Evaluation of an Older Persons’ Assessment Educational Workbook with second year nursing students in the UK.

Background: As a first step to successfully meet the complex health and social needs of older people, patient assessment has become a central feature of government policy and practice in order to ensure that care planning is person-centred. A core component of nurse education is clinical practice in order to support the development of clinical skills and competence; therefore it is important to help students and their practice-based mentors to develop and apply older person assessment skills. Therefore, an educational workbook was developed to help 2nd year nursing students to learn a structured, systematic and individualised older person assessment process with the support of their mentor.

Aim: A pilot study to evaluate the impact of an Older Persons’ Assessment Educational Workbook and explore second year nursing students’ competence and their opinions and use of an older person’s assessment skills workbook.

Research Methodology: A pre-experimental design (pre and post-test with no comparison group) was undertaken with n=6 2nd year students in 2014. The outcome measure was the Nursing Competence Questionnaire and results were analysed using the Wilcoxin Signed Rank Test in SPSS version 21. Content analysis of completed workbooks and a survey (n=5) of opinions regarding the workbook was undertaken.

Key Findings- No pre-post-test difference was found in the Nursing Competence Questionnaire with p=0.058 for the total scale. However, as this was a pilot, the study was under-powered and all students’ scores improved. Content analysis of the workbook found that 3 of the 5 participants completed all components of the workbook, with a mean of 1051 words used (Std dev 281.8). Through the survey students reported the workbook as a useful guide when undertaking a patient assessment.

Conclusions: The workbook showed potential as an intervention to help support development of nursing students’ assessment skills in practice.

Development and Application of Medication Appropriateness Indicators for Persons with Advanced Dementia: A Feasibility Study

Background: No studies have been conducted in the UK context to date that categorise medications in terms of appropriateness for patients with advanced dementia, or that examine medication use in these vulnerable patients.

Objectives: The objectives of this study were to categorise the appropriateness of a comprehensive list of medications and medication classes for use in patients with advanced dementia; examine the feasibility of conducting a longitudinal prospective cohort study to collect clinical and medication use data; and determine the appropriateness of prescribing for nursing home residents with advanced dementia in Northern Ireland (NI), using the categories developed.

Methods: A three-round Delphi consensus panel survey of expert clinicians was used to categorise the appropriateness of medications for patients with advanced dementia [defined as having Functional Assessment Staging (FAST) scores ranging from 6E to 7F]. This was followed by a longitudinal prospective cohort feasibility study that was conducted in three nursing homes in NI. Clinical and medication use for participating residents with advanced dementia (FAST scores ranging from 6E to 7F) were collected and a short test of dementia severity administered. These data were collected at baseline and every 3 months for up to 9 months or until death. For those residents who died during the study period, data were also collected within 14 days of death. The appropriateness ratings from the consensus panel survey were retrospectively applied to residents’ medication data at each data collection timepoint to determine the appropriateness of medications prescribed for these residents.

Results: Consensus was achieved for 87 (90 %) of the 97 medications and medication classes included in the survey. Fifteen residents were recruited to participate in the longitudinal prospective cohort feasibility study, four of whom died during the data collection period. Mean numbers of medications prescribed per resident were 16.2 at baseline, 19.6 at 3 months, 17.4 at 6 months and 16.1 at 9 months. Fourteen residents at baseline were taking at least one medication considered by the consensus panel to be never appropriate, and approximately 25 % of medications prescribed were considered to be never appropriate. Post-death data collection indicated a decrease in the proportion of never appropriate medications and an increase in the proportion of always appropriate medications for those residents who died.

Conclusions: This study is the first to develop and apply medication appropriateness indicators for patients with advanced dementia in the UK setting. The Delphi consensus panel survey of expert clinicians was a suitable method of developing such indicators. It is feasible to collect information on quality of life, functional performance, physical comfort, neuropsychiatric symptoms and cognitive function for this subpopulation of nursing home residents with advanced dementia.

Understanding barriers to cataract surgery among older persons in rural China through focus groups.

PURPOSE: To utilize focus groups (FGs) to identify barriers to cataract surgery specific to older persons in rural Guangdong, China. METHODS: Three focus groups in separate locations were carried out for persons aged 60 years and above with best-corrected vision <= 6/18 due to cataract, either accepting or refusing surgery. Participants also ranked responses to questions about acceptance of surgery among the elderly. FG transcripts were coded independently by two investigators using qualitative data management software. RESULTS: Twenty participants had a mean age of 72.7 ± 6.1 years, 14 (70.0%) were women and 17 (85.0%) were blind (best-corrected vision <= 6/60) in at least one eye. Cost was ranked by two of three groups as the main barrier to surgery, and all groups listed reducing cost as the best strategy to increase surgical uptake. Many respondents planned to use China's New Cooperative Medical Scheme (NCMS) health insurance to pay for surgery. Participants showed poor understanding of cataract, but ranked educational interventions low as methods of increasing uptake. Though opinions of local service quality were poor, respondents did not see quality as an important barrier to accepting service. Participants frequently depended on family members to pay for surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to some previous reports, cost may be an important barrier to cataract surgery in rural China, which NCMS may help to alleviate. Educational interventions to increase knowledge about cataract are needed, but may face skepticism among patients. Strategies to promote cataract surgery should target the entire family.