Search

Background and Objectives Providing preferred leisure activities appears to be an important approach to support and empower people receiving adult day services (ADS) allowing them to age in place. To provide the conceptualization for a preference instrument, we actively involved people receiving ADS in exploring the content and structure of their preferences for leisure activities. Research Design and Methods We chose a concept mapping methodology and involved 16 people receiving ADS. We systematically reviewed the literature and conducted semistructured interviews to generate a set of 80 preferences. Analysis of structuring these preferences resulted in a 3-dimensional cube with 12 clusters. A graphical representation was then interpreted , and the clusters were labeled. Results Our conceptualization divides preferences for leisure activities into the following: 1. Take a trip , 2. Revel in memories and catch up on the news (most important), 3. Do something for yourself and come to rest , 4. Play intelligence and parlor games , 5. Make/produce and try something alone or in a group , 6. Keep fit and cheer others on in sports (least important), 7. Learn, educate, and share knowledge , 8. Have contact with other people , 9. Attend at entertainment, cultural, and amusement events , 10. Enjoy music, your homeland, or other countries , 11. Engage in outdoor activities , and 12. Get involved, offer support, and provide companionship. Discussion and Implications Our results may lead to the development of instruments and thus opens the field for further research and theory building on preferences for leisure activities of people receiving ADS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectivesMethodsResultsConclusionsClinical implicationsThe current study aimed to develop and preliminarily validate an initial version of an instrument to assess the leisure activity preferences of people receiving adult day services (ADS).Based on previously conducted concept mapping steps, we identified 12 clusters of preferences for leisure activities. We adopted the structure of the Preferences for Everyday Living Inventory and phrased our cluster labels as questions to develop a first draft of the Preferences for Leisure Activities Inventory (P-LAI). We conducted cognitive interviews (n = 8) to revise, preliminarily validate, and preliminarily finalize the P-LAI.The draft of the P-LAI included 25 questions. Based on the results of the cognitive interviews, the number of questions was reduced to 21, three questions were rephrased, and evidence to support the preliminary validity of the P-LAI based on the response processes was provided.The P-LAI is the first instrument to assess preferences for leisure activities in the ADS environment.The preliminary results of the P-LAI allow ADS providers and healthcare professionals to assess the preferences for leisure activities of people who receive ADS in a structured way. Based on these results, preference-based services can be designed and planned, and the person-centered philosophy of care can be further operationalized in the ADS environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Currently it is unknown what people receiving adult day services (ADS) understand as leisure and the activities they prefer remain unknown. To address these gaps, we investigated the understanding of leisure of people receiving ADS. We conducted semistructured interviews with 15 people receiving ADS in Germany. Interviews were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. The sweet bitter symphony emphasizes the sensations that shape participant's understanding of leisure. Young, wild & free ! describes the types of preferred activities. Is this our last tango? refers to the barriers. Anchors aweigh! the [ongoing] voyage describes the process by which leisure is transferred from private domain to the ADS environment. The beginning is the end is the beginning illustrates the paradox of understanding the ADS as offering a form of leisure and the adaptation to engage in nonpreference-based activities. Our findings indicate the importance in offering leisure activities that enable preference-based engagement in the ADS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Caring for people with dementia is complex, and there are various evidence-based interventions. However, a gap exists between the available interventions and how to implement them. The objectives of our review are to identify implementation strategies, implementation outcomes, and influencing factors for the implementation of evidence-based interventions that focus on three preselected phenomena in people with dementia: (A) behavior that challenges supporting a person with dementia in long-term care, (B) delirium in acute care, and (C) postacute care needs. Methods: We conducted a scoping review according to the description of the Joanna Briggs Institute. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. For the data analysis, we conducted deductive content analysis. For this analysis, we used the Expert Recommendations for Implementation Change (ERIC), implementation outcomes according to Proctor and colleagues, and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results: We identified 362 (A), 544 (B), and 714 records (C) on the three phenomena and included 7 (A), 3 (B), and 3 (C) studies. Among the studies, nine reported on the implementation strategies they used. Clusters with the most reported strategies were adapt and tailor to context and train and educate stakeholders. We identified one study that tested the effectiveness of the applied implementation strategy, while ten studies reported implementation outcomes (mostly fidelity). Regarding factors that influence implementation, all identified studies reported between 1 and 19 factors. The most reported factors were available resources and the adaptability of the intervention. To address dementia-specific influencing factors, we enhanced the CFIR construct of patient needs and resources to include family needs and resources. Conclusions: We found a high degree of homogeneity across the different dementia phenomena, the evidence-based interventions, and the care settings in terms of the implementation strategies used, implementation outcomes measured, and influencing factors identified. However, it remains unclear to what extent implementation strategies themselves are evidence-based and which intervention strategy can be used by practitioners when either the implementation outcomes are not adjusted to the implementation strategy and/or the effects of implementation strategies are mostly unknown. Future research needs to focus on investigating the effectiveness of implementation strategies for evidence-based interventions for dementia care. Trial registration: The review protocol was prospectively published (Manietta et al., BMJ Open 11:e051611, 2021). