Challenges of implementing intervention research in persons with dementia: example of a glider swing intervention

Introducing virtual reality therapy for inpatients with dementia admitted to an acute care hospital: learnings from a pilot to pave the way to a randomized controlled trial

Background

Behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) are difficult to manage, particularly in acute care settings. As virtual reality (VR) technology becomes increasingly accessible and affordable, there is growing interest among clinicians to evaluate VR therapy in hospitalized patients, as an alternative to administering antipsychotics/sedatives or using physical restraints associated with negative side effects.

Objectives

Validate and refine the proposed research protocol for a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that evaluates the impact of VR therapy on managing BPSD in acute care hospitals. Special attention was given to ascertain the processes of introducing non-pharmacological interventions in acute care hospitals.

Methods

Ten patients 65 years or older (mean = 87) previously diagnosed with dementia, admitted to an acute care hospital, were recruited over 3-month period into a prospective longitudinal pilot study. The intervention consisted of viewing 20-min of immersive 360° VR using a head-mounted display. Baseline and outcomes data were collected from the hospital electronic medical records, pre/post mood-state questionnaires, Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) score, and standardized qualitative observations. Comprehensive process data and workflow were documented, including timestamps for each study task and detailed notes on personnel requirements and challenges encountered.

Results

Of 516 patients admitted during the study, 67 met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. In total, 234 calls were initiated to substitute decision makers (SDM) of the 67 patients for the consenting process. Nearly half (45.6%) of SDMs declined participation, and 40% could not be reached in time before patients being discharged, resulting in 57 eligible patients not being enrolled. Ten consented participants were enrolled and completed the study. The initial VR session averaged 53.6 min, largely due to the administration of NPI (mean = 19.5 min). Only four participants were able to respond reliably to questions. Seven participants opted for additional VR therapy sessions; of those providing feedback regarding the VR content, they wanted more varied scenery (animals, fields of flowers, holiday themes). Few sessions (4/18) encountered technical difficulties.

Conclusion

The pilot was instrumental in identifying issues and providing recommendations for the RCT. Screening, inclusion criteria, consenting, data collection, and interaction with SDMs and hospital staff were all processes requiring changes and optimizations. Overall, patients with dementia appear to tolerate immersive VR, and with suggested protocol alterations, it is feasible to evaluate this non-pharmacological intervention in acute care hospitals.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40814-020-00708-9.

Challenges of conducting research in long-term care facilities: a systematic review

Background

The aim of this review is to describe the challenges and barriers to conducting research in long-term care facilities.

Methods

A literature search was conducted in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central, PsycINFO and CINAHL. Keywords used included “long term care”, “nursing home”, “research”, “trial”, “challenge” and “barrier”, etc. Resulting references were screened in order to identify relevant studies that reported on challenges derived from first-hand experience of empirical research studies. Challenges were summarized and synthesized.

Results

Of 1723 references, 39 articles were selected for inclusion. To facilitate understanding we proposed a classification framework of 8 main themes to categorize the research challenges presented in the 39 studies, relating to the characteristics of facility/owner/administrator, resident, staff caregiver, family caregiver, investigator, ethical or legal concerns, methodology, and budgetary considerations.

Conclusions

Conducting research in long-term care facilities is full of challenges which can be categorized into 8 main themes. Investigators should be aware of all these challenges and specifically address them when planning their studies. Stakeholders should be involved from an early stage and flexibility should be built into both the methodology and research budget.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12877-018-0934-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Conducting randomized controlled trials with older people with dementia in long-term care: Challenges and lessons learnt

The characteristics of older people with dementia and the long-term care environment can make conducting research a challenge and, as such, this population and setting are often understudied, particularly in terms of clinical or randomized controlled trials. This paper provides a critical discussion of some of the difficulties faced whilst implementing a randomized controlled trial exploring the effect of a live music programme on the behaviour of older people with dementia in long-term care. A discussion of how these challenges were addressed is presented to aid investigators planning the design of similar research and help encourage a proactive approach in dealing with research-related challenges right from project conception. The article is structured according to the three principles of a randomized controlled trial in order to keep experimental rigour at the forefront of this research area.

