Suppr超能文献

团队式和问题式方法在养老院中的痴呆症护理的比较及其对 COVID-19 大流行期间居民结果的影响:一项混合方法研究。

Comparison of Team-Based and Problem-Based Approaches to Dementia Care in Nursing Homes and Their Effects on Resident Outcomes During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mixed-Methods Study.

机构信息

Titus Family Department of Clinical Pharmacy, USC Mann School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Sol Price School of Public Policy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Schaeffer Center for Health Policy & Economics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

出版信息

J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2024 Oct;25(10):105217. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2024.105217. Epub 2024 Aug 17.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Compare the effectiveness of 2 nonpharmacologic approaches to dementia care in nursing homes on 12- and 18-month resident outcomes, which was after the emergence of COVID-19.

DESIGN AND INTERVENTION

A cluster randomized pragmatic trial, which included an embedded convergent mixed-methods design. Nursing homes were randomized to a team-based (TB) or problem-based (PB) intervention arm.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Residents (n = 2658 at baseline) and staff (n = 327) from 52 nursing homes in the United States.

METHODS

The exploratory quantitative analysis used a difference-in-differences model to compare the change in TB arm resident outcomes between baseline, 12 months, and 18 months relative to the PB arm using the Minimum Data Set 3.0. Outcomes included antipsychotic medication use, behavioral symptoms, wandering, and rejection of care. Staff interview data were analyzed in a 3-phase team-based rapid qualitative analysis approach, after which data were integrated.

RESULTS

Rejection of care decreased by 5.9 percentage points in the TB arm relative to the PB arm at 12 months (95% CI -11.7 to -0.2). Emergent results indicated that COVID-19 visitation restrictions prevented PB staff from working with families to manage rejection of care as was done before the pandemic, whereas TB staff described using collaboration strategies not hindered by the pandemic. There was no statistically significant difference between arms in antipsychotic medication use, behavioral symptoms, and wandering at either follow-up period. When integrated, qualitative data provided contradictory information on antipsychotic medication use and confirmatory information on behavioral symptoms and wandering.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The exploratory nature and mixed results of the quantitative data analysis limited the ability to determine a clear benefit of one approach over the other. Findings suggest that dementia care delivery faced complex challenges during COVID-19 and required engagement from a broad range of nursing home staff underscoring the importance of equipping all staff with foundational dementia care knowledge.

摘要

目的

比较 2 种非药物干预措施在养老机构对居民的影响,该研究是在新冠疫情爆发后进行的,评估指标为 12 个月和 18 个月的居民结果。

设计和干预

这是一项群组随机实用试验,包括一个嵌入式收敛混合方法设计。养老院被随机分配到一个以团队为基础(TB)或以问题为基础(PB)的干预组。

地点和参与者

来自美国 52 家养老院的 2658 名居民(基线时)和 327 名工作人员。

方法

使用差异中的差异模型对 TB 组居民结果进行探索性定量分析,与 PB 组进行比较,使用最低数据集 3.0。结果包括抗精神病药物使用、行为症状、徘徊和拒绝护理。工作人员访谈数据采用基于团队的快速定性分析方法进行 3 阶段分析,然后进行数据整合。

结果

TB 组与 PB 组相比,12 个月时拒绝护理的比例下降了 5.9 个百分点(95%置信区间为-11.7 至-0.2)。初步结果表明,新冠疫情限制了探视,使 PB 工作人员无法像大流行前那样与家属合作管理拒绝护理,而 TB 工作人员则表示,他们使用的合作策略不受疫情的阻碍。在两个随访期,两组在抗精神病药物使用、行为症状和徘徊方面均无统计学差异。当整合时,定性数据对抗精神病药物使用提供了相互矛盾的信息,对行为症状和徘徊提供了确认性信息。

结论和意义

定量数据分析的探索性质和混合结果限制了确定一种方法优于另一种方法的能力。研究结果表明,在新冠疫情期间,痴呆症护理服务面临着复杂的挑战,需要养老院的广泛工作人员参与,这突显了为所有工作人员提供基础痴呆症护理知识的重要性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验