The influence of care home managers on the implementation of a complex intervention: findings from the process evaluation of a randomised controlled trial of dementia care mapping

BACKGROUND

Many people with dementia live in care homes, where staff can struggle to meet their complex needs. Successful practice improvement interventions in these settings require strong managerial support, but little is known about how managers can support implementation in practice, or what factors support or hinder care home managers in providing this support. Using Dementia Care Mapping™ (DCM) as an example, this study explored how care home managers can support the implementation of complex interventions, and identified factors affecting their ability to provide this support.

METHODS

We undertook interviews with 48 staff members (managers and intervention leads) from care homes participating in the intervention arm of the DCM EPIC trial of DCM implementation.

RESULTS

Managerial support played a key role in facilitating the implementation of a complex intervention in care home settings. Managers could provide practical and financial support in many forms. However, managerial support and leadership approaches towards implementation were highly variable in practice, and implementation was easily de-stabilised by management changes or competing managerial priorities. How well managers understood, valued and engaged with the intervention, alongside the leadership style they adopted to support implementation, were key influences on implementation success.

CONCLUSIONS

For care home managers to effectively support interventions they must fully understand the proposed intervention and its potential value. This is especially important during times of managerial or practice changes, when managers lack the skills required to effectively support implementation, or when the intervention is complex. It may be unfeasible to successfully implement new interventions during times of managerial or practice instability.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN82288852 , registered 16/01/2014.

An audit of dementia education and training in UK health and social care: a comparison with national benchmark standards

BACKGROUND

Despite people living with dementia representing a significant proportion of health and social care users, until recently in the United Kingdom (UK) there were no prescribed standards for dementia education and training. This audit sought to review the extent and nature of dementia education and training offered to health and social care staff in the UK against the standards described in the 2015 Dementia Training Standards Framework, which describes the knowledge and skills required of the UK dementia workforce.

METHODS

This audit presents national data concerning the design, delivery, target audience, length, level, content, format of training, number of staff trained and frequency of delivery within existing dementia training programmes offered to health and social care staff. The Dementia Training Standards Framework was used as a reference for respondents to describe the subjects and learning outcomes associated with their training.

RESULTS

The findings are presented from 614 respondents offering 386 training packages, which indicated variations in the extent and quality of training. Many training packages addressed the subjects of 'person-centred care', 'communication', 'interaction and behaviour in dementia care', and 'dementia awareness'. Few training packages addressed subjects concerning 'pharmacological interventions in dementia care', 'leadership' and 'end of life care'. Fewer than 40% of The Dementia Training Standards Framework learning outcomes targeted to staff with regular contact with people with dementia or in leadership roles were covered by the reported packages. However, for training targeted at increasing dementia awareness more than 70% of the learning outcomes identified in The Dementia Training Standards Framework were addressed. Many training packages are not of sufficient duration to derive impact; although the majority employed delivery methods likely to be effective.

CONCLUSIONS

The development of new and existing training and education should take account of subjects that are currently underrepresented and ensure that training reflects the Training Standard Framework and evidence regarding best practice for delivery. Lessons regarding the limitations of training in the UK serve as a useful illustration of the challenge of implementing national dementia training standards; particularly for countries who are developing or have recently implemented national dementia strategies.

Impact of a person-centred dementia care training programme on hospital staff attitudes, role efficacy and perceptions of caring for people with dementia: A repeated measures study

BACKGROUND

People with dementia occupy up to one quarter of acute hospital beds. However, the quality of care delivered to this patient group is of national concern. Staff working in acute hospitals report lack of knowledge, skills and confidence in caring for people with dementia. There is limited evidence about the most effective approaches to supporting acute hospital staff to deliver more person-centred care.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a specialist training programme for acute hospital staff regarding improving attitudes, satisfaction and feelings of caring efficacy, in provision of care to people with dementia.

DESIGN

A repeated measures design, with measures completed immediately prior to commencing training (T1), after completion of Foundation level training (T2: 4-6 weeks post-baseline), and following Intermediate level training (T3: 3-4 months post-baseline).

SETTING

One NHS Trust in the North of England, UK.

PARTICIPANTS

40 acute hospital staff working in clinical roles, the majority of whom (90%) were nurses.

METHODS

All participants received the 3.5 day Person-centred Care Training for Acute Hospitals (PCTAH) programme, comprised of two levels, Foundation (0.5 day) and Intermediate (3 days), delivered over a 3-4 months period. Staff demographics and previous exposure to dementia training were collected via a questionnaire. Staff attitudes were measured using the Approaches to Dementia Questionnaire (ADQ), satisfaction in caring for people with dementia was captured using the Staff Experiences of Working with Demented Residents questionnaire (SEWDR) and perceived caring efficacy was measured using the Caring Efficacy Scale (CES).

RESULTS

The training programme was effective in producing a significant positive change on all three outcome measures following intermediate training compared to baseline. A significant positive effect was found on the ADQ between baseline and after completion of Foundation level training, but not for either of the other measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Training acute hospital staff in Intermediate level person-centred dementia care is effective in producing significant improvements in attitudes towards and satisfaction in caring for people with dementia and feelings of caring efficacy. Foundation level training is effective in changing attitudes but does not seem to be sufficient to bring about change in satisfaction or caring efficacy.