Effectiveness of reminders to sustain practice change among direct care providers in residential care facilities: a cluster randomized controlled trial

Susan E Slaughter, Misha Eliasziw, Carla Ickert, C Allyson Jones, Carole A Estabrooks, Adrian S Wagg, Susan E Slaughter, Misha Eliasziw, Carla Ickert, C Allyson Jones, Carole A Estabrooks, Adrian S Wagg

Abstract

Background: The study purpose was to compare the effectiveness of monthly or quarterly peer reminder knowledge translation interventions, with monthly or quarterly paper-based reminders, to sustain a mobility innovation, the sit-to-stand activity.

Method: A cluster RCT using a stratified 2 × 2 factorial design was conducted in 24 Canadian residential care facilities with 416 residents and 54 peer reminder care aides. The 1-year intervention included two intensities of reminders (high: socially based peer reminders delivered by volunteer care aides to other care aides; low: paper-based reminders posted in residents' rooms), at two frequencies (monthly; every 3 months). Intervention fidelity was assessed using questionnaires and observations. Monthly sustainability rate of the sit-to-stand activity was calculated as the percentage of opportunities that residents successfully completed the activity in 30 days. Residents' sustainability rates were analyzed using a linear mixed model that mirrored the clustered repeated-measures factorial trial design. The model included a random intercept to account for clustering within sites. An unstructured covariance structure characterized the interdependence of repeated measures over time.

Results: Twenty-four sites were randomized. One site was excluded because of falsifying data, leaving 23 sites and 349 residents for intention-to-treat analysis. Paper reminders were implemented with high fidelity across all arms (91.5% per protocol), while the peer reminders were implemented with moderate fidelity in the monthly group (81.0% per protocol) and poor fidelity in the quarterly group (51.7% per protocol). At month 1, mean sustainability ranged from 40.7 to 47.2 per 100 opportunities, across the four intervention arms (p = 0.43). Mean rate of sustainability in the high intensity, high frequency group diverged after randomization, yielding statistically significant differences among the groups at 4 months which persisted for the remainder of the trial. After 12 months, the mean sustainability in the high intensity, high frequency group was approximately twice that of the other three groups combined (64.1 versus 37.8 per 100 opportunities, p < 0.001).

Conclusions: A monthly peer reminder intervention was more effective than a quarterly peer reminder intervention, a monthly paper-based reminder intervention, and a quarterly paper-based reminder intervention, in supporting care aides to sustain a mobility innovation in residential care facilities over 1 year.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01746459. Registered 11 December 2012: https://ichgcp.net/clinical-trials-registry/NCT01746459 .

Keywords: Cluster randomized controlled trial; Reminders; Sit-to-stand activity; Sustainability.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Screening, randomization, and follow-up
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Mean rate of sustainability by month of study and intervention group. High intensity, high frequency (), high intensity, low frequency (); low intensity, high frequency (); low intensity, low frequency (). The mean rates of adoption were estimated from a linear mixed model that included eight factors, a random intercept, and an unstructured covariance structure. The mean rate of sustainability in the combined high intensity, high frequency group diverged shortly after randomization, yielding a statistically significant difference among the groups as early as 4 months. At the end of 12 months, the mean rate of adoption in the high intensity, high frequency group was approximately twice as high than in the other three groups combined (64.1 versus 37.8 per 100 opportunities, p < 0.001), which were not significantly different from each other (p = 0.34), and their rates of sustainability remained relatively constant over the duration of the trial

