Quasi-experimental evaluation of a multifaceted intervention to improve quality of end-of-life care and quality of dying for patients with advanced dementia in long-term care institutions.

BACKGROUND: Improvement in the quality of end-of-life care for advanced dementia is increasingly recognized as a priority in palliative care. AIM: To evaluate the impact of a multidimensional intervention to improve quality of care and quality of dying in advanced dementia in long-term care facilities. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental study with the intervention taking place in two long-term care facilities versus usual care in two others over a 1-year period. The intervention had five components: (1) training program to physicians and nursing staff, (2) clinical monitoring of pain using an observational pain scale, (3) implementation of a regular mouth care routine, (4) early and systematic communication with families about end-of-life care issues with provision of an information booklet, and (5) involvement of a nurse facilitator to implement and monitor the intervention. Quality of care was assessed with the Family Perception of Care Scale. The Symptom Management for End-of-Life Care in Dementia and the Comfort Assessment in Dying scales were used to assess the quality of dying. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 193 residents with advanced dementia and their close family members were included (97 in the intervention group and 96 in the usual care group). RESULTS: The Family Perception of Care score was significantly higher in the intervention group than in the usual care group (157.3 vs 149.1; p = 0.04). The Comfort Assessment and Symptom Management scores were also significantly higher in the intervention group. CONCLUSIONS: Our multidimensional intervention in long-term care facilities for patients with terminal dementia resulted in improved quality of care and quality of dying when compared to usual care.

Increasing the Frequency and Timeliness of Pain Assessment and Management in Long-Term Care: Knowledge Transfer and Sustained Implementation.

Background. Although feasible protocols for pain assessment and management in long-term care (LTC) have been developed, these have not been implemented on a large-scale basis. Objective. To implement a program of regular pain assessment in two LTC facilities, using implementation science principles, and to evaluate the process and success of doing so. Methods. The implementation protocol included a pain assessment workshop and the establishment of a nurse Pain Champion. Quality indicators were tracked before and after implementation. Focus groups and interviews with staff were also conducted. Results. The implementation effort was successful in increasing and regularizing pain assessments. This was sustained during the follow-up period. Staff members reported enthusiasm about the protocol at baseline and positive results following its implementation. Despite the success in increasing assessments, we did not identify changes in the percentages of patients reported as having moderate-to-severe pain. Discussion. It is our hope that our feasibility demonstration will encourage more facilities to improve their pain assessment/management practices. Conclusions. It is feasible to implement regular and systematic pain assessment in LTC. Future research should focus on ensuring effective clinical practices in response to assessment results, and determination of longer-term sustainability.

Assessment of inattention in the context of delirium screening: one size does not fit all!

BACKGROUND: Despite its high prevalence and deleterious consequences, delirium often goes undetected in older hospitalized patients and long-term care (LTC) residents. Inattention is a core symptom of this syndrome. The aim of this study was to explore the usefulness of ten simple and objective attention tests that would enable efficient delirium screening among this population. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis (n = 191) of a validation study conducted in one acute care hospital (ACH) and one LTC facility among older adults with, or without, cognitive impairment. The attention test tasks (n = 10) were drawn from the Concentration subscale the Hierarchic Dementia Scale (HDS). Delirium was defined as meeting the criteria for DSM-5 delirium. The Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) was used to determine the presence of delirium symptoms. RESULTS: The Months of the Year Backward (MOTYB) test, which 57% of participants completed successfully, showed the best balance between sensitivity and specificity (82.6%; 95% CI [61.2-95.0], and 62.5%; 95% CI [54.7-69.8] respectively) for the entire group. Subgroup analyses revealed that no test had both sensitivity and specificity over 50% in participants with cognitive impairment indicated in their medical chart. CONCLUSIONS: Our results revealed that these tests varied greatly in performance and none can be earmarked to become a single-item screening tool for delirium among older patients and residents with, or without, cognitive impairment. The presence of premorbid cognitive impairment may necessitate more extensive assessments of delirium, especially when a change in general status or mental state is observed.

RADAR: A Measure of the Sixth Vital Sign?

The objective of this study was to investigate the potential of RADAR (Recognizing Active Delirium As part of your Routine) as a measure of the sixth vital sign. This study was a secondary analysis of a study (N = 193) that took place in one acute care hospital and one long-term care facility. The primary outcome was a positive sixth vital sign, defined as the presence of both an altered level of consciousness and inattention. These indicators were assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method. RADAR identified 30 of the 43 participants as having a positive sixth vital sign and 58 of the 70 cases as not, yielding a sensitivity and specificity of 70% and 83%, respectively. Positive predictive value was 71%. RADAR's characteristics, including its brevity and acceptability by nursing staff, make this tool a good candidate as a measure of the sixth vital sign. Future studies should address the generalizability of RADAR among various populations and clinical settings.

Recognizing acute delirium as part of your routine [RADAR]: a validation study.

