Typology of Dementia-Specific Care Units: A Nationwide Survey Study in Germany.

Background and Objectives: Dementia-specific care units vary in their organizational characteristics and are difficult to compare in empirical studies. Based on a representative sample of care units in German nursing homes, we present a typology of organizational characteristics focusing on dementia-specific care structures. We also examine the relationships between organizational types and the provision of nonpharmacological interventions for people with dementia. Research Design and Methods: Data were collected in a Germany-wide survey of a stratified randomized sample of 134 care units using a standardized questionnaire administered during telephone interviews with nursing home administrators or their representatives. The typology was developed based on a factor analysis of mixed data and a hierarchical cluster analysis. Results: We identified 4 types of care units: Dementia Care Units (DCUs; n = 40), Dementia Special Care Units (DSCUs; n = 17), Usual Separated Care Units (n = 58), and Usual Incorporated Care Units (n = 19). All care unit types clearly differed in their organizational characteristics. The specialization of DSCUs was agreed upon with cost bearers and included admission criteria, higher costs, and better staff conditions. Dementia Care Units without specialization did not have these characteristics. Three of seven nonpharmacological interventions were associated with the DSCUs and two with DCUs, but not with the other care unit types. Discussion and Implications: Researchers can use the typology to define and describe care units in empirical studies and improve the understanding and comparability of the context. A clear definition of care units also improves international comparisons.

Participatory development of a framework to actively involve people living with dementia and those from their social network, and healthcare professionals in conducting a systematic review: the DECIDE-SR protocol.

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.

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.

Theory-based evaluation and programme theories in nursing: A discussion on the occasion of the updated Medical Research Council (MRC) Framework.

Developing and evaluating health interventions for the benefit of patients is notoriously difficult. This also applies to the discipline of nursing, owing to the complexity of nursing interventions. Following significant revision, the updated guidance of the Medical Research Council (MRC) adopts a pluralistic view to intervention development and evaluation, including a theory-based perspective. This perspective promotes the use of program theory, aiming to understand how and under what circumstances interventions lead to change. In this discussion paper, we reflect the recommended use of program theory in the context of evaluation studies addressing complex nursing interventions. First, we review the literature by investigating the question whether and how evaluation studies targeting complex interventions used theory and to what extent program theories may contribute to enhance the theoretical foundations of intervention studies in nursing. Second, we illustrate the nature of theory-based evaluation and program theories. Third, we argue how this may impact theory building in nursing in general. We finish by discussing which resources, skills and competencies are necessary to fulfill the demanding task of undertaking theory-based evaluations. We caution against an oversimplified interpretation of the updated MRC guidance regarding the theory-based perspective, e.g. by using simple linear logic models, rather than articulating program theories. Instead, we encourage researchers to embrace the corresponding methodology, i.e. theory-based evaluation. With the prevailing perspective of knowledge production in crisis, we might be on the verge of a paradigm shift in health intervention research. Viewed through this lens, the updated MRC guidance could lead to a renewed understanding of what constitutes useful knowledge in nursing. This may facilitate knowledge production and, thereby, contribute to improve nursing practice for the benefit of the patient. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: The latest iteration of the MRC Framework for developing and evaluating complex healthcare interventions could lead to a renewed understanding of what constitutes useful knowledge for nursing.

Measuring person-centred care in german nursing homes - exploring the construct validity of the Dementia Policy Questionnaire: a cross-sectional study of a secondary data set.

BACKGROUND: To ensure the sustainable implementation of dementia-specific person-centred care (PCC) in nursing homes, internal policies are crucial. The preliminary German Dementia Policy Questionnaire, which features 19 dichotomous items, assesses the existence of and evaluates these policies. This article reports the results of an exploration of the construct validity of the preliminary Dementia Policy Questionnaire. METHODS: This study is a cross-sectional study that references a secondary data set drawn from a national survey study of a randomized, stratified sample of 134 nursing homes in Germany. To explore the construct validity of the preliminary Dementia Policy Questionnaire, we conducted an adjusted multiple correspondence analysis of the pretested 19-item assessment. We included data assessed using the preliminary Dementia Policy Questionnaire from 134 care units associated with 134 nursing homes; these data were collected via telephone interviews with nursing home administrators or their representatives. RESULTS: Two items assessing visitor regulations and regulations regarding the inclusion of residents in staff selection were less frequent and were therefore excluded from the adjusted multiple correspondence analysis. In total, nine items were assigned to two dimensions. The items assigned to the first dimension assess existing regulations for PCC as well as existing regulations regarding the involvement of the resident, relatives and the multiprofessional team in the collection of information concerning preferences, case conferences or decision making. The items assigned to the second dimension assess existing regulations regarding the systematic assessment of resident preferences and their requirements. CONCLUSION: The study produces exploratory evidence concerning the preliminary Dementia Policy Questionnaire. Since the dimensions of the items included in this questionnaire cannot be conceptualized clearly, the instrument in its current state requires further development.

Dementia specific care structures in nursing homes-Study protocol of a telephone-based survey study in a nationwide random sample.

AIM: To describe a study protocol for a survey study in German nursing homes that (1) plans to enhance a typology of care units (2) and investigates the association between different care unit types and the provision of dementia-specific interventions based on a stratified randomized sample. BACKGROUND: Many nursing homes in Germany provide Dementia Special Care Units. Existing definitions often do no justice to the complexity of their context. In this study, we define context as structural and organizational variables. It is necessary to define an empirical based set of indicators to characterize care units with respect to dementia care. DESIGN: Observational survey study with a cross-sectional design. METHODS: We will use a stratified random nationwide sample of 160 German nursing homes. Stratification variables are federal state and the existence of a Dementia Special Care Unit. The sampling frame from which the participating nursing homes are selected is a list with the total population of German nursing homes (n = 11.658). Data will be gathered on the level of the nursing homes and one of their care units via computer-assisted telephone interviews with a standardized questionnaire. The distribution of the assessed variables (contextual characteristics) will be described in absolute and relative frequencies for the whole sample in the first step in order to describe dementia-specific care structures. In the second step, factor analysis of mixed data (FAMD) with hierarchical clustering (HC) will be applied to analyze relationships between variables. The study was ethically approved in October 2018. DISCUSSION: The typology can be used in future studies to define the context of care units in nursing homes. This may improve the interpretation of findings from future studies that investigated interventions in nursing homes. IMPACT: The typology will visualize and describe the complexity of contextual characteristics of several care units.