Faculty of Nursing, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Can J Aging. 2023 Dec;42(4):761-770. doi: 10.1017/S071498082300034X. Epub 2023 Aug 15.
Our study aimed to explore how perceived baseline contact may influence acceptability of , a personal contact intervention, among people living with dementia. We aimed to generate hypotheses for testing in future studies. This was a sub-group analysis of pilot study data. Fifteen people living with mild to moderate dementia participated in We explored how perceptions of intervention acceptability may differ in groups reporting weekly contact ( = 8) compared with groups reporting monthly/unknown ( = 7) contact at baseline. Measures of acceptability included a treatment perceptions and preferences questionnaire, and the number of and reasons for non-consent, missing data, and study withdrawal. We used descriptive statistics and content analysis. In visits one and two, a larger proportion (85.7-100%) of low baseline contact participants reported feeling better, and indicated that the visits helped them and were easy "mostly" or "a lot", compared with the high baseline contact group (37.5-62.5%). Most missing data (71%) and all study withdrawals occurred in the high baseline contact group. Scheduled in-person visits with family, friends, or a volunteer may appeal to residents in care homes who have few existing opportunities for routine, one-on-one visits with others. Hypotheses generated should be tested in future studies.
我们的研究旨在探讨基线接触感知如何影响痴呆症患者对个人接触干预措施的可接受性。我们旨在为未来的研究提出假设。这是一项试点研究数据的亚组分析。15 名轻度至中度痴呆症患者参加了我们的研究。我们探讨了在基线时每周接触（=8 人）与每月/未知接触（=7 人）的小组中，对干预措施可接受性的看法有何不同。可接受性的衡量标准包括治疗认知和偏好问卷，以及不同意、缺失数据和研究退出的次数和原因。我们使用了描述性统计和内容分析。在第 1 次和第 2 次就诊中，与高基线接触组（37.5-62.5%）相比，低基线接触组的参与者（85.7-100%）报告感觉更好，并且表示就诊对他们有帮助，而且就诊容易“主要是”或“很多”。大多数缺失数据（71%）和所有研究退出都发生在高基线接触组。与家人、朋友或志愿者定期进行面对面的访问可能会吸引养老院的居民，因为他们很少有机会与他人进行常规的一对一访问。应该在未来的研究中检验提出的假设。
