Effective Dementia Education and Training for the Health and Social Care Workforce: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

Ensuring an informed and effective dementia workforce is of international concern; however, there remains limited understanding of how this can be achieved. This review aimed to identify features of effective dementia educational programs. Critical interpretive synthesis underpinned by Kirkpatrick's return on investment model was applied. One hundred and fifty-two papers of variable quality were included. Common features of more efficacious educational programs included the need for educational programs to be relevant to participants' role and experience, involve active face-to-face participation, underpin practice-based learning with theory, be delivered by an experienced facilitator, have a total duration of at least 8 hours with individual sessions of 90 minutes or more, support application of learning in practice, and provide a structured tool or guideline to guide care practice. Further robust research is required to develop the evidence base; however, the findings of this review have relevance for all working in workforce education.

What works in delivering dementia education or training to hospital staff? A critical synthesis of the evidence.

BACKGROUND: The quality of care delivered to people with dementia in hospital settings is of international concern. People with dementia occupy up to one quarter of acute hospital beds, however, staff working in hospitals report lack of knowledge and skills in caring for this group. There is limited evidence about the most effective approaches to training hospital staff on dementia. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this literature review was to examine published evidence on the most effective approaches to dementia training and education for hospital staff. DESIGN AND REVIEW METHODS: The review was conducted using critical synthesis and included qualitative, quantitative and mixed/multi- methods studies. Kirkpatrick's four level model for the evaluation of training interventions was adopted to structure the review. DATA SOURCES: The following databases were searched: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, AMED, British Education Index, Education Abstracts, ERIC (EbscoHost), The Cochrane Library-Cochrane reviews, Economic evaluations, CENTRAL (Wiley), HMIC (Ovid), ASSIA, IBSS (Proquest), Conference Proceedings Citation Indexes (Web of Science), using a combination of keyword for the following themes: Dementia/Alzheimer's, training/education, staff knowledge and patient outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 20 papers were included in the review, the majority of which were low or medium quality, impacting on generalisability. The 16 different training programmes evaluated in the studies varied in terms of duration and mode of delivery, although most employed face-to-face didactic techniques. Studies predominantly reported on reactions to training and knowledge, only one study evaluated outcomes across all of the levels of the Kirkpatrick model. Key features of training that appeared to be more acceptable and effective were identified related to training content, delivery methods, practicalities, duration and support for implementation. CONCLUSIONS: The review methodology enabled inclusion of a broad range of studies and permitted common features of successful programmes to be identified. Such features may be used in the design of future dementia training programmes, to increase their potential for effectiveness. Further research on the features of effective dementia training for hospital staff is required.

Managing Quality and Safety in Real Time? Evidence from an Interview Study.

Health systems around the world are investing increasing effort in monitoring care quality and safety. Dashboards can support this process, providing summary data on processes and outcomes of care, making use of data visualization techniques such as graphs. As part of a study exploring development and use of dashboards in English hospitals, we interviewed senior managers across 15 healthcare providers. Findings revealed substantial variation in sophistication of the dashboards in place, largely presenting retrospective data items determined by national bodies and dependent on manual collation from a number of systems. Where real time systems were in place, they supported staff in proactively managing quality and safety.