Affiliation:
1. University of Leeds School of Healthcare
2. University of Leeds Faculty of Medicine and Health
3. University of Nottingham School of Medicine
4. University of Leeds Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences
5. University of Leeds School of Electronic and Electrical Engineering
6. South Tyneside Council
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Rapid and mass transmission of the Sars-cov2 virus amongst vulnerable people led to devastating effects from COVID-19 in care homes. The CONTACT intervention introduced Bluetooth Low Energy “smart” wearable devices (BLE wearables) as a basis for automated contact tracing in, and feedback on infection risks and patterns to, care homes to try and improve infection prevention and control (IPC). We planned a cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) of CONTACT. To be feasible, homes had to adopt CONTACT’s technology and new ways of working. This paper reports on the process evaluation conducted alongside CONTACT’s feasibility study and explains why it lacked the feasibility and acceptability for a definitive RCT.
Methods
This mixed methods process evaluation used Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) qualitative (interviews, field notes, study case report forms and documents, and observation) and quantitative (survey instruments, counts of activity) data to plan, implement and analyse the mechanisms, effects and contextual factors that shaped the (lack of) feasibility and acceptability of the CONTACT intervention.
Results
Thirteen themes within four core NPT constructs explained CONTACT’s lack of feasibility. Coherence: the home’s varied in the scale and extent of commitment and understanding of the technology and study procedures. Leadership credibility was important but compromised by competing priorities. Management and direct care staff saw CONTACT differently. Work to promote (cognitive participation) and enact (collective action) CONTACT was burdensome and failed to be prioritised over competing COVID-19-related demands on time and scarce human and cognitive resources. Ultimately, staff appraisal of the value of CONTACT-generated information and study procedures (reflexivity) was that any utility for IPC was insufficient to outweigh the perceived burden and complexity involved.
Conclusions:
Dismissing BLE wearables' potential for capturing contacts is premature. In non-pandemic conditions, with more time, better co-design, and integration of theory-driven implementation strategies tailored to care homes' unique contexts researchers could enhance normalisation in readiness for future pandemic challenges.
Trial registration
ISRCTN registration: 11204126 registered 17/02/2021
Publisher
Research Square Platform LLC
Reference49 articles.
1. Office for national Statistics. Impact of coronavirus in care homes in England: 26 May to 19 June 2020. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/impactofcoronavirusincarehomesinenglandvivaldi/26mayto19june2020 (2021).
2. Office for National Statistics. Deaths involving COVID-19 in the care sector, England and Wales: deaths registered between week ending 20 March 2020 and week ending 21 January 2022. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/articles/deathsinvolvingcovid19inthecaresectorenglandandwales/deathsregisteredbetweenweekending20march2020andweekending21january2022 (2022).
3. SARS-CoV-2 infection, clinical features and outcome of COVID-19 in United Kingdom nursing homes;Graham NSN;J Infect,2020
4. The impact of Covid-19-related distancing on the well-being of nursing home residents and their family members: a qualitative study;Paananen J;Int J Nurs Stud Adv,2021
5. Rajan S. & M., M. Learning from the impacts of COVID-19 on care homes: a pilot survey. https://ltccovid.org/2020/06/09/learning-from-the-impacts-of-covid-19-on-care-homes-in-england-a-pilot-survey/ (2020).