David Edvardsson1, P O Sandman2, Lena Borell3. 1. School of Nursing and Midwifery,La Trobe University,Melbourne,Australia. 2. Department of Neurobiology,Care Sciences and Society (NVS),Division of Nursing,Karolinska Institutet,Stockholm,Sweden. 3. Department of Neurobiology,Care Sciences and Society (NVS),Division of Occupational Therapy,Karolinska Institutet,Stockholm,Sweden.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Person-centeredness has had substantial uptake in the academic literature on care of older people and people with dementia. However, challenges exist in interpreting and synthesizing the evidence on effects of providing person-centered care, as the person-centered components of some intervention studies are unclear - targeting very different and highly specific aspects of person-centeredness, as well as not providing empirical data to indicate the extent to which care practice was actually perceived to become more person-centered post-intervention. METHODS: The study employed a quasi-experimental, one-group pre-test-post-test design with a 12-month follow-up to explore intervention effects on person-centeredness of care and the environment (primary endpoints), and on staff strain and stress of conscience (secondary endpoints). RESULTS: The intervention resulted in significantly higher scores on person-centeredness of care at follow-up, and the facility was rated as being significantly more hospitable at follow-up. A significant reduction of staff stress of conscience was also found at follow-up, which suggests that, to a larger extent, staff could provide the care and activities they wanted to provide after the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated that an interactive and step-wise action-research intervention consisting of knowledge translation, generation, and dissemination, based on national guidelines for care of people with dementia, increased the staff self-reported person-centeredness of care practice, perceived hospitality of the setting, and reduced staff stress of conscience by enabling staff to provide the care and activities they want to provide.
BACKGROUND:Person-centeredness has had substantial uptake in the academic literature on care of older people and people with dementia. However, challenges exist in interpreting and synthesizing the evidence on effects of providing person-centered care, as the person-centered components of some intervention studies are unclear - targeting very different and highly specific aspects of person-centeredness, as well as not providing empirical data to indicate the extent to which care practice was actually perceived to become more person-centered post-intervention. METHODS: The study employed a quasi-experimental, one-group pre-test-post-test design with a 12-month follow-up to explore intervention effects on person-centeredness of care and the environment (primary endpoints), and on staff strain and stress of conscience (secondary endpoints). RESULTS: The intervention resulted in significantly higher scores on person-centeredness of care at follow-up, and the facility was rated as being significantly more hospitable at follow-up. A significant reduction of staff stress of conscience was also found at follow-up, which suggests that, to a larger extent, staff could provide the care and activities they wanted to provide after the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated that an interactive and step-wise action-research intervention consisting of knowledge translation, generation, and dissemination, based on national guidelines for care of people with dementia, increased the staff self-reported person-centeredness of care practice, perceived hospitality of the setting, and reduced staff stress of conscience by enabling staff to provide the care and activities they want to provide.
Authors: Sanetta Henrietta Johanna du Toit; Loretta Baldassar; Christine L Raber; Adele M Millard; Christopher D Etherton-Beer; Helen A Buchanan; Daniel S du Toit; Lesley J Collier; Gary Cheung; Kathryn Peri; Eileen A Webb; Meryl Lovarini Journal: J Cross Cult Gerontol Date: 2020-03
Authors: Hanneke J A Smaling; Karlijn J Joling; Peter M van de Ven; Judith E Bosmans; Joyce Simard; Ladislav Volicer; Wilco P Achterberg; Anneke L Francke; Jenny T van der Steen Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-10-15 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Connie Lethin; Helena Leino-Kilpi; Brenda Roe; Maria Martin Soto; Kai Saks; Astrid Stephan; Sandra Zwakhalen; Adelaida Zabalegui; Staffan Karlsson Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2016-01-29 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: Kathryn von Treuer; Gery Karantzas; Marita McCabe; David Mellor; Anastasia Konis; Tanya E Davison; Daniel O'Connor Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Martina Summer Meranius; Inger K Holmström; Jakob Håkansson; Agneta Breitholtz; Farah Moniri; Sofia Skogevall; Karin Skoglund; Dara Rasoal Journal: Nurs Open Date: 2020-06-10