Format

Send to

Choose Destination
BMC Geriatr. 2019 Oct 21;19(1):275. doi: 10.1186/s12877-019-1275-z.

A four-stage process for intervention description and guide development of a practice-based intervention: refining the Namaste Care intervention implementation specification for people with advanced dementia prior to a feasibility cluster randomised trial.

Author information

1
International Observatory on End of Life Care, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YG, UK. c.walshe@lancaster.ac.uk.
2
St Christopher's Hospice, 51-59 Lawrie Park Road, Sydenham, London, SE26 6DZ, UK.
3
International Observatory on End of Life Care, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YG, UK.
4
Lancashire Clinical Trials Unit, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, PR1 2HE, UK.
5
Centre for Research in Public Health and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, AL10 9AB, UK.
6
Patient Representative c/o The Alzheimer's Society, London, UK.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Some interventions are developed from practice, and implemented before evidence of effect is determined, or the intervention is fully specified. An example is Namaste Care, a multi-component intervention for people with advanced dementia, delivered in care home, community, hospital and hospice settings. This paper describes the development of an intervention description, guide and training package to support implementation of Namaste Care within the context of a feasibility trial. This allows fidelity to be determined within the trial, and for intervention users to understand how similar their implementation is to that which was studied.

METHODS:

A four-stage approach: a) Collating existing intervention materials and drawing from programme theory developed from a realist review to draft an intervention description. b) Exploring readability, comprehensibility and utility with staff who had not experienced Namaste Care. c) Using modified nominal group techniques with those with Namaste Care experience to refine and prioritise the intervention implementation materials. d) Final refinement with a patient and public involvement panel.

RESULTS:

Eighteen nursing care home staff, one carer, one volunteer and five members of our public involvement panel were involved across the study steps. A 16-page A4 booklet was designed, with flow charts, graphics and colour coded information to ease navigation through the document. This was supplemented by infographics, and a training package. The guide describes the boundaries of the intervention and how to implement it, whilst retaining the flexible spirit of the Namaste Care intervention.

CONCLUSIONS:

There is little attention paid to how best to specify complex interventions that have already been organically implemented in practice. This four-stage process may have utility for context specific adaptation or description of existing, but untested, interventions. A robust, agreed, intervention and implementation description should enable a high-quality future trial. If an effect is determined, flexible practice implementation should be enabled through having a clear, evidence-based guide.

KEYWORDS:

Consensus methods; Dementia; Implementation; Intervention; Nursing homes; Palliative care; Trial

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for BioMed Central Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center