowledge and authority to respond to an unmet need; 2) role relevant training and opportunities for reflection; 3) clinical experts and senior staff promoting practices that are patient-focused; 4) engaging with opportunities to spend time with patients; 5) risk management as an opportunity for person-centred care; 6) valuing dementia care as skilled work. Effective interactions reduced patient distress and supported patient orientation. Training and allocation of staff time were of themselves insufficient to ensure dementia care was prioritised and valued as skilled work. Staff concerns about the consequences of adverse incidents and work pressures on the ward, even with support, took precedence and influenced the quality of their interactions with patients with dementia. A key finding linked to staff retention and developing capacity in the workforce to provide expert dementia care was that despite extra training and organisational endorsement, nursing staff did not regard dementia care as skilled nursing work.

CONCLUSIONS

There is increased awareness and organisational commitment to dementia-friendly healthcare in general hospitals. However, in addition to training and adapting the environment to the patient, further work is needed to make explicit the specialist skills required for effective dementia care.

Psychometric Evaluation of the MOBID Dementia Pain Scale in U.S. Nursing Homes

PURPOSE

The Mobilization-Observation-Behavior-Intensity-Dementia (MOBID) Pain Scale is an observational tool in which raters estimate pain intensity on a 0-10 scale following five standardized movements. The tool has been shown to be valid and reliable in northern European samples and could be useful in the United States (US) for research and clinical purposes. The goal of this study was to examine the validity and reliability of the MOBID among English-speaking nursing home residents in the US.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTINGS

Sixteen nursing homes in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia and Alabama.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred thirty-eight older adults with dementia and moderate to severe cognitive impairment.

METHODS

Validity was evaluated using Spearman correlations between the MOBID overall pain intensity score and 1) an expert clinician's pain intensity rating (ECPIR), 2) nursing staff surrogate pain intensity ratings, and 3) known correlates of pain. We assessed internal consistency by Cronbach's alpha.

RESULTS

MOBID overall scores were significantly associated with expert clinician's rating of current and worst pain in the past week (rho = 0.54, and 0.57; p < .001, respectively). Statistically significant associations also were found between the MOBID overall score and nursing staff current and worst pain intensity ratings as well as the Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (rho = 0.29; p < .001). Internal consistency was acceptable (α = 0.83).

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Result of this study support the use of the MOBID in English-speaking staff and residents in the US. Findings also suggest that the tool can be completed by trained, nonclinical staff.