ArticleImplementation science communications2025
De-implementation of low-value home-based nursing care: an effect and process evaluation.
Article in Implementation science communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe demand for homecare is increasing, and reducing low-value care is essential for achieving sustainable healthcare. Low-value care refers to practices that are ineffective, inefficient, unwanted, or potentially harmful to the client. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of a tailored, multifaceted de-implementation strategy in reducing low-value home-based nursing care.
methodsA prospective, multicenter, convergent parallel mixed method design was employed, including a before-and-after study, using the Reach-Effectiveness-Adoption-Implementation-Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. The effect of reducing low-value home-based nursing care was assessed from client records, focusing on the number of clients receiving care, minutes of care per week, frequency of visits per week, and clients no longer requiring care. The de-implementation process was evaluated qualitatively through individual interviews with de-implementation ambassadors, registered nurses, and nurse assistants, using Directed Qualitative Content Analysis. This approach served to interpret the effects of the deployment of de-implementation ambassadors and the strategies they implemented.
resultsWe observed a reduction in low-value home-based nursing care, with a decrease of 130 h per week in daily showering, bathing and/or dressing; 54 h per week in the assistance with compression stockings; and 8 h per week in changing bandages enabling clients to regain their independence. Important de-implementation strategies included involving clients and relatives in decision making, organizing informational meetings for homecare professionals, and fostering collaboration with other healthcare professionals. Factors that influenced adoption included providing reassurance and using a stepwise approach with clients and relatives. Homecare professionals noted that the de-implementation ambassadors were highly committed to reducing care. De-implementation ambassadors found their role to be intense, challenging, and exciting.
conclusionsThis evaluation found that the deployment of de-implementation ambassadors, paired with additional de-implementation strategies, enhanced the reduction of low-value home-based nursing care. Providing reassurance and involving clients and their relatives were identified as beneficial for the de-implementation process.
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.