OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate an intervention to improve staff offers of choice to nursing home residents during morning care. DESIGN: A controlled trial with a delayed intervention design. SETTING: Four community, for-profit nursing homes. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 169 long-stay nursing home residents who required staff assistance with morning care and were able to express their care preferences. INTERVENTION: Research staff held weekly training sessions with nurse aides (NAs) for 12 consecutive weeks focused on how to offer choice during four targeted morning care areas: when to get out of bed, when to get dressed/what to wear, incontinence care (changing and/or toileting), and where to dine. Training sessions consisted of brief video vignettes illustrating staff-resident interactions followed by weekly feedback about how often choice was being provided based on standardized observations of care conducted weekly by research staff. MEASUREMENTS: Research staff conducted standardized observations during a minimum of 4 consecutive morning hours per participant per week for 12 weeks of baseline and 12 weeks of intervention. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in the frequency that choice was offered for 3 of the 4 targeted morning care areas from baseline to intervention: (1) out of bed, 21% to 33% (P < .001); dressing, 20% to 32% (P < .001); incontinence care, 18% to 23%, (P < .014). Dining location (8% to 13%) was not significant. There was also a significant increase in the amount of NA staff time to provide care from baseline to intervention (8.01 ± 9.0 to 9.68 ± 9.9 minutes per person, P < .001). CONCLUSION: A staff training intervention improved the frequency with which NAs offered choice during morning care but also required more time. Despite significant improvements, choice was still offered one-third or less of the time during morning care.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate an intervention to improve staff offers of choice to nursing home residents during morning care. DESIGN: A controlled trial with a delayed intervention design. SETTING: Four community, for-profit nursing homes. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 169 long-stay nursing home residents who required staff assistance with morning care and were able to express their care preferences. INTERVENTION: Research staff held weekly training sessions with nurse aides (NAs) for 12 consecutive weeks focused on how to offer choice during four targeted morning care areas: when to get out of bed, when to get dressed/what to wear, incontinence care (changing and/or toileting), and where to dine. Training sessions consisted of brief video vignettes illustrating staff-resident interactions followed by weekly feedback about how often choice was being provided based on standardized observations of care conducted weekly by research staff. MEASUREMENTS: Research staff conducted standardized observations during a minimum of 4 consecutive morning hours per participant per week for 12 weeks of baseline and 12 weeks of intervention. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in the frequency that choice was offered for 3 of the 4 targeted morning care areas from baseline to intervention: (1) out of bed, 21% to 33% (P < .001); dressing, 20% to 32% (P < .001); incontinence care, 18% to 23%, (P < .014). Dining location (8% to 13%) was not significant. There was also a significant increase in the amount of NA staff time to provide care from baseline to intervention (8.01 ± 9.0 to 9.68 ± 9.9 minutes per person, P < .001). CONCLUSION: A staff training intervention improved the frequency with which NAs offered choice during morning care but also required more time. Despite significant improvements, choice was still offered one-third or less of the time during morning care.
Authors: Julia Neily; Peter D Mills; Yinong Young-Xu; Brian T Carney; Priscilla West; David H Berger; Lisa M Mazzia; Douglas E Paull; James P Bagian Journal: JAMA Date: 2010-10-20 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Jennifer King; Lindsey Yourman; Cyrus Ahalt; Catherine Eng; Sara J Knight; Eliseo J Pérez-Stable; Alexander K Smith Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2012-01-30 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Philip D Sloane; Lois L Miller; C Madeline Mitchell; Joanne Rader; Kristen Swafford; Shirin O Hiatt Journal: Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen Date: 2007 Oct-Nov Impact factor: 2.035
Authors: Joanne Lynn; Jeff West; Susan Hausmann; David Gifford; Rachel Nelson; Paul McGann; Nancy Bergstrom; Judith A Ryan Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2007-08-21 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Jennifer A Palmer; Victoria A Parker; James F Burgess; Dan Berlowitz; A Lynn Snow; Susan L Mitchell; Christine W Hartmann Journal: Res Gerontol Nurs Date: 2017-05-01 Impact factor: 1.571
Authors: Heather Davila; Weiwen Ng; Odichinma Akosionu; Mai See Thao; Tricia Skarphol; Beth A Virnig; Roland J Thorpe; Tetyana P Shippee Journal: Gerontologist Date: 2022-10-19
Authors: Katherine M Abbott; Rachel Klumpp; Kendall A Leser; Jane K Straker; Gerald C Gannod; Kimberly Van Haitsma Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2017-11-14 Impact factor: 4.669