Browsing by Author "Watt, Jennifer"

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Barriers and facilitators to care for agitation and/or aggression among persons living with dementia in long-term care
    (2024-04-11) Wong, Britney; Ismail, Zahinoor; Watt, Jennifer; Holroyd-Leduc, Jayna; Goodarzi, Zahra
    Abstract Background Agitation and/or aggression affect up to 60% of persons living with dementia in long-term care (LTC). It can be treated via non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions, but the former are underused in clinical practice. In the literature, there is currently a lack of understanding of the challenges to caring for agitation and/or aggression among persons living with dementia in LTC. This study assesses what barriers and facilitators across the spectrum of care exist for agitation and/or aggression among people with dementia in LTC across stakeholder groups. Methods This was a qualitative study that used semi-structured interviews among persons involved in the care and/or planning of care for people with dementia in LTC. Participants were recruited via purposive and snowball sampling, with the assistance of four owner-operator models. Interviews were guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework and transcribed and analyzed using Framework Analysis. Results Eighteen interviews were conducted across 5 stakeholder groups. Key identified barriers were a lack of agitation and/or aggression diagnostic measures, limited training for managing agitation and/or aggression in LTC, an overuse of physical and chemical restraints, and an underuse of non-pharmacological interventions. Facilitators included using an interdisciplinary team to deliver care and having competent and trained healthcare providers to administer non-pharmacological interventions. Conclusions This study advances care for persons living with dementia in LTC by drawing attention to unique and systemic barriers present across local and national Canadian LTC facilities. Findings will support future implementation research endeavours to eliminate these identified barriers across the spectrum of care, thus improving care outcomes among people with dementia in LTC.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Comparative safety and efficacy of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for the behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis
    (2017-09-07) Watt, Jennifer; Goodarzi, Zahra; Tricco, Andrea C; Veroniki, Areti-Angeliki; Straus, Sharon E
    Abstract Background Behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) are highly prevalent in patients with dementia. Both pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies are commonly used to treat these symptoms, but their comparative safety and efficacy is unknown. Methods We will conduct a systematic review of the published and unpublished literature to retrieve all articles pertaining to outcomes of safety and efficacy associated with pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments of BPSD for patients living in the community and institutionalized care settings. Our primary outcome of efficacy is a change in aggression. Our primary outcome of safety will be risk of fracture. These primary outcomes were chosen by stakeholders involved in the care of patients experiencing BPSD. Possible secondary outcomes of efficacy will include a change in agitation, depressive symptoms, and night-time behaviors. Possible secondary outcomes of safety will include the risk of stroke, falls, and mortality. All article screening, data abstraction, and risk of bias appraisal will be completed independently by two reviewers. If the assumption of transitivity is valid and the evidence forms a connected network, Bayesian random-effects pairwise and network meta-analyses (NMAs) will be conducted. Relative treatment rankings will be reported with mean ranks and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve. Discussion We will identify the safest and most efficacious treatment strategies for patients with BPSD from among our most highly ranked treatments. The results of this study will be used to guide decision-making and improve patient care. Systematic review registration PROSPERO registry number CRD42017050130.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Detecting agitation and aggression in persons living with dementia: a systematic review of diagnostic accuracy
    (2024-06-26) Wong, Britney; Wu, Pauline; Ismail, Zahinoor; Watt, Jennifer; Goodarzi, Zahra
    Abstract Objective 40–60% of persons living with dementia (PLWD) experience agitation and/or aggression symptoms. There is a need to understand the best method to detect agitation and/or aggression in PLWD. We aimed to identify agitation and/or aggression tools that are validated against a reference standard within the context of PLWD. Methods Our study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020156708). We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO up to April 22, 2024. There were no language or date restrictions. Studies were included if they used any tools or questionnaires for detecting either agitation or aggression compared to a reference standard among PLWD, or any studies that compared two or more agitation and/or aggression tools in the population. All screening and data extraction were done in duplicates. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Data extraction was completed in duplicates by two independent authors. We extracted demographic information, prevalence of agitation and/or aggression, and diagnostic accuracy measures. We also reported studies comparing the correlation between two or more agitation and/or aggression tools. Results 6961 articles were screened across databases. Six articles reporting diagnostic accuracy measures compared to a reference standard and 30 articles reporting correlation measurements between tools were included. The agitation domain of the Spanish NPI demonstrated the highest sensitivity (100%) against the agitation subsection of the Spanish CAMDEX. Single-study evidence was found for the diagnostic accuracy of commonly used agitation scales (BEHAVE-AD, NPI and CMAI). Conclusions The agitation domain of the Spanish NPI, the NBRS, and the PAS demonstrated high sensitivities, and may be reasonable for clinical implementation. However, a limitation to this finding is that despite an extensive search, few studies with diagnostic accuracy measurements were identified. Ultimately, more research is needed to understand the diagnostic accuracy of agitation and/or aggression detection tools among PLWD.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemEmbargo
