Effects of strategies to improve general practitioner-nurse collaboration and communication in regard to hospital admissions of nursing home residents (interprof ACT): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial.
Interprofessional relations
Nursing homes
Physician-nurse
Journal
Trials
ISSN: 1745-6215
Titre abrégé: Trials
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101263253
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 Nov 2020
05 Nov 2020
Historique:
received:
13
05
2020
accepted:
10
09
2020
entrez:
6
11
2020
pubmed:
7
11
2020
medline:
22
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In Germany, up to 50% of nursing home residents are admitted to a hospital at least once a year. It is often unclear whether this is beneficial or even harmful. Successful interprofessional collaboration and communication involving general practitioners (GPs) and nurses may improve medical care of nursing home residents. In the previous interprof study, the six-component intervention package interprof ACT was developed to facilitate collaboration of GPs and nurses in nursing homes. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the interprof ACT intervention. This multicentre, cluster randomised controlled trial compares nursing homes receiving the interprof ACT intervention package for a duration of 12 months (e.g. comprising appointment of mutual contact persons, shared goal setting, standardised GPs' home visits) with a control group (care as usual). A total of 34 nursing homes are randomised, and overall 680 residents recruited. The intervention package is presented in a kick-off meeting to GPs, nurses, residents/relatives or their representatives. Nursing home nurses act as change agents to support local adaption and implementation of the intervention measures. Primary outcome is the cumulative incidence of hospitalisation within 12 months. Secondary outcomes include admissions to hospital, days admitted to hospital, use of other medical services, prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication and quality of life. Additionally, health economic and a mixed methods process evaluation will be performed. This study investigates a complex intervention tailored to local needs of nursing homes. Outcomes reflect the healthcare and health of nursing home residents, as well as the feasibility of the intervention package and its impact on interprofessional communication and collaboration. Because of its systematic development and its flexible nature, interprof ACT is expected to be viable for large-scale implementation in routine care services regardless of local organisational conditions and resources available for medical care for nursing home residents on a regular basis. Recommendations will be made for an improved organisation of primary care for nursing home residents. In addition, the results may provide important knowledge and data for the development and evaluation of further strategies to improve outpatient care for elderly care-receivers. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03426475 . Initially registered on 7 February 2018.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In Germany, up to 50% of nursing home residents are admitted to a hospital at least once a year. It is often unclear whether this is beneficial or even harmful. Successful interprofessional collaboration and communication involving general practitioners (GPs) and nurses may improve medical care of nursing home residents. In the previous interprof study, the six-component intervention package interprof ACT was developed to facilitate collaboration of GPs and nurses in nursing homes. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the interprof ACT intervention.
METHODS
METHODS
This multicentre, cluster randomised controlled trial compares nursing homes receiving the interprof ACT intervention package for a duration of 12 months (e.g. comprising appointment of mutual contact persons, shared goal setting, standardised GPs' home visits) with a control group (care as usual). A total of 34 nursing homes are randomised, and overall 680 residents recruited. The intervention package is presented in a kick-off meeting to GPs, nurses, residents/relatives or their representatives. Nursing home nurses act as change agents to support local adaption and implementation of the intervention measures. Primary outcome is the cumulative incidence of hospitalisation within 12 months. Secondary outcomes include admissions to hospital, days admitted to hospital, use of other medical services, prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication and quality of life. Additionally, health economic and a mixed methods process evaluation will be performed.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
