↓ Skip to main content

Description of an advance care planning intervention in nursing homes: outcomes of the process evaluation

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
160 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Description of an advance care planning intervention in nursing homes: outcomes of the process evaluation
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12877-018-0713-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Irene Aasmul, Bettina S. Husebo, Elisabeth Flo

Abstract

Advance Care Planning (ACP) is the repeated communication and decision-making process between the patient, family, and healthcare professionals. This study describes an ACP intervention in nursing homes and evaluates the outcomes of the implementation process. The ACP intervention was part of a 4-month complex, cluster randomized controlled trial (COSMOS). 37 Norwegian nursing homes with 72 units (1 cluster = 1 unit) and 765 patients were invited to participate and eligible units were randomised to the intervention group or control. Nursing home staff in the intervention group was offered a standardized education programme to learn early and repeated communication with patients and families and to implement ACP in their units. We used a train-the-trainer approach to educate staff in the units, supported by regular telephone calls and a midway seminar after two months. Individual patient logs consisting of different communication deliverables were used to evaluate the implementation process. Supported by Qualitative Content Analyses, we identified facilitators and barriers of the ACP implementation based on feedback during midway seminars and individual patient logs. The ACP intervention was conducted in 36 NH units (n = 297); 105 healthcare providers participated at the education seminar prior to the study, and 3-4 employees from each unit participated in the midway seminar. NH staff reported the educational material relevant for the implementation strategy. The patient logs showed that ACP was successfully implemented in 62% (n = 183) of the patients using our predefined implementation criteria. The staff emphasized the clear communication of the relevance of ACP addressed to leaders and staff as important facilitators, along with the clearly defined routines, roles and responsibilities. Identified barriers included lack of competence, perceived lack of time, and conflicting culture and staff opinions. Monthly communication with the family was the most frequently conducted communication, and the predefined criteria of successfully implemented ACP were largely achieved. Nursing home routines and engagement of leaders and staff were crucial facilitators, whereas lack of time and competence reduced the implementation success. The COSMOS-trial was registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02238652 ) July 7th, 2014.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 160 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 160 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 16%
Student > Bachelor 20 13%
Researcher 10 6%
Other 9 6%
Other 29 18%
Unknown 41 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 50 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 26 16%
Social Sciences 11 7%
Psychology 9 6%
Environmental Science 4 3%
Other 15 9%
Unknown 45 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 October 2019.
All research outputs
#4,480,224
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#1,171
of 3,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,189
of 441,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#38
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,235 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 441,127 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.