Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35128740›Full record

ArticleHealth & social care in the community2022

Time to reflect is a rare and valued opportunity; a pilot of the NIDUS-professional dementia training intervention for homecare workers during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Daniel Kelleher, Kathryn Lord, Larisa Duffy, Penny Rapaport, Julie Barber, Jill Manthorpe, Monica Leverton, Briony Dow, Jessica Budgett, Sara Banks and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health & social care in the community, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 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 at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Daniel KelleherCentre for Applied Dementia Studies, University of Bradford, Bradford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2659-1606
Kathryn LordCentre for Applied Dementia Studies, University of Bradford, Bradford, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6681-2624
Larisa DuffyDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
Penny RapaportDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0479-6950
Julie BarberStatistical Sciences, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5762-762X
Jill ManthorpeNIHR Policy Research Unit on Health and Social Care Workforce, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9006-1410
Monica LevertonDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6678-5865
Briony DowNational Ageing Research Institute, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4186-314X
Jessica BudgettDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
Sara BanksDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
Sandra DugganAlzheimer's Society Research Network, London, UK.
Claudia CooperDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2777-7616
University of Idaho · USUniversity of Bradford · GBAlzheimer's Society · GBKing's College London · GBRoyal Statistical Society · GBThe University of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most people living with dementia want to continue living in their own home for as long as possible and many rely on support from homecare services to do so. There are concerns that homecare often fails to meet the needs of clients with dementia, but there is limited evidence regarding effective interventions to improve its delivery for this client group. We aimed to assess whether a co-designed, 6-session dementia training intervention for homecare workers (NIDUS-professional) was acceptable and feasible. Facilitated training sessions were delivered over 3 months, followed by 3, monthly implementation meetings to embed changes in practice. Two trained and supervised facilitators without clinical qualifications delivered the intervention via group video-calls during Oct 2020-March 2021 to a group of seven homecare workers from one agency in England. Participants provided qualitative feedback 3- and 6-months post intervention. Qualitative interview data and facilitator notes were integrated in a thematic analysis. Adherence to the intervention and fidelity of delivery were high, indicating that it was acceptable and feasible to deliver in practice. Thirty of a possible 42 (71.4%) group sessions were attended. In our thematic analysis we report one over-arching theme: 'Having time and space to reflect is a rare opportunity'. Within this we identified four subthemes (Having time to reflect is a rare opportunity; Reflecting with peers enhances learning; Reflection and perspective taking can improve care; Recognising skills and building confidence) through which we explored how participants valued the intervention to discuss their work and learn new skills. Attendance was lower for the implementation sessions, perhaps reflecting participants' lack of clarity about their purpose. We used our findings to consider how we can maintain positive impacts of the manualised sessions, so that these are translated into tangible, scalable benefits for people living with dementia and the homecare workforce. A randomised feasibility trial is underway.

Indexed as

COVID-19DementiaHome Care ServicesHome Health AidesHumansPandemicsdementia carehomecareindependenceinterventionsperson-centred caretraining

Identifiers

PMID35128740
PMCPMC9111618
OpenAlexW4210257367

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.