ArticleBMC geriatrics2023
Investigating the impact of an online hydration intervention in care homes using the COM-B model: a mixed methods study.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Exploring Staff Perspectives on the Feasibility of Integrating the Environmental Components of a Novel Intervention for Hydration in Long-Term Care.International journal of older people nursing · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAntimicrobial resistance is a serious threat to public health. To reduce antimicrobial resistance, interventions to reduce gram-negative infections, specifically urinary tract infections, are vital. Early evidence suggests increased fluid intake is linked with a reduction in UTIs and subsequently has potential to reduce antibiotic usage. Care homes have a high prevalence of UTIs and provide an opportunity in a closed setting to deliver an intervention focused on increasing fluid intake, where it is supported and monitored by health care workers. The study aimed to evaluate the impact and feasibility of an online staff focused intervention over a 30 day period to increase the hydration of care home residents with a view to reducing the burden of AMR in this setting.
methodsThe study was a pre and post intervention with a sequential explanatory mixed methods design. The intervention was delivered online in 3 care homes, containing 3 main components underpinned by the COM-B model including hydration training, 7 structured drinks rounds and a hydration champion to change behaviour of care home staff. A pre and post questionnaire assessed the impact of the intervention on staff and data was collected on fluid intake, drinks rounds delivered to residents, UTIs, antibiotic used to treat UTIs, falls and hospitalisation. Descriptive statistics summarised and assessed the impact of the study. Focus groups with care home staff provided qualitative data which was thematically analysed.
resultsStaff increased in self-perceived knowledge across the six components of hydration care. 59% of residents had an increase in median fluid intake post intervention. During the time of the intervention, a 13% decrease in UTIs and antibiotic usage to treat UTIs across the 3 care homes was recorded, however falls and hospitalisations increased. Themes arising from focus groups included the role of information for action, accessibility of online training, online training content.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that a brief, low cost, online multi-component intervention focused on care home staff can increase the fluid intake of residents. A reduction in UTIs and antibiotic consumption was observed overall. Empowering care home staff could be a way of reducing the burden of infection in this setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.