This study investigates a complex intervention tailored to local needs of nursing homes. Outcomes reflect the healthcare and health of nursing home residents, as well as the feasibility of the intervention package and its impact on interprofessional communication and collaboration. Because of its systematic development and its flexible nature, interprof ACT is expected to be viable for large-scale implementation in routine care services regardless of local organisational conditions and resources available for medical care for nursing home residents on a regular basis. Recommendations will be made for an improved organisation of primary care for nursing home residents. In addition, the results may provide important knowledge and data for the development and evaluation of further strategies to improve outpatient care for elderly care-receivers.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03426475 . Initially registered on 7 February 2018.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33153484
doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04736-x
pii: 10.1186/s13063-020-04736-x
pmc: PMC7643262
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03426475']
Types de publication
Clinical Trial Protocol
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
913Subventions
Organisme : Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss
ID : 01VSF16029
Références
Age Ageing. 2007 Sep;36(5):549-54
pubmed: 17881422
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Jan 19;17(1):55
pubmed: 28103927
Aging Clin Exp Res. 2020 Jul;32(7):1359-1368
pubmed: 31428997
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2018 Jun 26;:
pubmed: 29947150
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 May 24;19(1):332
pubmed: 31126277
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2014 Mar;15(3):162-170
pubmed: 24513226
JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Sep 1;177(9):1257-1264
pubmed: 28672291
Appl Nurs Res. 2017 Jun;35:118-125
pubmed: 28532718
Qual Life Res. 2015 Apr;24(4):845-50
pubmed: 25347978
Biom J. 2006 Aug;48(4):537-55
pubmed: 16972704
J Adv Nurs. 2015 Feb;71(2):451-7
pubmed: 25338930
Gesundheitswesen. 2016 Nov;78(11):742-748
pubmed: 25951115
Age Ageing. 2019 May 1;48(3):419-425
pubmed: 30806453
Int Psychogeriatr. 2016 Aug;28(8):1399-400
pubmed: 26863077
BMC Geriatr. 2019 Jan 21;19(1):17
pubmed: 30665362
Pflege. 2016 Jul;29(4):183-91
pubmed: 27239744
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2010 Aug;107(31-32):543-51
pubmed: 20827352
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2011;105(10):714-22
pubmed: 22176980
Gerontologist. 2005 Oct;45 Spec No 1(1):27-36
pubmed: 16230747
BMC Geriatr. 2018 Jun 19;18(1):145
pubmed: 29914389
BMJ. 2015 Mar 19;350:h1258
pubmed: 25791983
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Jan 24;14:36
pubmed: 24456561
J Med Internet Res. 2019 Jan 23;21(1):e10178
pubmed: 30672744
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2015 Dec 01;13:192
pubmed: 26627874
Int J Nurs Stud. 2019 Aug;96:27-34
pubmed: 31014546
Qual Life Res. 2011 Dec;20(10):1727-36
pubmed: 21479777
BMJ Open. 2019 Jan 21;9(1):e025269
pubmed: 30670526
J Clin Epidemiol. 2004 Aug;57(8):785-94
pubmed: 15485730
BMC Fam Pract. 2018 Jan 11;19(1):14
pubmed: 29325541
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jun 22;6:CD000072
pubmed: 28639262
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2011 Apr;59(4):745-53
pubmed: 21410447
Gesundheitswesen. 2015 Jan;77(1):46-52
pubmed: 24806594
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2016 Feb 12;113(6):92-8
pubmed: 26931625
BMC Fam Pract. 2016 Aug 30;17(1):123
pubmed: 27576357
BMC Geriatr. 2019 Jan 25;19(1):24
pubmed: 30683060
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2013 Jul;14(7):471-8
pubmed: 23566932
Trials. 2013 Jan 12;14:15
pubmed: 23311722
Gesundheitswesen. 2015 Jan;77(1):53-61
pubmed: 25025287
Med Care Res Rev. 2008 Feb;65(1):3-39
pubmed: 18184869
Thorax. 2016 Jun;71(6):493-500
pubmed: 27030578
Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Jun;36(6):663-674
pubmed: 29460066
JAMA. 2012 May 23;307(20):2177-84
pubmed: 22618925
BMC Public Health. 2019 Nov 6;19(1):1464
pubmed: 31694584
Age Ageing. 2014 Nov;43(6):759-66
pubmed: 25315230