gms | German Medical Science

1st International Conference of the German Society of Nursing Science

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Pflegewissenschaft e. V.

04.05. - 05.05.2018, Berlin

Comparison of a Norwegian and German case conference concept for challenging behavior in nursing homes

Meeting Abstract

Suche in Medline nach

  • presenting/speaker Daniela Holle - German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases
  • Margareta Halek - German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases
  • Sverre Bergh - Centre for Old Age Psychiatric Research, Innlandet Hospital Trust
  • Bjørn Lichtwarck - Centre for Old Age Psychiatric Research, Innlandet Hospital Trust

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Pflegewissenschaft e.V. (DGP). 1st International Conference of the German Society of Nursing Science. Berlin, 04.-05.05.2018. Düsseldorf: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2018. Doc18dgpP08

doi: 10.3205/18dgp053, urn:nbn:de:0183-18dgp0530

Veröffentlicht: 30. April 2018

© 2018 Holle et al.
Dieser Artikel ist ein Open-Access-Artikel und steht unter den Lizenzbedingungen der Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (Namensnennung). Lizenz-Angaben siehe http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.


Gliederung

Text

Background and Purpose: Guidelines emphasize the need for proper analysis of challenging behavior (CB) in nursing home residents with dementia. One way of shifting the approach to CB from treatment-focused to analysis-focused is the use of dementia-specific case conferences (DSCCs). The two DSCCs – the Norwegian TIME and the German WELCOME-IdA – are compared and analyzed regarding their implementation strategies. The overall aim is to ease implementation of DSCC into routine care.

Methods: For the comparison the template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) is used. Similarities and differences of the DSCCs and the implementation strategies were analyzed and discussed.

Results: Both interventions rely on a bio-psychosocial construct of CB. While TIME is an interdisciplinary approach, WELCOME-IdA is monodisciplinarily oriented to nurses. The description and analysis of CB is guided in both DSCCs by structured assessments. In TIME, the assessments are performed prior to the DSCC, and in WELCOME-IdA the assessment are performed during the DSCC. Both DSCCs include a fixed process and role structure, last 60-90 minutes and are performed monthly. The implementation strategies of both approaches address different organization levels, include a steering group and face-to-face trainings. For WELCOME-IdA on-the-job trainings are offered, whereas in TIME the first DSCC is supervised by a trainer. Manuals and handouts are used for both approaches to further facilitate the implementation of DSCCs.

Conclusions: The success of the implementation of DSCC depends on intervention characteristics and the implementation process. TIME and WELCOME-IdA are currently evaluated in large scale evaluations. The process evaluations will give further insights into the implementation processes.