Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33579279›Full record

Trial reportBMC health services research2021

Staff experiences of implementing Dementia Care Mapping to improve the quality of dementia care in care homes: a qualitative process evaluation.

Alys Wyn Griffiths, Olivia C Robinson, Emily Shoesmith, Rachael Kelley, Claire A Surr

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors.

Alys Wyn GriffithsCentre for Dementia Research, Leeds Beckett University, City Campus, Leeds, LS1 3HE, UK.
Olivia C RobinsonCentre for Dementia Research, Leeds Beckett University, City Campus, Leeds, LS1 3HE, UK.
Emily ShoesmithCentre for Dementia Research, Leeds Beckett University, City Campus, Leeds, LS1 3HE, UK.
Rachael KelleyCentre for Dementia Research, Leeds Beckett University, City Campus, Leeds, LS1 3HE, UK.
Claire A SurrCentre for Dementia Research, Leeds Beckett University, City Campus, Leeds, LS1 3HE, UK. c.a.surr@leedsbeckett.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4312-6661

Funding

Department of Health 11/15/13Health Technology Assessment Programme 11/15/13
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDementia Care Mapping™ (DCM) is a widely used, staff-led, psychosocial intervention to support the implementation of person-centred care. Efficacy evaluations in care homes have produced mixed outcomes, with implementation problems identified. Understanding the experiences of staff trained to lead DCM implementation is crucial to understanding implementation challenges, yet this has rarely been formally explored. This study aimed to examine the experiences of care home staff trained to lead DCM implementation, within a large cluster randomised controlled trial.

methodsProcess evaluation including, semi-structured interviews with 27 trained mappers from 16 intervention allocated care homes. Data were analysed using template variant of thematic analysis.

resultsThree main themes were identified 1) Preparedness to lead - While mappers overwhelmingly enjoyed DCM training, many did not have the personal attributes required to lead practice change and felt DCM training did not adequately equip them to implement it in practice. For many their expectations of the mapper role at recruitment contrasted with the reality once they began to attempt implementation; 2) Transferring knowledge into practice - Due to the complex nature of DCM, developing mastery required regular practice of DCM skills, which was difficult to achieve within available time and resources. Gaining engagement of and transferring learning to the wider staff team was challenging, with benefits of DCM largely limited to the mappers themselves, rather than realised at a care home level; and 3) Sustaining DCM - This required a perception of DCM as beneficial, allocation of adequate resources and support for the process which was often not able to be provided, for the mapper role to fit with the staff member's usual duties and for DCM to fit with the home's ethos and future plans for care.

conclusionsMany care homes may not have staff with the requisite skills to lead practice change using DCM, or the requisite staffing, resources or leadership support required for sustainable implementation. Adaptations to the DCM tool, process and training may be required to reduce its complexity and burden and increase chances of implementation success. Alternatively, models of implementation not reliant on care home staff may be required.

Indexed as

DementiaNursing HomesHumansLeadershipSelf CareImplementationLong-term careNursing homesPractice developmentPsychosocial interventionsResidential careStaff developmentSustainability

Identifiers

PMID33579279
PMCPMC7881580

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.