Search

Delirium frequently occurs in intensive care unit patients and is associated with worse outcomes. Recently, a multicomponent non-pharmacological nursing intervention program called UNDERPIN-ICU, was implemented in ten Dutch intensive care units. The program was aimed at delirium reduction by optimizing four modifiable risk factors: visual and hearing impairment, cognitive impairment, immobility, and sleep deprivation. Despite its scientific fundament and extensive implementation, this program showed no effect on delirium outcomes. To explore factors that hindered or facilitated the application of the UNDERPIN-ICU delirium program in daily practice as experienced by healthcare professionals. Semi-structured focus group interviews were conducted in all participating centers between April and June of 2019. Directed content and thematic analyses were applied. Interviews were coded. Codes were grouped into categories based on factors that hindered or facilitated program application. In total, 22 ICU nurses, 3 ICU physicians, 5 local delirium group members and one research manager participated in 10 focus group interviews. We found 41 factors that hindered or facilitated program application, grouped into five categories: interventions; individual healthcare professional; patient; implementation process; capacity for change, incentives and resources. Among the factors identified in this study, the facilitating factors included standardized interventions, a structured implementation, interactive educational meetings and, feedback and support. The hindering factors included doubts about usefulness, feasibility, the extensive number of program components, limited knowledge about the program and a focus on physical care. Factors that hindered program application may explain why the UNDERPIN-ICU program did not have positive effects on delirium outcomes. Factors that facilitated application should be strengthened in future non-pharmacological nursing interventions to prevent or reduce delirium in intensive care. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03002701 ; registration date December 26, 2016. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: General practitioners (GPs) are advised to offer advance care planning (ACP) to people with dementia (PWD). In a randomized controlled trial, an educational intervention for GPs aimed at initiating and optimizing ACP proved to be effective. During the intervention most GPs were accompanied by their practice nurse (PN). To provide insights into the intervention's successful components and what could be improved, we conducted a process evaluation and explored implementation, mechanisms of impact and contextual factors. Methods: We used the Medical Research Council guidance for process evaluations. Implementation was explored identifying reach and acceptability. We performed descriptive analyses of participants' characteristics; selection, inclusion and intervention attendance; a GP post-intervention survey on initiating ACP; a post intervention focus group with trainers of the intervention. Mechanisms of impact were explored identifying adoption and appropriateness. We used: participants' intervention ratings; a GP post-intervention survey on conducting ACP; ACP documentation in PWD's medical files; post-intervention interviews with PWD/FC dyads. All data was used to identify contextual factors. Results: The intervention was implemented by a small percentage of the total Dutch GP population invited, who mostly included motivated PWD/FC dyads with relatively little burden, and PWD with limited cognitive decline. The mechanisms of impact for GPs were: interactively learning to initiate ACP with training actors with a heterogeneous group of GPs and PNs. For PWD/FCs dyads, discussing non-medical preferences was most essential regarding their SDM experience and QoL. Some dyads however found ACP stressful and not feasible. Younger female GPs more often initiated ACP. Male PWD and those with mild dementia more often had had ACP. These characteristics and the safe and intimate training setting, were important contextual facilitators. Conclusion: We recommend Interventions aimed at improving ACP initiation with PWD by GPs to include interactive components and discussion of non-medical preferences. A safe environment and a heterogeneous group of participants facilitates such interventions. However, in practice not all FC/PWD dyads will be ready to start. Therefore, it is necessary to check their willingness when ACP is offered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]