Refine
Year of publication
- 2020 (5) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (peer reviewed) (5) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- no (5)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (5)
Keywords
- Aged (1)
- Aged, 80 and over (1)
- COVID-19-Pandemie (1)
- Cluster-randomised controlled trials (1)
- Complex intervention (1)
- Critical pathways (1)
- Dizziness, (1)
- General practitioners (1)
- Implementation strategy (1)
- Joint contractures (1)
Background:
Care pathways (CPWs) are complex interventions that have the potential to reduce treatment errors and optimize patient outcomes by translating evidence into local practice. To design an optimal implementation strategy, potential barriers to and facilitators of implementation must be considered.
The objective of this systematic review is to identify barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of CPWs in primary care (PC).
Methods:
A systematic search via Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and MEDLINE via PubMed supplemented by hand searches and citation tracing was carried out. We considered articles reporting on CPWs targeting patients at least 65 years of age in outpatient settings that were written in the English or German language and were published between 2007 and 2019. We considered (non-)randomized controlled trials, controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series studies (main project reports) as well as associated process evaluation reports of either methodology. Two independent researchers performed the study selection; the data extraction and critical appraisal were duplicated until the point of perfect agreement between the two reviewers. Due to the heterogeneity of the included studies, a narrative synthesis was performed.
Results:
Fourteen studies (seven main project reports and seven process evaluation reports) of the identified 8154 records in the search update were included in the synthesis. The structure and content of the interventions as well as the quality of evidence of the studies varied.
The identified barriers and facilitators were classified using the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions framework. The identified barriers were inadequate staffing, insufficient education, lack of financial compensation, low motivation and lack of time. Adequate skills and knowledge through training activities for health professionals, good multi-disciplinary communication and individual tailored interventions were identified as facilitators.
Conclusions:
In the implementation of CPWs in PC, a multitude of barriers and facilitators must be considered, and most of them can be modified through the careful design of intervention and implementation strategies. Furthermore, process evaluations must become a standard component of implementing CPWs to enable other projects to build upon previous experience.
Hintergrund: Die COVID-19-Pandemie ist eine Ausnahmesituation ohne Präzedenz und erforderte zahlreiche Ad-hoc-Anpassungen in den Strukturen und Prozessen der akutstationären Versorgung.
Ziel: Ziel war es zu untersuchen, wie aus Sicht von Führungspersonen und Hygienefachkräften in der Pflege die stationäre Akutversorgung durch die Pandemiesituation beeinflusst wurde und welche Implikationen sich daraus für die Zukunft ergeben.
Methoden: Qualitative Studie bestehend aus semistrukturierten Interviews mit fünf Verantwortlichen des leitenden Pflegemanagements und drei Hygienefachkräften in vier Krankenhäusern in Deutschland. Die Interviews wurden mittels qualitativer Inhaltsanalyse ausgewertet.
Ergebnisse: Die Befragten beschrieben den auf die prioritäre Versorgung von COVID-19-Fällen hin umstrukturierten Klinikalltag. Herausforderungen waren Unsicherheit und Angst bei den Mitarbeiter_innen, relative Ressourcenknappheit von Material und Personal und die schnelle Umsetzung neuer Anforderungen an die Versorgungleistung. Dem wurde durch gezielte Kommunikation und Information, massive Anstrengungen zur Sicherung der Ressourcen und koordinierte Steuerung aller Prozesse durch bereichsübergreifende, interprofessionelle Task Forces begegnet.
Schlussfolgerungen: Die in der COVID-19-Pandemie vorgenommenen Anpassungen zeigen Entwicklungspotenziale für die zukünftige Routineversorgung auf, z. B. könnten neue Arbeits- und Skill Mix-Modelle aufgegriffen werden. Für die Konkretisierung praktischer Implikationen sind vertiefende Analysen der Daten mit zeitlichem Abstand erforderlich.
Background
Joint contractures in frail older people are associated with serious restrictions in participation. We developed the Participation Enabling CAre in Nursing (PECAN) intervention, a complex intervention to enable nurses to promote participation in nursing home residents with joint contractures. The aim of this study was to examine the feasibility of the implementation strategy and to identify enablers and barriers for a successful implementation.
Methods
The implementation of PECAN was investigated in a 6-month pilot cluster-randomised controlled trial (c-RCT). As a key component of the implementation strategy, nominated nurses were trained as facilitators in a one-day workshop and supported by peer-mentoring (visit, telephone counselling). A mixed-methods approach was conducted in conjunction with the pilot trial and guided by a framework for process evaluations of c-RCTs. Data were collected using standardised questionnaires (nursing staff), documentation forms, problem-centred qualitative interviews (facilitators, therapists, social workers, relatives, peer-mentors), and a group discussion (facilitators). A set of predefined criteria on the nursing home level was examined. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analysed using directed content analysis.
