Perspectives of aged care home staff and health care professionals on the Psychotropic medicines use in Residents And Culture: Influencing clinical Excellence (PRACTICE) tool ©.

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Research in Social & Administrative Pharmacy Pub Date : 2024-12-04 DOI:10.1016/j.sapharm.2024.12.001
Boyi Chen, Yun-Hee Jeon, Timothy F Chen, Danijela Gnjidic, Jane Thompson, Mouna Sawan
{"title":"Perspectives of aged care home staff and health care professionals on the Psychotropic medicines use in Residents And Culture: Influencing clinical Excellence (PRACTICE) tool ©.","authors":"Boyi Chen, Yun-Hee Jeon, Timothy F Chen, Danijela Gnjidic, Jane Thompson, Mouna Sawan","doi":"10.1016/j.sapharm.2024.12.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>High use of psychotropic medications continues to be common in residential aged care homes despite the risk of harm and limited efficacy in people living with dementia. Research has shown that the organizational culture of aged care homes influences psychotropic medication use in residents with dementia. The Psychotropic medicines use in Residents And Culture: Influencing Clinical Excellence (PRACTICE) tool was developed to evaluate the organizational culture of aged care homes specific to the use of psychotropic medications.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the comprehensibility, relevance, and comprehensiveness of the PRACTICE tool among end-users.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Cognitive interviews were conducted with participants representing a broad range of health disciplines across Australia. Interviews were performed using a combination of the think-aloud technique and verbal probing. Interviews were transcribed and content coded for participants' perceptions of the PRACTICE tool. Items were modified based on findings from the cognitive interviews, participants' suggestions for rewording of items and discussions with the research team.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 20 cognitive interviews were conducted. Based on the cognitive interviews, 48 out of 63 items were modified. Reasons for modification were categorized into three themes: 1) Items changed to align with the aged care home staff's scope of practice; 2) Items adjusted to prevent unintended blame from reading the items; and 3) Items modified to prevent potential misinterpretation of their intended meaning. Three items were added to improve the comprehensiveness of the tool. Most participants reported that they understood the items and considered them as relevant and acceptable for the evaluation of organizational culture and use of psychotropic medication in aged care homes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study confirms that the PRACTICE tool is a comprehensive tool appropriate for the assessment of organizational culture specific to psychotropic medication use and is important for aged care home settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":48126,"journal":{"name":"Research in Social & Administrative Pharmacy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Social & Administrative Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2024.12.001","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: High use of psychotropic medications continues to be common in residential aged care homes despite the risk of harm and limited efficacy in people living with dementia. Research has shown that the organizational culture of aged care homes influences psychotropic medication use in residents with dementia. The Psychotropic medicines use in Residents And Culture: Influencing Clinical Excellence (PRACTICE) tool was developed to evaluate the organizational culture of aged care homes specific to the use of psychotropic medications.

Objectives: To evaluate the comprehensibility, relevance, and comprehensiveness of the PRACTICE tool among end-users.

Method: Cognitive interviews were conducted with participants representing a broad range of health disciplines across Australia. Interviews were performed using a combination of the think-aloud technique and verbal probing. Interviews were transcribed and content coded for participants' perceptions of the PRACTICE tool. Items were modified based on findings from the cognitive interviews, participants' suggestions for rewording of items and discussions with the research team.

Results: A total of 20 cognitive interviews were conducted. Based on the cognitive interviews, 48 out of 63 items were modified. Reasons for modification were categorized into three themes: 1) Items changed to align with the aged care home staff's scope of practice; 2) Items adjusted to prevent unintended blame from reading the items; and 3) Items modified to prevent potential misinterpretation of their intended meaning. Three items were added to improve the comprehensiveness of the tool. Most participants reported that they understood the items and considered them as relevant and acceptable for the evaluation of organizational culture and use of psychotropic medication in aged care homes.

Conclusion: This study confirms that the PRACTICE tool is a comprehensive tool appropriate for the assessment of organizational culture specific to psychotropic medication use and is important for aged care home settings.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
老年护理人员和卫生保健专业人员对居民和文化中精神药物使用的看法:影响临床卓越(PRACTICE)工具©。
导读:尽管精神药物对痴呆患者有危害的风险和有限的疗效,但在老年住宅中,精神药物的大量使用仍然很常见。研究表明,养老院的组织文化对痴呆症患者使用精神药物有影响。精神药物在居民中的使用与文化:影响临床卓越(PRACTICE)工具的开发是为了评估老年护理院的组织文化,特别是精神药物的使用。目的:评估PRACTICE工具在最终用户中的可理解性、相关性和全面性。方法:认知访谈与参与者进行代表广泛的健康学科在澳大利亚。访谈采用了出声思考技巧和口头探究相结合的方式进行。根据参与者对PRACTICE工具的认知,对访谈进行转录和内容编码。根据认知访谈的结果、参与者对项目重新措辞的建议以及与研究团队的讨论,对项目进行了修改。结果:共进行了20次认知访谈。在认知访谈的基础上,对63个项目中的48个进行了修改。修改的原因分为三个主题:1)修改的项目与养老院工作人员的业务范围相一致;2)调整的项目,以防止无意的指责阅读项目;3)为防止对其本意的潜在误解而修改的项目。为了提高工具的全面性,增加了三个项目。大多数参与者报告说,他们理解这些项目,并认为它们是相关的和可接受的,以评估组织文化和精神药物在养老院的使用。结论:本研究证实PRACTICE工具是一种适用于评估精神药物使用的组织文化的综合工具,对养老院具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Research in Social & Administrative Pharmacy
Research in Social & Administrative Pharmacy PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
10.30%
发文量
225
审稿时长
47 days
期刊介绍: Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy (RSAP) is a quarterly publication featuring original scientific reports and comprehensive review articles in the social and administrative pharmaceutical sciences. Topics of interest include outcomes evaluation of products, programs, or services; pharmacoepidemiology; medication adherence; direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medications; disease state management; health systems reform; drug marketing; medication distribution systems such as e-prescribing; web-based pharmaceutical/medical services; drug commerce and re-importation; and health professions workforce issues.
期刊最新文献
A deep neural network model for classifying pharmacy practice publications into research domains. Why are pharmacy technicians leaving? Factors contributing to turnover intention and strategies for retention. The International Collaboration of Pharmacy Journal Editors (ICPJE) formally constituted to foster quality around clinical and social pharmacy practice research publications. The association between falls and fall-risk-increasing drugs among older patients in out-patient clinics: A retrospective cohort, single center study. Identifying critical elements in using question prompt lists at the pharmacy counter to induce patient activation-using principles of conversation analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1