Search

Abstract: Background: Patient care guidelines are usually implemented one at a time, yet patients are at risk for multiple, often preventable, adverse events simultaneously. Objective: The SAFE or SORRY? programme targeted three adverse events (pressure ulcers, urinary tract infections and falls) and was successful in reducing the incidence of these events. This article explores the process of change and describes the effect on the preventive care given. Design: Separate data on preventive care were collected along the cluster randomised trial, which was conducted between September 2006 and November 2008. Settings: Ten hospital wards and ten nursing home wards. Participants: We monitored nursing care given to adult patients with an expected length of stay of at least five days. Methods: The SAFE or SORRY? programme consisted of the essential recommendations of guidelines for pressure ulcers, urinary tract infections and falls. A multifaceted implementation strategy was used to implement this multiple guidelines programme. Data on preventive care given to patients were collected in line with these guidelines and the difference between the intervention and the usual care group at follow-up was analysed. Results: The study showed no overall difference in preventive pressure ulcer measures between the intervention and the usual care group in hospitals (estimate=6%, CI: −7–19) and nursing homes (estimate=4%, CI: −5–13). For urinary tract infections, even statistically significantly fewer hospital patients at risk received preventive care (estimate=19%, CI: 17–21). For falls in hospitals and nursing homes, no more patients at risk received preventive care. Conclusion: Though the SAFE OR SORRY? programme effectively reduced the number of adverse events, an increase in preventive care given to patients at risk was not demonstrated. These results seem to emphasise the difficulties in measuring the compliance to guidelines. More research is needed to explore the possibilities for measuring the implementation of multiple guidelines using process indicators. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Background: Patient care guidelines are usually implemented one at a time, yet patients are at risk for multiple, often preventable, adverse events simultaneously. Objective: This study aimed to test the effect of the SAFE or SORRY? programme on the incidence of three adverse events (pressure ulcers, urinary tract infections and falls). This paper describes Part I of the study: the effect on the incidence of adverse events. Design: A cluster randomised trial was conducted between September 2006 and November 2008. After a three-month baseline period the intervention was implemented followed by a nine-month follow-up period. Settings: Ten wards from four hospitals and ten wards from six nursing homes were stratified for institute and ward type and then randomised to intervention or usual care group. Participants: During baseline and follow-up, patients (≥18 years) with an expected length of stay of at least five days, were asked to participate. Methods: The SAFE or SORRY? programme consisted of the essential recommendations of guidelines for the three adverse events. A multifaceted implementation strategy was used for the implementation: education, patient involvement and feedback on process and outcome indicators. The usual care group continued care as usual. Data were collected on the incidence of adverse events and a Poisson regression model was used to estimate the rate ratio of the adverse events between the intervention and the usual care group at follow-up. Results: At follow-up, 2201 hospital patients with 3358 patient weeks and 392 nursing home patients with 5799 patient weeks were observed. Poisson regression analyses showed a rate ratio for the development of an adverse event in favour of the intervention group of 0.57 (95% CI: 0.34–0.95) and 0.67 (95% CI: 0.48–0.99) for hospital patients and nursing home patients respectively. Conclusion: This study showed that implementing multiple guidelines simultaneously is possible, which is promising. Patients in the intervention groups developed 43% and 33% fewer adverse events compared to the usual care groups in hospitals and nursing homes respectively. Even so, more research is necessary to underline these results. Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00365430. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Background: Patients in hospitals and nursing homes are at risk for the development of often preventable adverse events. Guidelines for the prevention of many types of adverse events are available, however compliance with these guidelines appears to be lacking. As a result many patients do not receive appropriate care. We developed a patient safety program that allows organisations to implement multiple guidelines simultaneously and therefore facilitates guideline use to improve patient safety. This program was developed for three frequently occurring nursing care related adverse events: pressure ulcers, urinary tract infections and falls. For the implementation of this program we developed educational activities for nurses as a main implementation strategy. Objectives: The aim of this study is to describe the effect of interactive and tailored education on the knowledge levels of nurses. Design: A cluster randomised trial was conducted between September 2006 and July 2008. Settings: Ten hospital wards and ten nursing home wards participated in this study. Prior to baseline, randomisation of the wards to an intervention or control group was stratified for centre and type of ward. Participants: All nurses from participating wards. Methods: A knowledge test measured nurses’ knowledge on the prevention of pressure ulcers, urinary tract infections and falls, during baseline en follow-up. The results were analysed for hospitals and nursing homes separately. Results: After correction for baseline, the mean difference between the intervention and the control group on hospital nurses’ knowledge on the prevention of the three adverse events was 0.19 points on a zero to ten scale (95% CI: −0.03 to 0.42), in favour of the intervention group. There was a statistically significant effect on knowledge of pressure ulcers, with an improved mean mark of 0.45 points (95% CI: 0.10–0.81). For the other two topics there was no statistically significant effect. Nursing home nurses’ knowledge did neither improve (0 points, CI: −0.35 to 0.35) overall, nor for the separate subjects. Conclusion: The educational intervention improved hospital nurses’ knowledge on the prevention of pressure ulcers only. More research on long term improvement of knowledge is needed. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID [NCT00365430]. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Objective: Balance of prognostic factors between treatment groups is desirable because it improves the accuracy, precision, and credibility of the results. In cluster-controlled trials, imbalance can easily occur by chance when the number of cluster is small. If all clusters are known at the start of the study, the “best balance” allocation method (BB) can be used to obtain optimal balance. This method will be compared with other allocation methods. Study Design and Setting: We carried out a simulation study to compare the balance obtained with BB, minimization, unrestricted randomization, and matching for four to 20 clusters and one to five categorical prognostic factors at cluster level. Results: BB resulted in a better balance than randomization in 13–100% of the situations, in 0–61% for minimization, and in 0–88% for matching. The superior performance of BB increased as the number of clusters and/or the number of factors increased. Conclusion: BB results in a better balance of prognostic factors than randomization, minimization, stratification, and matching in most situations. Furthermore, BB cannot result in a worse balance of prognostic factors than the other methods. