Can Health-care Assistant Training improve the relational care of older people? (CHAT) A development and feasibility study of a complex intervention

Author:

Arthur Antony12,Aldus Clare12,Sarre Sophie3,Maben Jill3,Wharrad Heather4,Schneider Justine5,Barton Garry26,Argyle Elaine4,Clark Allan26,Nouri Fiona4,Nicholson Caroline3

Affiliation:

1. School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

2. Norwich Clinical Trials Unit, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

3. Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, King’s College London, London, UK

4. School of Health Sciences, Queen’s Medical Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

5. School of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

6. Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

Abstract

BackgroundOlder people account for an increasing proportion of those receiving NHS acute care. The quality of health care delivered to older people has come under increased scrutiny. Health-care assistants (HCAs) provide much of the direct care of older people in hospital. Patients’ experience of care tends to be based on the relational aspects of that care including dignity, empathy and emotional support.Objective(s)We aimed to understand the relational care training needs of HCAs caring for older people, design a relational care training intervention for HCAs and assess the feasibility of a cluster randomised controlled trial to test the new intervention against HCA training as usual (TAU).Design(1) A telephone survey of all NHS hospital trusts in England to assess current HCA training provision, (2) focus groups of older people and carers, (3) semistructured interviews with HCAs and other care staff to establish training needs and inform intervention development and (4) a feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial.Setting(1) All acute NHS hospital trusts in England, and (2–4) three acute NHS hospital trusts in England and the populations they serve.Participants(1) Representatives of 113 out of the total of 161 (70.2%) NHS trusts in England took part in the telephone survey, (2) 29 older people or carer participants in three focus groups, (3) 30 HCA and 24 ‘other staff’ interviewees and (4) 12 wards (four per trust), 112 HCAs, 92 patients during the prerandomisation period and 67 patients during the postrandomisation period.InterventionsFor the feasibility trial, a training intervention (Older People’s Shoes™) for HCAs developed as part of the study was compared with HCA TAU.Main outcome measuresPatient-level outcomes were the experience of emotional care and quality of life during patients’ hospital stay, as measured by the Patient Evaluation of Emotional Care during Hospitalisation and the EuroQol-5 Dimensions questionnaires. HCA outcomes were empathy, as measured by the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire, and attitudes towards older people, as measured by the Age Group Evaluation and Description Inventory. Ward-level outcomes were the quality of HCA–patient interaction, as measured by the Quality of Interaction Scale.Results(1) One-third of trust telephone survey participants reported HCA training content that we considered to be ‘relational care’. Training for HCAs is variable across trusts and is focused on new recruits. The biggest challenge for HCA training is getting HCAs released from ward duties. (2) Older people and carers are aware of the pressures that ward staff are under but good relationships with care staff determine whether or not their experience of hospital is positive. (3) HCAs have training needs related to ‘difficult conversations’ with patients and relatives; they have particular preferences for learning styles that are not always reflected in available training. (4) In the feasibility trial, 187 of the 192 planned ward observation sessions were completed; the response to HCA questionnaires at baseline and at 8 and 12 weeks post randomisation was 64.2%, 46.4% and 35.7%, respectively, and 57.2% of eligible patients returned completed questionnaires.LimitationsThis was an intervention development and feasibility study so no conclusions can be drawn about the clinical effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of the intervention.ConclusionsThe intervention had high acceptability among nurse trainers and HCA learners. Viability of a definitive trial is conditional on overcoming specific methodological (patient recruitment processes) and contextual (involvement of wider ward team) challenges.Future workMethods to ease the burden of questionnaire completion without compromising ethics or methodological rigour need to be explored.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN10385799.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full inHealth Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 5, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Funder

Health Services and Delivery Research (HS&DR) Programme

Publisher

National Institute for Health Research

Subject

General Economics, Econometrics and Finance

Reference114 articles.

Cited by 6 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3