Results
Seven nursing homes (n = 4 intervention groups, n = 3 control groups) in two regions of Germany took part in the study. Facilitators responded well to the qualification measures (workshop participation: 14/14; workshop rating: “good”; peer-mentor visit participation: 10/14). The usage of peer-mentoring via telephone varied (one to seven contacts per nursing home). Our implementation strategy was not successful in connection with supplying the intervention to all the nurses. The clear commitment of the entire nursing home and the respect for the expertise of different healthcare professionals were emphasised as enablers, whereas a lack of impact on organisational conditions and routines and a lack of time and staff competence were mentioned as barriers.
Conclusion
The PECAN intervention was delivered as planned to the facilitators but was unable to produce comprehensive changes in the nursing homes and subsequently for the residents. Strategies to systematically include the management and the nursing team from the beginning are needed to support the facilitators during implementation in the main trial.
Trial registration
German clinical trials register, DRKS00010037. Registered 12 February 2016.
Implementation of robotic devices in nursing care. Barriers and facilitators: an integrative review
(2020)
Background: Robots in healthcare are gaining increasing attention; however, their implementation is challenging due to the complexity of both interventions themselves and the contexts in which they are implemented. The objective of this integrative review is to identify barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of robotic systems in nursing.
Methods: Articles published from 2002 to 2019 reporting on projects to implement robotic devices in nursing care were searched on Medline (via PubMed), CINAHL and databases on funded research projects (Community Research and Development Information Services and Technische Informationsbibliothek) and in journals for robotic research in November 2017 and July 2019 for an update. No restrictions regarding study designs were imposed. All included articles underwent quality assessments with design-specific critical appraisal tools. Barriers to and facilitators of implementation were classified using the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions framework.
Results: After removing all duplicates, the search revealed 11 204 studies, of which 17 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the synthesis. The majority of the studies dealt with the implementation of robots designed to support individuals, either living at home or in nursing homes (n=11). The studies were conducted in Europe, the USA and New Zealand and were carried out in nursing homes, individual living environments, hospital units and laboratories. The quality of reporting and quality of evidence were low in most studies. The most frequently reported barriers were in socioeconomic and ethical domains and were within the implementation outcomes domain. The most frequently reported facilitators were related to the sociocultural context, implementation process and implementation strategies.
Discussion: This review identified barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of robotic devices in nursing within different dimensions. The results serve as a basis for the development of suitable implementation strategies to reduce potential barriers and promote the integration of elements to facilitate implementation.
PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018073486.
Background
Vertigo, dizziness and balance disorders (VDB) are among the most relevant contributors to the burden of disability among older adults living in the community and associated with immobility, limitations of activities of daily living and decreased participation. The aim of this study was to identify the quality of evidence of physical therapy interventions that address mobility and participation in older patients with VDB and to characterize the used primary and secondary outcomes.
Methods
A systematic search via MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PEDro, forward citation tracing and hand search was conducted initially in 11/2017 and updated in 7/2019. We included individual and cluster-randomized controlled trials and trials with quasi-experimental design, published between 2007 and 2017/2019 and including individuals ≥65 years with VDB. Physical therapy and related interventions were reviewed with no restrictions to outcome measurement. Screening of titles, abstracts and full texts, data extraction and critical appraisal was conducted by two independent researchers. The included studies were heterogeneous in terms of interventions and outcome measures. Therefore, a narrative synthesis was conducted.
Results
A total of 20 randomized and 2 non-randomized controlled trials with 1876 patients met the inclusion criteria. The included studies were heterogeneous in terms of complexity of interventions, outcome measures and methodological quality. Vestibular rehabilitation (VR) was examined in twelve studies, computer-assisted VR (CAVR) in five, Tai Chi as VR (TCVR) in three, canal repositioning manoeuvres (CRM) in one and manual therapy (MT) in one study. Mixed effects were found regarding body structure/function and activities/participation. Quality of life and/or falls were assessed, with no differences between groups. VR is with moderate quality of evidence superior to usual care to improve balance, mobility and symptoms.
Conclusion
To treat older individuals with VDB, VR in any variation and in addition to CRMs seems to be effective. High-quality randomized trials need to be conducted to inform clinical decision making.
Trial registration
PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017080291.