Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32161658›Full record

ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2020

Evaluating the feasibility and acceptability of the Namaste Care program in long-term care settings in Canada.

Sharon Kaasalainen, Paulette V Hunter, Vanina Dal Bello-Haas, Lisa Dolovich, Katherine Froggatt, Thomas Hadjistavropoulos, Maureen Markle-Reid, Jenny Ploeg, Joyce Simard, Lehana Thabane and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Namaste Care Family for people with dementia and family-A randomized controlled trial.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Sharon Kaasalainen1School of Nursing, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, HSC 3H48C, Hamilton, ON L8S 3Z1 Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2175-6037
Paulette V Hunter3St. Thomas More College, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
Vanina Dal Bello-Haas4School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Lisa Dolovich2Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, 3H48C, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5 Canada.
Katherine FroggattInternational Observatory on End of Life Care, Lancaster, UK.
Thomas Hadjistavropoulos7Department of Psychology, University of Regina, Regina, Canada.
Maureen Markle-Reid8Aging, Community and Health Research Unit, School of Nursing, McMaster Institute for Research on Aging/Collaborative for Health and Aging, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, HSc 3N25B, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1 Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4019-7077
Jenny Ploeg9Aging, Community and Health Research Unit, School of Nursing, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, HSc 3N25C, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1 Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8168-8449
Joyce SimardLand O Lakes, USA.
Lehana Thabane11Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON Canada.
Jenny T van der Steen12Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Ladislav Volicer13School of Aging Studies, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResidents living and dying in long-term care (LTC) homes represent one of society's most frail and marginalized populations of older adults, particularly those residents with advanced dementia who are often excluded from activities that promote quality of life in their last months of life. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and effects of Namaste Care: an innovative program to improve end-of-life care for people with advanced dementia.

methodsThis study used a mixed-method survey design to evaluate the Namaste Care program in two LTC homes in Canada. Pain, quality of life, and medication costs were assessed for 31 residents before and 6 months after they participated in Namaste Care. The program consisted of two 2-h sessions per day for 5 days per week. Namaste Care staff provided high sensory care to residents in a calm, therapeutic environment in a small group setting. Feasibility was assessed in terms of recruitment rate, number of sessions attended, retention rate, and any adverse events. Acceptability was assessed using qualitative interviews with staff and family.

resultsThe feasibility of Namaste Care was acceptable with a participation rate of 89%. However, participants received only 72% of the sessions delivered and only 78% stayed in the program for at least 3 months due to mortality. After attending Namaste Care, participants' pain and quality of life improved and medication costs decreased. Family members and staff perceived the program to be beneficial, noting positive changes in residents. The majority of participants were very satisfied with the program, providing suggestions for ongoing engagement throughout the implementation process.

conclusionsThese study findings support the implementation of the Namaste Care program in Canadian LTC homes to improve the quality of life for residents. However, further testing is needed on a larger scale.

Indexed as

DementiaLong-term carePalliative care

Identifiers

PMID32161658
PMCPMC7053118

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.