Home › Research › Clinical safety
Expert-Derived Components of Person-Centred Nursing Intervention for People with Dementia and/or Cognitive Impairment in a Hospital Experiencing Distress
Haraldsdottir E, Reilly I, MacArthur J, Rennie K, Helin C, McAuley G.. Research Square, 2026-09-29
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
Background Hospital admissions among people living with dementia are rising across the UK, with distress, often intensified in acute settings, contributing to poorer outcomes (Abbott et al., 2022; Brontsema et al., 2025). This study took place in an acute hospital featuring a Meaningful Activities Centre (MAC), established by a Dementia Nurse Specialist (DNS). Aim To identify expert‑derived components of person‑centred nursing interventions delivered by a Dementia Nurse Specialist to reduce distress in hospitalised people with dementia and/or cognitive impairment. Methods A qualitative approach was employed involving six patients and five relatives referred to the DNS. Data sources included clinical record review; observation of 12 episodes of care; and 28 interviews with patients (n=5), relatives (n=5) and the DNS (n=18). Qualitative data were analysed using Colaizzi’s (1978) seven‑step method. Results The findings from this study describe the DNS’s intervention for reducing the distress of PLWD/C in acute clinical areas in one hospital. They demonstrate that the core element of the intervention was a holistic assessment, focused on identifying underlying contributors to distress, which were then recognised as unmet needs. This assessment frequently identified previously unrecognised symptoms or unmet needs that were often biological in nature, as evidenced by the variation in symptoms reported before and after the DNS’s intervention. Although the assessment process was person-centred, it followed a clear linear structure with defined components that contributed to building a comprehensive understanding of the individual and their distress. Conclusion Thorough and structured assessment is essential for identifying unmet needs and managing distress in people with dementia in acute hospitals. An individualised, assessment-driven approach supports targeted use of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions, reducing reliance on non-specific treatments, improving care quality, and promoting person-centredness.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Haraldsdottir, E., Reilly, I., MacArthur, J., Rennie, K., Helin, C., & McAuley, G. (2026). Expert-Derived Components of Person-Centred Nursing Intervention for People with Dementia and/or Cognitive Impairment in a Hospital Experiencing Distress. Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-10984373/v1
Vancouver
Haraldsdottir E, Reilly I, MacArthur J, Rennie K, Helin C, McAuley G. Expert-Derived Components of Person-Centred Nursing Intervention for People with Dementia and/or Cognitive Impairment in a Hospital Experiencing Distress. Research Square. 2026. doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-10984373/v1.
BibTeX
@article{haraldsdottir2026-0c2bf98d,
author = {Haraldsdottir, E. and Reilly, I. and MacArthur, J. and Rennie, K. and Helin, C. and McAuley, G.},
title = {{Expert-Derived Components of Person-Centred Nursing Intervention for People with Dementia and/or Cognitive Impairment in a Hospital Experiencing Distress}},
journal = {Research Square},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.21203/rs.3.rs-10984373/v1},
url = {https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-10984373/v1}
}
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.
Key findings
- Results The findings from this study describe the DNS’s intervention for reducing the distress of PLWD/C in acute clinical areas in one hospital.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 16/100
Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. It scored 21 on the same rubric, but non-peer-reviewed sources are capped at 16, so it shows as 16. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on 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 13 of the 62 points we could judge it on, which is 21 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 2 / 10 | Tier 4 — not a peer-reviewed journal (Research Square) |
| Journal's citation record | 0 / 4 | Not a journal article, so the journal's record does not count |
| 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 | 4 / 10 | Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. Hosted on a preprint server. |
| How recent | 5 / 5 | 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 | 1 / 2 | Not in PubMed, but has a DOI |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 13 / 62 | Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 13 of the 62 points we could judge it on is 21 out of 100. |
| Total | 21 / 100 | Capped to 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed article. |
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.
Related studies in Clinical safety
Also tagged “assisted-living”
199 studies in the library carry the topic tag “assisted-living”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 199 tagged studies.