对老年痴呆住院病人行为监测图表的评估

Q3 Nursing
Nicole King, Ian Asquith
{"title":"对老年痴呆住院病人行为监测图表的评估","authors":"Nicole King, Ian Asquith","doi":"10.1108/wwop-06-2023-0023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose This study aims to evaluate the quality of information recorded in Behaviour Monitoring Charts (BMC) for Behaviours that Challenge (BtC) in dementia in an older adult inpatient dementia service in the North of England (Aim I) and to understand staff perceptions and experiences of completing BMC for BtC in dementia (Aim II). Design/methodology/approach Descriptive statistics and graphs were used to analyse and interpret quantitative data gathered from BMC (Aim I) and Likert-scale survey responses (Aim II). Thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006) was used to analyse and interpret qualitative data collected from responses to open-ended survey questions and, separately, focus group discussions (Aim II). Findings Analysis of the BMCs revealed that some of the data recorded relating to antecedents, behaviours and consequences lacked richness and used vague language (i.e. gave reassurance), which limited its clinical utility. Overall, participants and respondents found BMC to be problematic. For them, completing BMCs were not viewed as worthwhile, the processes that followed their completion were unclear, and they left staff feeling disempowered in the systemic hierarchy of an inpatient setting. Originality/value Functional analysis of BMC helps identify and inform appropriately tailored interventions for BtC in dementia. Understanding how BMCs are used and how staff perceive BMC provides a unique opportunity to improve them. Improving BMC will support better functional analysis of BtC, thus allowing for more tailored interventions to meet the needs of people with dementia.","PeriodicalId":53659,"journal":{"name":"Working with Older People","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An evaluation of behaviour monitoring charts for behaviours that challenge in an older adult inpatients dementia service\",\"authors\":\"Nicole King, Ian Asquith\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/wwop-06-2023-0023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose This study aims to evaluate the quality of information recorded in Behaviour Monitoring Charts (BMC) for Behaviours that Challenge (BtC) in dementia in an older adult inpatient dementia service in the North of England (Aim I) and to understand staff perceptions and experiences of completing BMC for BtC in dementia (Aim II). Design/methodology/approach Descriptive statistics and graphs were used to analyse and interpret quantitative data gathered from BMC (Aim I) and Likert-scale survey responses (Aim II). Thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006) was used to analyse and interpret qualitative data collected from responses to open-ended survey questions and, separately, focus group discussions (Aim II). Findings Analysis of the BMCs revealed that some of the data recorded relating to antecedents, behaviours and consequences lacked richness and used vague language (i.e. gave reassurance), which limited its clinical utility. Overall, participants and respondents found BMC to be problematic. For them, completing BMCs were not viewed as worthwhile, the processes that followed their completion were unclear, and they left staff feeling disempowered in the systemic hierarchy of an inpatient setting. Originality/value Functional analysis of BMC helps identify and inform appropriately tailored interventions for BtC in dementia. Understanding how BMCs are used and how staff perceive BMC provides a unique opportunity to improve them. Improving BMC will support better functional analysis of BtC, thus allowing for more tailored interventions to meet the needs of people with dementia.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53659,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Working with Older People\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Working with Older People\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/wwop-06-2023-0023\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Nursing\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Working with Older People","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/wwop-06-2023-0023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在评估英格兰北部老年痴呆症住院服务(Aim I)中痴呆症挑战行为(BtC)行为监测图(BMC)中记录的信息质量,并了解工作人员对痴呆症挑战行为(BtC)完成BMC (Aim II)的看法和经验。设计/方法/方法使用描述性统计和图表来分析和解释从BMC (Aim I)和李克特量表调查中收集的定量数据主题分析(Braun and Clarke, 2006)用于分析和解释从开放式调查问题的回答中收集的定性数据,以及单独的焦点小组讨论(Aim II)。调查结果对bmc的分析显示,记录的一些与前事、行为和后果有关的数据缺乏丰富性,使用模糊的语言(即给予保证),这限制了其临床效用。总体而言,参与者和受访者都认为BMC存在问题。对他们来说,完成bmc被认为是不值得的,完成后的流程不明确,他们让员工在住院环境的系统等级制度中感到被剥夺了权力。独创性/价值BMC的功能分析有助于识别和告知痴呆患者BtC的适当干预措施。了解BMC的使用方式以及员工对BMC的看法为改进BMC提供了独特的机会。改善BMC将支持更好的BtC功能分析,从而允许更有针对性的干预措施,以满足痴呆症患者的需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An evaluation of behaviour monitoring charts for behaviours that challenge in an older adult inpatients dementia service
Purpose This study aims to evaluate the quality of information recorded in Behaviour Monitoring Charts (BMC) for Behaviours that Challenge (BtC) in dementia in an older adult inpatient dementia service in the North of England (Aim I) and to understand staff perceptions and experiences of completing BMC for BtC in dementia (Aim II). Design/methodology/approach Descriptive statistics and graphs were used to analyse and interpret quantitative data gathered from BMC (Aim I) and Likert-scale survey responses (Aim II). Thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006) was used to analyse and interpret qualitative data collected from responses to open-ended survey questions and, separately, focus group discussions (Aim II). Findings Analysis of the BMCs revealed that some of the data recorded relating to antecedents, behaviours and consequences lacked richness and used vague language (i.e. gave reassurance), which limited its clinical utility. Overall, participants and respondents found BMC to be problematic. For them, completing BMCs were not viewed as worthwhile, the processes that followed their completion were unclear, and they left staff feeling disempowered in the systemic hierarchy of an inpatient setting. Originality/value Functional analysis of BMC helps identify and inform appropriately tailored interventions for BtC in dementia. Understanding how BMCs are used and how staff perceive BMC provides a unique opportunity to improve them. Improving BMC will support better functional analysis of BtC, thus allowing for more tailored interventions to meet the needs of people with dementia.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Working with Older People
Working with Older People Nursing-Community and Home Care
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
48
×
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