Chiara Carparelli, Christopher Jones, Jan R Oyebode, Gerard A Riley
{"title":"A Systematic Review of the Effectiveness of Educational Interventions in Promoting Person-Centred Care in Dementia Services.","authors":"Chiara Carparelli, Christopher Jones, Jan R Oyebode, Gerard A Riley","doi":"10.1080/07317115.2022.2152515","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To review evidence about the effectiveness of educational programmes in promoting the delivery of person-centered care by staff in dementia services.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Several databases were searched, and the methodological quality of identified studies systematically evaluated. A summary mean effect size was calculated for several types of outcome (direct knowledge, applied knowledge, attitudes, self-reported and observed working practices).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighteen studies were identified. Results were mixed, with findings of no change, significant improvement, and (in attitude) significant deterioration. Effect size was modest for direct knowledge (standardized mean difference = 0.6), but small or negligible for applied knowledge (0.29) and self-reported (0.06) and observed (0.25) working practices. There was a negative effect for attitudes (-0.17).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The quality of evidence was poor. Apart from attitudes, the effect sizes are likely to be overestimates. There was little evidence that education programmes can reliably produce substantial improvements in working practices.</p><p><strong>Clinical implications: </strong>Education alone is unlikely to be sufficient for establishing high standards of person-centered care in services. It needs to be supplemented by steps to ensure that staff develop skills in delivering such care in practice, and by organizational support to ensure staff have sufficient motivation, cues and opportunities for implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":10376,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Gerontologist","volume":" ","pages":"665-683"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Gerontologist","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07317115.2022.2152515","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/12/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: To review evidence about the effectiveness of educational programmes in promoting the delivery of person-centered care by staff in dementia services.
Methods: Several databases were searched, and the methodological quality of identified studies systematically evaluated. A summary mean effect size was calculated for several types of outcome (direct knowledge, applied knowledge, attitudes, self-reported and observed working practices).
Results: Eighteen studies were identified. Results were mixed, with findings of no change, significant improvement, and (in attitude) significant deterioration. Effect size was modest for direct knowledge (standardized mean difference = 0.6), but small or negligible for applied knowledge (0.29) and self-reported (0.06) and observed (0.25) working practices. There was a negative effect for attitudes (-0.17).
Conclusions: The quality of evidence was poor. Apart from attitudes, the effect sizes are likely to be overestimates. There was little evidence that education programmes can reliably produce substantial improvements in working practices.
Clinical implications: Education alone is unlikely to be sufficient for establishing high standards of person-centered care in services. It needs to be supplemented by steps to ensure that staff develop skills in delivering such care in practice, and by organizational support to ensure staff have sufficient motivation, cues and opportunities for implementation.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Gerontologist presents original research, reviews, and clinical comments relevant to the needs of behavioral health professionals and all practitioners who work with older adults. Published in cooperation with Psychologists in Long Term Care, the journal is designed for psychologists, physicians, nurses, social workers, counselors (family, pastoral, and vocational), and other health professionals who address behavioral health concerns found in later life, including:
-adjustments to changing roles-
issues related to diversity and aging-
family caregiving-
spirituality-
cognitive and psychosocial assessment-
depression, anxiety, and PTSD-
Alzheimer’s disease and other neurocognitive disorders-
long term care-
behavioral medicine in aging-
rehabilitation and education for older adults.
Each issue provides insightful articles on current topics. Submissions are peer reviewed by content experts and selected for both scholarship and relevance to the practitioner to ensure that the articles are among the best in the field. Authors report original research and conceptual reviews. A unique column in Clinical Gerontologist is “Clinical Comments." This section features brief observations and specific suggestions from practitioners which avoid elaborate research designs or long reference lists. This section is a unique opportunity for you to learn about the valuable clinical work of your peers in a short, concise format.