Faculty of Medicine, Department of Health Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Faculty of Health Sciences, Research Platform for Collaboration for Health, Kristianstad University, Kristianstad, Sweden.
PLoS One. 2021 Jan 25;16(1):e0244600. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244600. eCollection 2021.
Next of kin participation in care is a cornerstone of palliative care and is thus important in nursing homes, and outcomes following interventions need to be evaluated using robust methods.
To use within-group and within-individual analytical approaches to evaluate the participation of next of kin in care following an intervention and to compare the outcome between the intervention and control groups.
A pre-post intervention/control group study design was used. The educational intervention, directed towards staff members, focused on palliative care. The Next of Kin Participation in Care scale comprises the Communication and Trust subscale and the Collaboration in Care subscale, with nine items each. In total, 203 persons (intervention group: n = 95; control group: n = 108) were included. Three different analytical approaches were used: 1) traditional within-group comparison of raw ordinal scores and linearly transformed interval scores; 2) modern within-individual (person-level) interval score comparisons; 3) comparisons between the intervention group and control group based on individual person-level outcomes.
Within-group comparisons of change revealed no change in any of the groups, whether based on raw or transformed scores. Despite this, significant improvements at the individual level were found in 32.9% of the intervention group and 11.6% of the control group for the total scale (p = 0.0024), in 25% of the intervention group and 10.5% of the control group for the Communication and Trust subscale (p = 0.0018), and in 31.2% of the intervention group and 10.5% of the control group for the Collaboration in Care subscale (p = 0.0016). However, a significant worsening at the individual level in Collaboration in Care was found in 35.1% of the intervention group but only among 8.4% of the control group (p < 0.0005).
The intervention seems to have a positive impact on next of kin participation in care in nursing homes, especially for communication and trust. However, some next of kin reported decreased participation in care after the intervention. Modern individual person-level approaches for the analysis of intervention outcomes revealed individual significant changes beyond traditional group-level comparisons that would otherwise be hidden. The findings are relevant for future outcome studies and may also necessitate a re-evaluation of previous studies that have not used individual person-level comparisons.
This study is part of the intervention project registered under Clinical Trials Registration NCT02708498.
在安养院,亲属参与护理是姑息治疗的基石,因此这一点非常重要,需要使用稳健的方法来评估干预措施后的结果。
使用组内和个体内分析方法来评估干预后亲属参与护理的情况,并比较干预组和对照组的结果。
采用干预前后/对照组的设计方案。针对员工的教育干预侧重于姑息治疗。“亲属参与护理量表”由沟通和信任子量表以及护理合作子量表组成,每个量表包含 9 个项目。共纳入 203 人(干预组:n = 95;对照组:n = 108)。采用三种不同的分析方法:1)原始等级评分和线性转换区间评分的传统组内比较;2)现代个体内(个体水平)区间评分比较;3)基于个体水平结局的干预组和对照组之间的比较。
无论基于原始评分还是转换评分,组内变化的比较均未显示任何一组有变化。尽管如此,在干预组中,有 32.9%的个体和 11.6%的个体在总分(p = 0.0024)、25%的个体和 10.5%的个体在沟通和信任子量表(p = 0.0018)以及 31.2%的个体和 10.5%的个体在护理合作子量表(p = 0.0016)方面出现了显著的个体水平改善。然而,在干预组中,有 35.1%的个体在护理合作方面的个体水平出现了显著恶化,而对照组中只有 8.4%的个体出现了这种情况(p < 0.0005)。
该干预措施似乎对安养院中亲属参与护理产生了积极影响,特别是在沟通和信任方面。然而,一些亲属在干预后报告称参与护理的程度下降。用于分析干预结果的现代个体内方法揭示了传统组间比较可能隐藏的个体显著变化。这些发现对未来的结果研究具有重要意义,也可能需要重新评估之前没有使用个体内比较的研究。
本研究是在注册号为 NCT02708498 的干预项目中进行的。