References

    1. Canadian Institute for Health Information . Seniors in transition: exploring pathways across the care continuum. Ottawa: The Institute; 2017.
    1. Estabrooks CA, Squires JE, Carleton HL, Cummings GG, Norton PG. Who is looking after mom and dad? Unregulated workers in Canadian long-term care homes. Can J Aging. 2015;34:47–59. doi: 10.1017/S0714980814000506.
    1. Bostrom AM, Slaughter SE, Chojecki D, Estabrooks CA. What do we know about knowledge translation in the care of older adults? A scoping review. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2012;13:210–219. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2010.12.004.
    1. Proctor E, Silmere H, Raghavan R, Hovmand P, Aarons G, Bunger A, et al. Outcomes for implementation research: conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2011;38:65–76. doi: 10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7.
    1. Rogers E. Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed. London: Free Press; c2003.
    1. Caspar S, Cooke HA, Phinney A, Ratner PA. Practice change interventions in long-term care facilities: what works, and why? Can J Aging. 2016;35:372–384. doi: 10.1017/S0714980816000374.
    1. Kitson A, Rycroft-Malone J, Harvey G, McCormack B, Seers K, Titchen A. Evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARIHS framework: theoretical and practical challenges. Implement Sci. 2008;3:1. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-3-1.
    1. Slaughter SE, Estabrooks CA, Jones CA, Wagg AS, Eliasziw M. Sustaining transfers through Affordable Research Translation (START): study protocol to assess knowledge translation interventions in continuing care settings. Trials. 2013;14:355. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-355.
    1. Kagwa S, Bostrom A, Ickert C, Slaughter SE. Optimizing mobility through the sit-to-stand activity for older people living in residential care facilities: a qualitative interview study of health care aide experiences. Int J Older People Nurs. 2018;13:1–9. doi: 10.1111/opn.12169.
    1. Slaughter S, Wagg A, Jones A, Schopflocher D, Ickert C, Bampton E, et al. Mobility of vulnerable elders study: effect of the sit-to-stand activity on mobility, function and quality of life. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2015;16:138–143. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2014.07.020.
    1. Barreca S, Sigouin CS, Lambert C, Ansley B. Effects of extra training on the ability of stroke survivors to perform an independent sit-to-stand: a randomized controlled trial. J Geriatr Phys Ther. 2004;27:59–64. doi: 10.1519/00139143-200408000-00004.
    1. Matsufuji S, Shoji T, Yano Y, Tsujimota Y, Kishimoto H, Tabata T, et al. Effect of chair stand exercise on activity of daily living: a randomized controlled trial in hemodialysis patients. J Ren Nutr. 2015;25:17–24. doi: 10.1053/j.jrn.2014.06.010.
    1. Rosie J, Taylor D. Sit-to-stand as home exercise for mobility-limited adults over 80 years of age - GrandStand System may keep you standing? Age Ageing. 2007;36:555–562. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afm093.
    1. Tworek K, Ickert C, Bakal J, Eliasziw M, Wagg AS, Jones CA, et al. Examining the impact of knowledge translation interventions on uptake of evidence-based practices by care aides in continuing care. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2019;16:21–28. doi: 10.1111/wvn.12344.
    1. Slaughter SE, Bampton E, Erin DF, Ickert C, Jones CA, Estabrooks CA. A novel implementation strategy in residential care settings to promote EBP: direct care provider perceptions and development of a conceptual framework. Worldv Evid Based Nurs. 2017;14:237–245. doi: 10.1111/wvn.12224.
    1. Lengel RH, Daft RL. The selection of communication media as an executive skill. Acad Manage Exec. 1988;2(3):225–232. doi: 10.5465/ame.1988.4277259.
    1. Slaughter SE, Hill J, Snelgrove-Clarke E. What is the extent and quality of documentation and reporting of fidelity to implementation strategies: a scoping review. Implement Sci. 2015;10:129. doi: 10.1186/s13012-015-0320-3.
    1. Hegeman C, Hoskinson D, Munro H, Maiden P, Pillemer K. Peer mentoring in long-term care. Gerontol Geriatr Educ. 2007;28:77–90. doi: 10.1300/J021v28n02_06.
    1. Grimshaw J, Thomas R, MacLennan G, Fraser C, Ramsay CR, Vale L, et al. Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess. 2004;8:6. doi: 10.3310/hta8060.
    1. Grimshaw J, Eccles M, Lavis J, Hill SJ, Squires JE. Knowledge translation of research findings. Implement Sci. 2012;7:50. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-50.
    1. Thompson G, Estabrooks C, Degner L. Clarifying the concepts in knowledge transfer: a literature review. J Adv Nurs. 2006;53:691–701. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03775.x.
    1. Berta W, Laporte A, Deber R, Baumann A, Gamble B. The evolving role of health care aides in the long-term care and home and community care sectors in Canada. Hum Resour Health. 2013;11:25. doi: 10.1186/1478-4491-11-25.
    1. Arain M, Deutschlander S, Charland P. Are healthcare aides underused in long-term care? a cross-sectional study on continuing care facilities in Canada. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e015521. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015521.
    1. Squires J, Sullivan K, Eccles M, Worswick J, Grimshaw JM. Are multifaceted interventions more effective than single-component interventions in changing health-care professionals’ behaviours? An overview of systematic reviews. Implement Sci. 2014;9:152. doi: 10.1186/s13012-014-0152-6.

Source: PubMed

3
Subscribe