Successful clinical trial research in nursing homes: the Improving Decision-Making Study

BACKGROUND

One in four Americans, and 70% of people who have dementia, will spend their final days in nursing home care. Clinical research, particularly clinical trials, rarely includes this population due to unique challenges in research methods and ethics. Families of advanced dementia patients make choices about tube feeding and other feeding options with limited access to information or communication. The cluster randomized trial, Improving Decision Making about Feeding Options for Dementia Patients, tests a decision aid intervention to improve the quality of decision making for this choice.

PURPOSE

Our objectives are (1) to describe the methods used in this trial; (2) to describe challenges and strategies for effective nursing home and nursing home resident recruitment and retention; and (3) to describe research ethics approaches to minimize harms and maximize benefits for this population.

METHODS

The study is a cluster randomized trial of a decision aid to inform and support the choice between tube feeding and assisted oral feeding in advanced dementia. Study subjects are paired surrogate decision makers and residents with advanced dementia and feeding problems, enrolled from nursing homes in North Carolina.

RESULTS

This trial enrolled 256 paired surrogate decision makers and residents in 24 nursing home sites, and 99% completed participation through the 3-month study period. The research team had prior clinical and investigative experience in this setting, and used multiple strategies to recruit and retain nursing home sites, providers, surrogates, and the residents for whom they spoke. Informed consent and human subjects' protections were designed to address the vulnerability of this population.

LIMITATIONS

Cluster randomization was necessary to avoid contamination between control and intervention subjects, but may introduce confounding by site and intracluster correlation effects in analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies that facilitate nursing home recruitment, participant recruitment and protection of human subjects for a vulnerable population may be used by future investigators to expand the research evidence base for nursing home and dementia care.

Consent and refusal in dementia research: conceptual and practical considerations

This article discusses types of consent refusals, rates of refusal, factors that affect consent, and methods to increase rates of consent in elderly research participants and in those with dementia in particular. Refusals can be categorized according to several types: complete refusal, refusal that is time-contingent, partial refusal, and contingent agreement. Rates of consent vary greatly across studies of persons with dementia. This variation can also be affected by different methodologies of calculating rates, in addition to differences in content of studies, populations, and procedures. To warrant consent, a study must first be scientifically sound, with a high likelihood of advancing knowledge, and must provide maximal protection to participants. Consent rates are affected by the following factors: levels of anticipated risks and benefits of the study, relationships among the different caregivers involved in the care of the potential subject, the ability of the researcher to properly identify and locate the person who needs to provide consent, characteristics and attitudes of the person providing consent, and the method of obtaining consent, including timing, location, method of presentation, and type of consent requested. An understanding of these issues can assist the researcher in tailoring research procedures so as to maximize rates of consent. It also raises ethical issues that warrant further discussion concerning the process of obtaining consent from and for persons with dementia.

Barriers and facilitators in nursing home intervention research

Conducting intervention research in nursing home (NH) settings is particularly challenging because of the advanced age and frailty of the participants and the characteristics of the setting itself. The purpose of this project was to better understand the barriers and facilitators to the research process in NHs. Three primary data sources were used: investigator field notes, guided interviews with the research team and NH staff members, and research assistant (RA) e-mail communications. Data were analyzed using qualitative content and matrix analytic techniques. Barriers to the research process were largely congruent with previously identified NH staff characteristics, such as lack of communication between NH staff and the research team ineffective nursing leadership, decreased staff-to-resident ratios, and high turnover of NH staff. Research facilitators emerged in two overlapping areas, intraresearch team issues such as the flexibility and compatibility of the RAs, effective NH staff-to-research team communication, and the presence of an effective nurse leader in the NH.