BACKGROUND: Although detection of delirium using the current tools is excellent in research settings, in routine clinical practice, this is not the case. Together with nursing staff, we developed a screening tool (RADAR) to address certain limitations of existing tools, notably administration time, ease-of-use and generalizability. The purpose of this study was not only to evaluate the validity and reliability of RADAR but also to gauge its acceptability among the nursing staff in two different clinical settings. METHODS: This was a validation study conducted on three units of an acute care hospital (medical, cardiology and coronary care) and five units of a long-term care facility. A total of 142 patients and 51 residents aged 65 and over, with or without dementia, participated in the study and 139 nurses were recruited and trained to use the RADAR tool. Data on each patient/resident was collected over a 12-hour period. The nursing staff and researchers administered RADAR during the scheduled distribution of medication. Researchers used the Confusion Assessment Method to determine the presence of delirium symptoms. Delirium itself was defined as meeting the criteria for DMS-IV-TR delirium. Inter-rater reliability, convergent, and concurrent validity of RADAR were assessed. At study end, 103 (74%) members of the nursing staff completed the RADAR feasibility and acceptability questionnaire. RESULTS: Percentages of agreement between RADAR items that bedside nurses administered and those research assistants administered varied from 82% to 98%. When compared with DSM-IV-TR criterion-defined delirium, RADAR had a sensitivity of 73% and a specificity of 67%. Participating nursing staff took about seven seconds on average, to complete the tool and it was very well received (≥98%) overall. CONCLUSIONS: The RADAR tool proved to be efficient, reliable, sensitive and very well accepted by nursing staff. Consequently, it becomes an appropriate new option for delirium screening among older adults, with or without cognitive impairment, in both hospitals and nursing homes. Further projects are currently underway to validate the RADAR among middle-aged adults, as well as in newer clinical settings; home care, emergency department, medical intensive care unit, and palliative care.

Effect of an interdisciplinary educational program on antipsychotic prescribing among residents with dementia in two long-term care centers.

The effect of an educational program on antipsychotic prescribing was assessed in two Canadian long-term care centers (LTCC). In each center (Center A residents, n = 258 and Center B residents, n = 191, with dementia at program inception), the rate of change in the odds of using antipsychotics in residents was estimated using mixed-effects logistic regression during a 6-month program period and a 4-month postprogram period, with baseline proportions of use estimated during the 6 months prior to the program. Preprogram proportions of antipsychotic use were 41.6% and 46.2%, respectively. Antipsychotic use decreased during the program in both centers: (odds ratio with 95% CI: 0.943 per week [0.921, 0.965] and 0.969 per week [0.944, 0.994], respectively). During the postprogram period, antipsychotic use increased in Center A (1.039 per week [1.007, 1.072]) but decreased progressively in Center B. The study results suggest the need to implement an ongoing educational program in LTCC.

Educational needs of health care providers working in long-term care facilities with regard to pain management.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of chronic pain ranges from 40% to 80% in long-term care facilities (LTCF), with the highest proportion being found among older adults and residents with dementia. Unfortunately, pain in older adults is underdiagnosed, undertreated, inadequately treated or not treated at all. A solution to this problem would be to provide effective and innovative interdisciplinary continuing education to health care providers (HCPs). OBJECTIVE: To identify the educational needs of HCPs working in LTCF with regard to pain management. METHODS: A qualitative research design using the nominal group technique was undertaken. Seventy-two HCPs (21 physicians/pharmacists, 15 occupational/physical therapists, 24 nurses and 21 orderlies) were recruited from three LTCF in Quebec. Each participant was asked to provide and prioritize a list of the most important topics to be addressed within a continuing education program on chronic pain management in LTCF. RESULTS: Forty topics were generated across all groups, and six specific topics were common to at least three out of the four HCP groups. Educational need in pain assessment was ranked the highest by all groups. Other highly rated topics included pharmacological treatment of pain, pain neurophysiology, nonpharmacological treatments and how to distinguish pain expression from other behaviours. CONCLUSION: The present study showed that despite an average of more than 10 years of work experience in LTCF, HCPs have significant educational needs in pain management, especially pain assessment. These results will help in the development of a comprehensive pain management educational program for HCPs in LTCF.

[Validity 'and Utilities' clinic of a grid observation (PACSLAC-F) to evaluate the pain in seniors with dementia's living in the Long-Term Care ]. / Validité et utilité clinique d'une grille d'observation (PACSLAC-F) pour évaluer la douleur chez des aînés atteints de démence vivant en milieu de soins de longue durée.

This study presents the validation of the French Canadian version (PACLSAC-F) of the Pain Assessment Checklist for Seniors with Limited Ability to Communicate (PACSLAC). Unlike the published validation of the English version of the PACSLAC, which was validated retrospectively, the French version was validated prospectively. The PACSLAC-F was completed by nurses working in long-term care facilities after observing 86 seniors, with severe cognitive impairment, in calm, painful or distressing but non-painful situations. The test-retest and inter-observer reliability, the internal consistency, and the discriminent validity were found to be satisfactory. To evaluate the convergent validity with the DOLOPLUS-2 and the clinical relevance of the PACSLAC, it was also completed by nurses during their work shift, with 26 additional patients, for three days per week during a period of four weeks. These results encourage us to test the PACSLAC in a comprehensive program of pain management targeting this population.