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Systematic reviews summarize and evaluate relevant studies to contribute to evidence-based practice. Internationally, researchers have reached a consensus that the active involvement of the public leads to better research. Despite this agreement, there are many reviews of research concerning healthcare interventions intended to promote the care of people living with dementia and those from their social network (e.g., close contacts, both family and non-family members) primarily involve only healthcare professionals and other experts. Due to the lack of a dementia-sensitive framework to actively involve people living with dementia and those from their social network, and healthcare professionals as co-researchers in systematic reviews, it is important to develop a framework to inform practice. Methods: For this framework development process, we will recruit four people living with dementia and a total of four people from their social network, and three healthcare professionals working in acute or long-term care settings. We will conduct regular meetings with these groups of the public and healthcare professionals to include them in all stages of the systematic review. We will also identify and develop methods necessary to ensure meaningful involvement. The results will be documented and analyzed for the development of a framework. For the planning and preparation for these meetings, as well as the conduct of the meetings themselves, we will be guided by the principles of the INVOLVE approach. In addition, the ACTIVE framework will be used to guide the degree of involvement and the stage in the review process. Discussion: We assume that our transparent approach to the development of a framework to support the active involvement of people living with dementia and those from their social network, and healthcare professionals in systematic reviews will serve as an impetus for and provide guidance to other researchers with the goal of increasing researchers' focus on this topic and facilitating systematic reviews that apply participatory approaches. Trial registration: Trial registration is unnecessary as no intervention study will be conducted. Plain English summary: Systematic reviews summarize and evaluate studies on a particular topic. They provide information, for example, regarding whether an intervention is beneficial. This type of review is particularly important for healthcare professionals because they can use the results of the review to guide their actions. There is a growing awareness that the public, including people living with dementia and those from their social network (e.g., relatives, friends), need to be actively involved in the process of preparing these reviews when they are concerned with the topic of the reviews. Despite this consensus, it is often the case that only healthcare professionals are involved in such reviews. At present, no framework for the active involvement of people living with dementia and those from their social network, and healthcare professionals in systematic reviews has been developed. Therefore, we will develop such a framework together in collaboration with a range of members of the public and healthcare professionals. For this purpose, in addition to healthcare professionals, we will involve people living with dementia and those from their social network. Over the course of several meetings, we will engage in discussion with them and identify the stages of the process of conducting a systematic review in which their involvement as members of the researcher team is meaningful. We will furthermore identify the requirements associated with such an active involvement. A written report of these discussions will be produced in collaboration with the group. This will contribute towards the development of a framework for other researchers. The framework will later be made available to the public free of charge to increase awareness of this topic and to contribute towards more frequent, well-organised and meaningful involvement of people living with dementia and those from their social network, and healthcare professionals in systematic reviews. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Aim Design Result Conclusion Implications for the Profession and Patient Care Impact Reporting Method Patient and Public Contribution To investigate the professional dementia experts' understanding of a dementia‐friendly hospital to identify its characteristics.We used a qualitative design embedded in a case study. A total of 16 semi‐structured expert interviews were conducted with 17 professional dementia experts. Using inductive content analysis, the interviews were analysed in a participatory manner involving a group of researchers and dementia experts.We identified six characteristics of dementia‐friendly hospitals: Proud to be dementia‐friendly—That's what we want; Seeing the human being—Taking care of everyone; Having everyone on board—It's a collective task; Being professional—It takes more than being nice and kind; Rethinking the ‘running’ system—We have to change, not them; and Being part of the community—Thinking beyond the hospital.The concept of a dementia‐friendly hospital seems complex and requires a rethinking of the traditional hospital. For a conceptualisation, the involvement of people with dementia and their relatives is important to gain a comprehensive understanding.A dementia‐friendly hospital is characterised by professional care that comprises a safe, familiar and supportive environment, is prepared but also flexible, has everyone on board, and sees the human being. To become dementia‐friendly, individual interventions such as training courses can be a starting point. However, an overall concept is required that also includes components that contribute to successful implementation and a welcoming culture of people with dementia.Our findings on the perspective of professional dementia experts contribute to the conceptualisation of dementia‐friendly hospitals.We reported our study according to the COREQ checklist.The investigation of the perspective of professional dementia experts is one part of a larger study. In this overall DEMfriendlyHospital study, we interviewed professional dementia experts, people with dementia and their relatives and also involved them in a participatory manner in various stages of the research process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]