Conditions for successfully implementing resident-oriented care in nursing homes.
ABSTRACT This study reports an investigation of the conditions for a successful introduction of a resident-oriented care model on six somatic and psychogeriatric intervention wards in three Dutch nursing homes. This study aims to answer the following research question: 'What are the conditions for successfully implementing resident-oriented care?' To answer the research question, the organisational change process was monitored by using the '7-S' model of Peters and Waterman as a diagnostic framework. Based on this model, the following change characteristics were studied: structure, strategy, systems, staff, skills, style and shared values. Our study involved a one group pretest/post-test design. To measure the conditions for change, we operationalised the factors of the 7-S model serving as a diagnostic framework and studied their presence and nature on the intervention wards. For this purpose qualitative interviews were held with the change agents of the nursing homes and the wards' supervisors. To determine the degree of 'success' of the implementation, we measured the extent to which resident-oriented care was implemented. For this purpose a quantitative questionnaire was filled in by the nurses of the intervention wards. By relating the extent to which resident-oriented care was implemented to the differences in change conditions, we were able to distinguish the 'most' from the 'least' successful intervention ward and so, pointing out the conditions contributing to a successful implementation of resident-oriented care. The results showed that, in contrast to the least successful intervention ward, the most successful intervention ward was characterised by success conditions related to the 7-S model factors strategy, systems, staff and skills. The factor structure did not contribute to the success of the implementation. Success conditions appeared to be related to the ward level and not to the organisational or project level. Especially the supervisors' role appeared to be crucial for a successful implementation.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Pain is a major concern for individuals with cancer, particularly older adults who make up the largest segment of individuals with cancer and who have some of the most unique pain challenges. One of the priorities of hospice is to provide a pain-free death, and while outcomes are better in hospice, patients still die with poorly controlled pain. This article reports on the results of a Translating Research into Practice intervention designed to promote the adoption of evidence-based pain practices for older adults with cancer in community-based hospices. This Institutional Human Subjects Review Board-approved study was a cluster randomized controlled trial implemented in 16 Midwestern hospices. Retrospective medical records from newly admitted patients were used to determine the intervention effect. Additionally, survey and focus group data gathered from hospice staff at the completion of the intervention phase were analyzed. Improvement on the Cancer Pain Practice Index, an overall composite outcome measure of evidence-based practices for the experimental sites, was not significantly greater than control sites. Decrease in patient pain severity from baseline to post-intervention in the experimental group was greater; however, the result was not statistically significant (P = 0.1032). Findings indicate a number of factors that may impact implementation of multicomponent interventions, including unique characteristics and culture of the setting, the level of involvement with the change processes, competing priorities and confounding factors, and complexity of the innovation (practice change). Our results suggest that future study is needed on specific factors to target when implementing a community-based hospice intervention, including determining and measuring intervention fidelity prospectively.Pain Medicine 07/2012; 13(8):1004-17. · 2.46 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Western governments have initiated reforms to improve the quality of care for nursing home residents. Most of these reforms encompass the use of regulations and national quality indicators. In the Norwegian context, these regulations comprise two pages of text that are easy to read and understand. They focus particularly on residents' rights to plan their day-to-day life in nursing homes. However, the research literature indicates that the implementation of the new regulations, particularly if they aim to change nursing practice, is extremely challenging. The aim of this study was to further explore and describe nursing practice to gain a deeper understanding of why it is so hard to implement the new regulations. For this qualitative study, an ethnographic design was chosen to explore and describe nursing practice. Fieldwork was conducted in two nursing homes. In total, 45 nurses and nursing aides were included in participant observation, and 10 were interviewed at the end of the field study. Findings indicate that the staff knew little about the new quality regulations, and that the quality of their work was guided by other factors rooted in their nursing practice. Further analyses revealed that the staff appeared to be committed to daily routines and also that they always seemed to know what to do. Having routines and always knowing what to do mutually strengthen and enhance each other, and together they form a powerful force that makes daily nursing care a taken-for-granted activity. New regulations are challenging to implement because nursing practices are so strongly embedded. Improving practice requires systematic and deeply rooted practical change in everyday action and thinking.BMC Nursing 06/2012; 11:7.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Several residential aged-care facilities have replaced the institutional model of care to one that accepts person-centered care as the guiding standard of practice. This culture change is impacting the provision of aged-care services around the world. This systematic review evaluates the evidence for an impact of person-centered interventions on aged-care residents and nursing staff. We searched Medline, Cinahl, Academic Search Premier, Scopus, Proquest, and Expanded Academic ASAP databases for studies published between January 1995 and October 2012, using subject headings and free-text search terms (in UK and US English spelling) including person-centered care, patient-centered care, resident-oriented care, Eden Alternative, Green House model, Wellspring model, long-term care, and nursing homes. The search identified 323 potentially relevant articles. Once duplicates were removed, 146 were screened for inclusion in this review; 21 were assessed for methodological quality, resulting in nine articles (seven studies) that met our inclusion criteria. There was only one randomized, controlled trial. The majority of studies were quasi-experimental pre-post test designs, with a control group (n = 4). The studies in this review incorporated a range of different outcome measures (ie, dependent variables) to evaluate the impact of person-centered interventions on aged-care residents and staff. One person-centered intervention, ie, the Eden Alternative, was associated with significant improvements in residents' levels of boredom and helplessness. In contrast, facility-specific person-centered interventions were found to impact nurses' sense of job satisfaction and their capacity to meet the individual needs of residents in a positive way. Two studies found that person-centered care was actually associated with an increased risk of falls. The findings from this review need to be interpreted cautiously due to limitations in study designs and the potential for confounding bias. Typically, person-centered interventions are multifactorial, comprising: elements of environmental enhancement; opportunities for social stimulation and interaction; leadership and management changes; staffing models focused on staff empowerment; and assigning residents to the same care staff and an individualized philosophy of care. The complexity of the interventions and range of outcomes examined makes it difficult to form accurate conclusions about the impact of person-centered care interventions adopted and implemented in aged-care facilities. The few negative consequences of the introduction of person-centered care models suggest that the introduction of person-centered care is not always incorporated within a wider "hierarchy of needs" structure, where safety and physiological need are met before moving onto higher level needs. Further research is necessary to establish the effectiveness of these elements of person-centered care, either singly or in combination.Clinical Interventions in Aging 01/2013; 8:1-10. · 2.65 Impact Factor