9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      “We’re just winging it”. Identifying targets for intervention to improve the provision of hearing support for residents living with dementia in long-term care: an interview study with care staff

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          Hearing loss and dementia are common in long-term care home (LTCH) residents, causing communication difficulties and worsened behavioural symptoms. Hearing support provided to residents with dementia requires improvement. This study is the first to use the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) to identify barriers and propose interventions to improve the provision of hearing support by LTCH staff.

          Methods

          Semi-structured interviews with 10 staff members were conducted. Transcripts were analysed according to the BCW’s Theoretical Domains Framework alongside reflective thematic analysis. Relevant intervention functions and exemplar interventions were proposed.

          Results

          Staff believed hearing support to be beneficial to residents ( Beliefs about Consequences) but lacked knowledge of hearing loss management ( Knowledge). Poor collaborations between LTCHs and audiology ( Environmental Context and Resources), led to despondency, and apprehension about traditional hearing aids for residents ( Optimism). Despite feeling responsible for hearing support, staff lacked personal accountability ( Social/Professional Role and Identity).

          Conclusions

          Future interventions should include staff Training (on hearing support), Education (on the consequences of unsupported hearing loss), Enablement (dementia-friendly hearing devices), Incentivisation and Modelling (of Hearing Champions) and Environmental Restructuring (flexible audiology appointments to take place within the LTCH). Interventions should be multi-faceted to boost the capabilities, opportunities and motivations of LTCH staff.

          IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION

          Hearing support for care home residents with dementia:

          • Long-term care staff report inadequate knowledge and awareness of how to support residents’ hearing needs and a lack of personal accountability for providing hearing support.

          • They also report poor collaborations with audiologists and apprehension about traditional hearing aids.

          • Barriers to hearing support stem from gaps in the capabilities, opportunities and motivations of staff, therefore, interventions should be designed to target all three constructs.

          • Interventions to aid hearing support provision should target staffs’ education, training, enablement, persuasion, modelling, incentivisation and environmental restructuring to boost staff capabilities, opportunities and motivations to provide hearing support.

          Related collections

          Most cited references45

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Three approaches to qualitative content analysis.

          Content analysis is a widely used qualitative research technique. Rather than being a single method, current applications of content analysis show three distinct approaches: conventional, directed, or summative. All three approaches are used to interpret meaning from the content of text data and, hence, adhere to the naturalistic paradigm. The major differences among the approaches are coding schemes, origins of codes, and threats to trustworthiness. In conventional content analysis, coding categories are derived directly from the text data. With a directed approach, analysis starts with a theory or relevant research findings as guidance for initial codes. A summative content analysis involves counting and comparisons, usually of keywords or content, followed by the interpretation of the underlying context. The authors delineate analytic procedures specific to each approach and techniques addressing trustworthiness with hypothetical examples drawn from the area of end-of-life care.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic

            The kappa statistic is frequently used to test interrater reliability. The importance of rater reliability lies in the fact that it represents the extent to which the data collected in the study are correct representations of the variables measured. Measurement of the extent to which data collectors (raters) assign the same score to the same variable is called interrater reliability. While there have been a variety of methods to measure interrater reliability, traditionally it was measured as percent agreement, calculated as the number of agreement scores divided by the total number of scores. In 1960, Jacob Cohen critiqued use of percent agreement due to its inability to account for chance agreement. He introduced the Cohen’s kappa, developed to account for the possibility that raters actually guess on at least some variables due to uncertainty. Like most correlation statistics, the kappa can range from −1 to +1. While the kappa is one of the most commonly used statistics to test interrater reliability, it has limitations. Judgments about what level of kappa should be acceptable for health research are questioned. Cohen’s suggested interpretation may be too lenient for health related studies because it implies that a score as low as 0.41 might be acceptable. Kappa and percent agreement are compared, and levels for both kappa and percent agreement that should be demanded in healthcare studies are suggested.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Sample Size in Qualitative Interview Studies: Guided by Information Power

              Sample sizes must be ascertained in qualitative studies like in quantitative studies but not by the same means. The prevailing concept for sample size in qualitative studies is "saturation." Saturation is closely tied to a specific methodology, and the term is inconsistently applied. We propose the concept "information power" to guide adequate sample size for qualitative studies. Information power indicates that the more information the sample holds, relevant for the actual study, the lower amount of participants is needed. We suggest that the size of a sample with sufficient information power depends on (a) the aim of the study, (b) sample specificity, (c) use of established theory, (d) quality of dialogue, and (e) analysis strategy. We present a model where these elements of information and their relevant dimensions are related to information power. Application of this model in the planning and during data collection of a qualitative study is discussed.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Disabil Rehabil
                Disabil Rehabil
                Disability and Rehabilitation
                Taylor & Francis
                0963-8288
                1464-5165
                29 August 2023
                2024
                29 August 2023
                : 46
                : 15
                : 3303-3313
                Affiliations
                [a ]Manchester Centre for Audiology and Deafness, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester , Manchester, UK
                [b ]Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, The University of Manchester , Manchester, UK
                [c ]Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre , Manchester, UK
                [d ]NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, The University of Manchester , Manchester, UK
                [e ]NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre , Manchester, UK
                [f ]Centre for Hearing Research (CHEAR), School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Queensland , Saint Lucia, Australia
                [g ]Global Brain Health Institute and School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin , Dublin, Ireland
                Author notes
                CONTACT Hannah Cross hannah.cross-2@ 123456manchester.ac.uk Manchester Centre for Audiology and Deafness, University of Manchester , A3.16 Ellen-Wilkinson Building Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9153-1135
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2365-1765
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3180-9884
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1822-3643
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8606-0167
                Article
                2245746
                10.1080/09638288.2023.2245746
                11259204
                37641847
                a8a607d6-2350-407c-b6b1-0905b1a2d47b
                © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent.

                History
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 3, Pages: 11, Words: 8247
                Categories
                Research Article
                Research Articles

                Health & Social care
                residential care,hearing loss,behaviour change wheel,theoretical domains framework,qualitative research

                Comments

                Comment on this article