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objective: This observational study explores advanced practice nurses' (APN) performance in secondary prevention and self-management support in patients with cardiovascular disease.Methods: Real-life consultations in three outpatient clinics were recorded on audio and analysed. First, discussed (sub)categories were determined using five categories of self-management: symptom management, treatment, biomedical cardiovascular risk factors, psychosocial consequences, and lifestyle changes. Second, the extent in which motivational interviewing aspects were applied was determined using the Behaviour Change Counselling Index (BECCI).Results: In total, 49 consultations performed by five female APNs were analysed. Physical topics were discussed in 98% and psychological subthemes in 41% of the consultations. Although not all components of motivational interviewing were applied, talking about current behaviour and behaviours that should change were discussed, and information was provided. Especially setting targets and exchanging ideas on how to reach behavioural goals were applied to a small extent.Conclusion: Well-trained APNs in the current study do not carry out motivational interviewing in a structural and complete manner according to BECCI and do not discuss all self-management categories.Practice Implications: Psychological topics should be more integrated in providing self-management support by APNs and the application of motivational interviewing should be enhanced by regularly and repeated training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To identify self-report, self-management measures for adults with chronic conditions, and describe their purpose, theoretical foundation, dimensionality (multi versus uni), and scope (generic versus condition specific).Methods: A search of four databases (8479 articles) resulted in a scoping review of 28 self-management measures.Results: Although authors identified tools as measures of self-management, wide variation in constructs measured, purpose, and theoretical foundations existed. Subscales on 13 multidimensional tools collectively measure domains of self-management relevant to clients, however no one tool's subscales cover all domains.Conclusions: Viewing self-management as a complex, multidimensional whole, demonstrated that existing measures assess different, related aspects of self-management. Activities and social roles, though important to patients, are rarely measured. Measures with capacity to quantify and distinguish aspects of self-management may promote tailored patient care.Practice Implications: In selecting tools for research or assessment, the reason for development, definitions, and theories underpinning the measure should be scrutinized. Our ability to measure self-management must be rigorously mapped to provide comprehensive and system-wide care for clients with chronic conditions. Viewing self-management as a complex whole will help practitioners to understand the patient perspective and their contribution in supporting each individual patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim To assess the quality of evidence and determine the effect of patient-related and economic outcomes of self-management support interventions in chronically ill patients with a low socio-economic status. Background Integrated evidence on self-management support interventions in chronically ill people with low socio-economic status is lacking. Design Systematic literature review. Data sources Cochrane database of trials, PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, Psyc INFO and Joanna Briggs Institute Library were searched (2000-2013). Randomized controlled trials addressing self-management support interventions for patients with cardiovascular disease, stroke, cancer, diabetes and/or chronic respiratory disease were included. Review methods Data extraction and quality assessment were performed by independent researchers using a data extraction form. Results Studies ( n = 27) focused mainly on diabetes. Fourteen studies cited an underlying theoretical basis. Most frequently used self-management support components were lifestyle advice, information provision and symptom management. Problem-solving and goal-setting strategies were frequently integrated. Eleven studies adapted interventions to the needs of patients with a low socio-economic status. No differences were found for interventions developed based on health behaviour theoretical models. Conclusion Limited evidence was found for self-management support interventions in chronically ill patients with low socio-economic status. Essential characteristics and component(s) of effective self-management support interventions for these patients could not be detected. Rigorous reporting on development and underlying theories in the intervention is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Challenging behavior is prevalent in people with dementia residing in nursing homes and places a high burden on the nursing staff of dementia special care units. This study evaluates an educational program for nursing staff for managing challenging behavior: The Educating Nursing Staff Effectively (TENSE) program. This program can be tailored to care organizations' wishes and needs and combines various learning styles. The aim of this cluster-randomized controlled trial was to examine the short-term (3 months) and long-term (9 months) effects of the TENSE training program on experienced stress, work contentment, and stress reactions at work in nursing staff working in dementia special care units. Cluster-randomized controlled trial. Nursing staff members of 18 dementia special care units within nine nursing homes from different Netherlands regions were randomized into an intervention (n = 168) or control (n = 129) group. The TENSE program consisted of a three-day training course and two follow-up sessions after three and six months, respectively. The primary outcome was stress experienced by nursing staff measured with the Utrecht Burnout Scale - C. Secondary outcomes were work contentment and stress reactions at work. Furthermore, process evaluation data on the reach of and compliance with the program and the program's feasibility and relevance were collected. Data were collected between November 2012 and November 2014. In general, the participants appreciated the quality and relevance of the TENSE training and evaluated the content of the training as beneficial. The TENSE training had no effect on the components of experienced stress, i.e., emotional exhaustion (p = 0.751), depersonalization (p = 0.701), and personal accomplishment (p = 0.182). Furthermore, no statistically significant effects of the intervention on work contentment and stress reactions at work were found. The TENSE training program did not have an effect on experienced stress, work contentment, nor stress reactions at work of nursing staff working in dementia special care units. In future studies, more focus on practicing new skills seems needed. Trial registration: NTR (Dutch Trial Registration) number NTR3620 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]