MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1916089991 · doi:10.1111/jpm.12018

Staff and relatives' perspectives on the aggressive behaviour of older people with dementia in residential care: a qualitative study

2012· article· en· W1916089991 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

fundUn bailleur canadien est enregistré sur le travail.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing · 2012
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueElder Abuse and Neglect
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesAlzheimer Society
Mots-clésDementiaQualitative researchPsychologyGerontologyResidential carePsychiatryMedicineClinical psychologySociologyDisease

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Accessible summary Staff and relative perspectives on patient aggression in dementia care units are seriously under researched in the UK. We interviewed a number of nursing staff and relatives in four UK care homes in the North West of England. Using a combined approach of one‐to‐one interviews (for staff) and focus groups (for relatives) we explored their views as to the reasons for and ways of responding to aggressive behaviour. Using thematic analysis we found similar results from both staff and relatives and as such their views were categorized into two broad areas: causation and management. The results indicated that staff in the participating units embraced a person‐centred approach to aggression management. They predominantly respond to aggressive incidents with interpersonal strategies, such as distraction as opposed to medication or restraint. Relatives were clear in their perceptions of aggression as an interpersonal challenge, which is compounded or mediated by the illness of dementia. Consequently they were positive in their views of staff using non‐coercive interventions. Abstract Staff and relative perspectives on patient aggression in dementia care units are seriously under researched in the UK . Any work that has been conducted has relied upon quantitative studies. Qualitative research on aggression management in older peoples services are rare. In‐depth views that can offer insights into causation and management strategies are therefore under represented in the literature. In order to investigate this issue further we interviewed a number of nursing staff and relatives in four UK care homes in the N orth W est of E ngland. Using a combined approach of one‐to‐one interviews (for staff) and focus groups (for relatives) we explored their views as to the reasons for and ways of responding to aggressive behaviour. This was part of a larger study reported upon elsewhere. Using thematic analysis we found similar results from both staff and relatives and as such their views were categorized into two broad areas: causation and management. In regards to causation we noted three sub‐themes; internal, external and interpersonal factors which are further subdivided in the paper and for management two broad categories: the compassionate approach and ‘don't go in strong’. The results indicated that staff in the participating units embraced a person‐centred approach to aggression management. They predominantly respond to aggressive incidents with interpersonal strategies, such as distraction as opposed to medication or restraint. Overall they adopt a person centre approach to patient care. Relatives were clear in their perceptions of aggression as an interpersonal challenge, which is compounded or mediated by the illness of dementia. Consequently they were positive in their views of staff using non‐coercive interventions. While the results of this and our earlier study are promising suggesting a less invasive approach to this aspect of dementia care, given the limitations of a small sample, more research of a similar nature is warranted. Findings from multidimensional studies can then provide a sounder basis for health and social care education, and person centred informed practice to reduce the incidence of aggression through preventative strategies.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,046
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,366

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,016
Tête enseignante GPT0,392
Écart entre enseignants0,376 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle