Home › Research › End-of-life care
Evaluation of an educational program for long-term care nursing assistants
Parks SM, Haines C, Foreman D, McKinstry E, Maxwell TL.. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 2005-01-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Objectives To determine if an educational program can improve knowledge and attitude among ancillary staff on end-of-life care issues in a long-term care facility. Design A pilot study using a pre- and post-test design prior to and at the completion of an education intervention. Setting A long-term care facility in suburban Philadelphia that has 150 assisted living beds and 53 nursing home beds. Participants Long-term care ancillary staff including certified nursing assistants (called "care managers" at this facility), social workers, recreational therapists, and food service workers. Intervention The intervention was a novel educational program consisting of five in-service lectures with accompanying take home self-study modules for ancillary staff in long-term care entitled "Dignity in Dementia." Measurements Ancillary staff attitudes and knowledge on end-of-life issues in dementia were assessed with a knowledge and attitude questionnaire pre- and post-intervention. One-year follow-up questionnaires were administered to assess long-term maintenance of knowledge and attitude changes. Results Thirty-two ancillary staff completed the pre-intervention questionnaires. Twenty-nine ancillary staff completed the post-intervention questionnaires (90.6%). There was a significant change in the end-of-life knowledge level of the ancillary staff (P =.0270). Specifically, there was a significant change in one question dealing with dementia as a terminal disease (P = .006). There were also significant changes in the average attitude scores of the ancillary staff. (P = .0242). One-year follow-up revealed that both knowledge and attitude changes were maintained. Conclusions This pilot project demonstrates that a staff educational program on end-of-life care for dementia residents can improve end-of-life knowledge and attitudes among long-term care ancillary staff and that this improvement can be maintained for up to 1 year. This intervention is easily reproducible in the long-term care setting. This project is an important step in helping improve end-of-life care for dementia residents in long-term care settings by improving the knowledge and attitudes of their caregivers.
Key findings
- Results Thirty-two ancillary staff completed the pre-intervention questionnaires.
- There was a significant change in the end-of-life knowledge level of the ancillary staff (P =.0270).
- Specifically, there was a significant change in one question dealing with dementia as a terminal disease (P = .006).
- There were also significant changes in the average attitude scores of the ancillary staff.
- One-year follow-up revealed that both knowledge and attitude changes were maintained.
Study details
- Effect size90.6%
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 45/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 26 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 45 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of the American Medical Directors Association) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2005 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (pubmed indexes it as a clinical or observational study) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 15871873) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 26 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 26 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 45 out of 100. |
| Total | 45 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Parks, S. M., Haines, C., Foreman, D., McKinstry, E., & Maxwell, T. L. (2005). Evaluation of an educational program for long-term care nursing assistants. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2004.12.001
Vancouver
Parks SM, Haines C, Foreman D, McKinstry E, Maxwell TL. Evaluation of an educational program for long-term care nursing assistants. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association. 2005. doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2004.12.001. PMID: 15871873.
BibTeX
@article{parks2005-15871873,
author = {Parks, S. M. and Haines, C. and Foreman, D. and McKinstry, E. and Maxwell, T. L.},
title = {{Evaluation of an educational program for long-term care nursing assistants}},
journal = {Journal of the American Medical Directors Association},
year = {2005},
doi = {10.1016/j.jamda.2004.12.001},
pmid = {15871873},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2004.12.001}
}