    Developing a Novel Care Pathway for Symptoms of Agitation or Aggression in Persons Living with Dementia in Long-Term Care: A Multi-Methods Implementation Research Study
    (2023-06) Wong, Britney; Goodarzi, Zahra; Holroyd-Leduc, Jayna; Ismail, Zahinoor; Watt, Jennifer
    Background: Agitation and/or aggression are common among persons living with dementia (PLWD) in LTC, and together pose a significant burden to residents and their caregivers. Current treatment practices for agitation and/or aggression are highly variable among PLWD in LTC. There is a need to develop a more effective approach to treatment and to explore the barriers and facilitators to providing care for agitation and/or aggression among PLWD in LTC. Objectives: The first objective was to develop an evidence-informed clinical care pathway co-designed with stakeholders, to improve care for agitation and/or aggression among PLWD in LTC. The second objective was to identify barriers and facilitators to agitation and/or aggression care across the spectrum of care. Methods: Objective 1 used a modified Delphi panel to develop the clinical care pathway. Objective 2 used semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders to identify the barriers and facilitators to care. Framework Analysis was used to map identified barriers and facilitators to key behavioral domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework. Results: Crucial pathway features included using an interdisciplinary care team approach across the spectrum of care and featuring a broad range of non-pharmacological interventions. Several statements in our pathway did not reach agreement and require a third round of the Delphi. Perceived barriers for agitation and/or aggression care included a lack of validated tools to detect agitation and/or aggression, inconsistent training practices, and a limited number of available non-pharmacological interventions. Key facilitators were using an interdisciplinary care team and having trained healthcare providers to administer non-pharmacological interventions. Conclusions: Our study advances the state of evidence for agitation and/or aggression care among PLWD in LTC. Our efforts will inform future implementation research strategies working to improve the delivery and management of care. With more effective care approaches, the quality of life of PLWD in LTC will also improve.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Interventions on gender equity in the workplace: a scoping review
    (2024-04-05) Tricco, Andrea C.; Parker, Amanda; Khan, Paul A.; Nincic, Vera; Robson, Reid; MacDonald, Heather; Warren, Rachel; Cleary, Olga; Zibrowski, Elaine; Baxter, Nancy; Burns, Karen E. A.; Coyle, Doug; Ndjaboue, Ruth; Clark, Jocalyn P.; Langlois, Etienne V.; Ahmed, Sofia B.; Witteman, Holly O.; Graham, Ian D.; El-Adhami, Wafa; Skidmore, Becky; Légaré, France; Curran, Janet; Hawker, Gillian; Watt, Jennifer; Bourgeault, Ivy L.; Leigh, Jeanna P.; Lawford, Karen; Aiken, Alice; McCabe, Christopher; Shepperd, Sasha; Pattani, Reena; Leon, Natalie; Lundine, Jamie; Adisso, Évèhouénou L.; Ono, Santa; Rabeneck, Linda; Straus, Sharon E.
    Abstract Background Various studies have demonstrated gender disparities in workplace settings and the need for further intervention. This study identifies and examines evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on interventions examining gender equity in workplace or volunteer settings. An additional aim was to determine whether interventions considered intersection of gender and other variables, including PROGRESS-Plus equity variables (e.g., race/ethnicity). Methods Scoping review conducted using the JBI guide. Literature was searched in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, ERIC, Index to Legal Periodicals and Books, PAIS Index, Policy Index File, and the Canadian Business & Current Affairs Database from inception to May 9, 2022, with an updated search on October 17, 2022. Results were reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension to scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR), Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidance, Strengthening the Integration of Intersectionality Theory in Health Inequality Analysis (SIITHIA) checklist, and Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP) version 2 checklist. All employment or volunteer sectors settings were included. Included interventions were designed to promote workplace gender equity that targeted: (a) individuals, (b) organizations, or (c) systems. Any comparator was eligible. Outcomes measures included any gender equity related outcome, whether it was measuring intervention effectiveness (as defined by included studies) or implementation. Data analyses were descriptive in nature. As recommended in the JBI guide to scoping reviews, only high-level content analysis was conducted to categorize the interventions, which were reported using a previously published framework. Results We screened 8855 citations, 803 grey literature sources, and 663 full-text articles, resulting in 24 unique RCTs and one companion report that met inclusion criteria. Most studies (91.7%) failed to report how they established sex or gender. Twenty-three of 24 (95.8%) studies reported at least one PROGRESS-Plus variable: typically sex or gender or occupation. Two RCTs (8.3%) identified a non-binary gender identity. None of the RCTs reported on relationships between gender and other characteristics (e.g., disability, age, etc.). We identified 24 gender equity promoting interventions in the workplace that were evaluated and categorized into one or more of the following themes: (i) quantifying gender impacts; (ii) behavioural or systemic changes; (iii) career flexibility; (iv) increased visibility, recognition, and representation; (v) creating opportunities for development, mentorship, and sponsorship; and (vi) financial support. Of these interventions, 20/24 (83.3%) had positive conclusion statements for their primary outcomes (e.g., improved academic productivity, increased self-esteem) across heterogeneous outcomes. Conclusions There is a paucity of literature on interventions to promote workplace gender equity. While some interventions elicited positive conclusions across a variety of outcomes, standardized outcome measures considering specific contexts and cultures are required. Few PROGRESS-Plus items were reported. Non-binary gender identities and issues related to intersectionality were not adequately considered. Future research should provide consistent and contemporary definitions of gender and sex. Trial registration Open Science Framework https://osf.io/x8yae .