| Literature DB >> 31861209 |
Iris van Venrooij1,2,3, Jan Spijker3,4,5, Gerben J Westerhof6, Ruslan Leontjevas1,7, Debby L Gerritsen1,2.
Abstract
Precious memories (PM) is a life review intervention for depression in older adults with no to mild cognitive decline that has been implemented in multiple nursing homes (NHs) in the Netherlands. Previous research suggested its relevance but questioned its applicability. Therefore, this research aimed to (1) investigate the applicability of PM, and (2) increase its applicability, if necessary. Intervention mapping (IM) was used to achieve these goals: process evaluation through semi-structured interviews with psychologists (n = 11) and clients (n = 2) to identify potential improvements for PM and to set an improvement goal (IM-step 1); three focus groups with stakeholders (n = 20) to specify behaviors necessary to reach the improvement goal (IM-step 2); and selection of behavior change techniques and applications to facilitate attainment of these behaviors (IM-step 3). Results showed that psychologists perceived a high drop-out rate, which was partly due to PM being provided to clients that did not belong to the target group. Although PM was generally considered relevant, psychologists articulated its longer-term effects should be improved. To improve PM's applicability, concrete maintenance strategies were developed aiming to maintain clients' well-being by stimulating positive contact with others. Future research must pilot, implement and evaluate these strategies.Entities:
Keywords: applicability; depression; implementation; intervention mapping; life review therapy; maintenance; nursing home; process evaluation; psychosocial intervention
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31861209 PMCID: PMC6950488 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16245163
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Overview of intervention mapping (IM)-steps, outcomes and methods to reach those outcomes.
Characteristics of client interviews.
| Characteristic | Client 1 | Client 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Age | 63 | 95 |
| Sex | Male | Female |
| Length of nursing home (NH) stay (years) | 2.5 | 1 |
| Length interview (minutes) | 44 | 29 |
| Months between end of previous memories (PM) and study | 3 | 4 |
Characteristics of interviews with psychologists and focus group participants.
| Participant Group | Mean Age (Range) | Profession | Work Experience in Elderly Care in Years (Range) | Years Between PM Training and Study | Type of Clients Participants Worked With | Length Interviews and Focus Groups in Minutes | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Interviews with psychologists | 11 (11) | 40.18 (29–54) | Psychologist ( | 10.09 (5–18) | 1 ( | Somatic ( | |
| Focus Group 1 | 10 (9) | 35.30 (25–56) | Psychologist ( | 8.70 (0.5–24) | 0.5 ( | Cognitive ( | 26 |
| Focus Group 2 | 6 (6) | 48.50 (27–60) | Psychologist ( | 16.50 (4–28) | 4 ( | Both ( | 106 |
| Focus Group 3 | 4 (4) | 52.25 (41–61) | Psychologist ( | 17.13 (5.5–25) | 8 ( | Somatic ( | 49 |
Cognitive = clients with primarily cognitive impairments; somatic = clients with primarily somatic problems; both = clients with both cognitive impairments and somatic problems.
Prioritized options for maintenance strategies, from most (1) to least (7) helpful.
| Priority | Options for Maintenance Strategies |
|---|---|
| 1 | Mediative interventions: (Temporarily) including retrieved memories in mediative interventions by (1) adapting stimuli in the environment of the client to the retrieved memories (e.g., memory walls, scents, and music), (2) having supporters help clients retrieve precious memories, or (3) providing the client with activities based on the retrieved memories. |
| 2 | Memory book or box: The memories retrieved during PM are processed into a memory book or box after PM. |
| 3 | Follow-up session: Providing a follow-up session after the end of PM to assess whether clients need more guidance to maintain the retrieval of specific, positive memories. |
| 4 | Mini PM-sessions: Using mini PM-sessions (i.e., booster sessions) after the end of PM to maintain the skill to retrieve specific, positive memories. |
| 5 | Diary/letter: Potentially with help, clients write up their retrieved memories in a diary or letter to themselves. |
| 6 | Embedding PM in other therapies: Including PM in other (psychological) therapies. |
| 7 | Group treatment: Clients who received PM can afterwards participate in a group treatment to maintain the skill to retrieve specific, positive memories. |
Explication of determinants, behavior-change techniques, applications and conditions for one of the behaviors * needed to reach the improvement goal.
| Determinants of the Behavior * | Behavior Change Techniques | Application | Explanation (Conditions under Which Behavior Change Techniques are Effective in Bold) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Attitude: The psychologist believes it is important to report the positive memories. | Arguments [ | PM training | Psychologists are informed that reporting the positive memories is necessary to create memory-products ( |
| Knowledge (a) The psychologist knows why it is important to report the positive memories. | Providing information [ | PM training | The information is provided by the PM trainer. |
| (b) The psychologist knows how to report the positive memories. | Individualized [ | PM training | Psychologists are instructed by the PM trainer ( |
| Self-efficacy: The psychologist feels capable to report the positive memories. | Psychologists are verbally persuaded [ | PM training | Psychologists are persuaded by the PM trainer ( |
* One of the behaviors needed to reach the improvement goal is “After each PM session, with permission from the client, the psychologist reports the client’s retrieved positive memories in the client’s dossier”.
Figure 2Logic model of change.