Healthcare Professionals' Perspectives on the Impact of a Multicomponent Intervention for Older People With Frailty Discharged From Hospital–A Theory-Based Evaluation

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Rikke Larsen Rasmussen, Laurine Nilsson, Mette Holst, Morten Villumsen, Jane Andreasen
{"title":"Healthcare Professionals' Perspectives on the Impact of a Multicomponent Intervention for Older People With Frailty Discharged From Hospital–A Theory-Based Evaluation","authors":"Rikke Larsen Rasmussen,&nbsp;Laurine Nilsson,&nbsp;Mette Holst,&nbsp;Morten Villumsen,&nbsp;Jane Andreasen","doi":"10.1111/jep.70042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Rationale</h3>\n \n <p>Older people with frailty are at high risk of functional decline, readmissions, and other adverse health outcomes, after acute hospitalisation. Interventions should focus on strength training and nutrition, but knowledge is needed on designing sustainable interventions after discharge.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims and Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>The aim of this study was to explore what healthcare professionals perceive as central for making a newly developed complex training, social, and nutritional intervention work effectively using theory-based evaluation. The intervention was a RCT study including 119 participants.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Nine semi-structured interviews and three follow-up meetings were conducted with healthcare professionals (physiotherapists, senior activity employees, dietician) who performed the intervention. Interviews were analysed for Context–Intervention–Mechanism–Outcome configurations, and findings were compared with the initial programme theory.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The training and social elements of the intervention seemed to largely function as intended. According to the healthcare professionals, the mechanisms for the training intervention were successful experiences, the approach of the physiotherapists, and the atmosphere and interactions between participants, leading to increased self-efficacy and motivation for continuing. However, goal setting and test results were used differently as motivational tools. The social intervention was perceived to work through feeling part of a community and well received in the centre. The perceived mechanisms for the nutritional intervention were increased knowledge and feelings of being seen and heard, although it seems that the impact was mixed.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>According to the involved healthcare professionals, the complex training, social, and nutritional intervention seemed to work well for older people with frailty, although the nutritional intervention was received differently. The important mechanisms were the social element and the personal approach of the physiotherapists, which perceivably prompted training efforts and results and yielded good mental outcomes. The organisation of a similar multicomponent intervention should consider integrating the nutritional intervention and frame the use of goal setting and testing further. The findings provided novel insights to working mechanisms in multicomponent interventions for older people with frailty, especially regarding the social component, which may inform future interventions.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jep.70042","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.70042","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Rationale

Older people with frailty are at high risk of functional decline, readmissions, and other adverse health outcomes, after acute hospitalisation. Interventions should focus on strength training and nutrition, but knowledge is needed on designing sustainable interventions after discharge.

Aims and Objectives

The aim of this study was to explore what healthcare professionals perceive as central for making a newly developed complex training, social, and nutritional intervention work effectively using theory-based evaluation. The intervention was a RCT study including 119 participants.

Methods

Nine semi-structured interviews and three follow-up meetings were conducted with healthcare professionals (physiotherapists, senior activity employees, dietician) who performed the intervention. Interviews were analysed for Context–Intervention–Mechanism–Outcome configurations, and findings were compared with the initial programme theory.

Results

The training and social elements of the intervention seemed to largely function as intended. According to the healthcare professionals, the mechanisms for the training intervention were successful experiences, the approach of the physiotherapists, and the atmosphere and interactions between participants, leading to increased self-efficacy and motivation for continuing. However, goal setting and test results were used differently as motivational tools. The social intervention was perceived to work through feeling part of a community and well received in the centre. The perceived mechanisms for the nutritional intervention were increased knowledge and feelings of being seen and heard, although it seems that the impact was mixed.

Conclusion

According to the involved healthcare professionals, the complex training, social, and nutritional intervention seemed to work well for older people with frailty, although the nutritional intervention was received differently. The important mechanisms were the social element and the personal approach of the physiotherapists, which perceivably prompted training efforts and results and yielded good mental outcomes. The organisation of a similar multicomponent intervention should consider integrating the nutritional intervention and frame the use of goal setting and testing further. The findings provided novel insights to working mechanisms in multicomponent interventions for older people with frailty, especially regarding the social component, which may inform future interventions.

Abstract Image

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
4.20%
发文量
143
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice aims to promote the evaluation and development of clinical practice across medicine, nursing and the allied health professions. All aspects of health services research and public health policy analysis and debate are of interest to the Journal whether studied from a population-based or individual patient-centred perspective. Of particular interest to the Journal are submissions on all aspects of clinical effectiveness and efficiency including evidence-based medicine, clinical practice guidelines, clinical decision making, clinical services organisation, implementation and delivery, health economic evaluation, health process and outcome measurement and new or improved methods (conceptual and statistical) for systematic inquiry into clinical practice. Papers may take a classical quantitative or qualitative approach to investigation (or may utilise both techniques) or may take the form of learned essays, structured/systematic reviews and critiques.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信