Aim

To explore residents' experiences of the mealtime environment in nursing home.

Design

An exploratory qualitative design was employed to gain in-depth insights.

Methods

Twenty semi-structured interviews were conducted with residents at a nursing home. Data were analysed using thematic analysis as outlined by Braun and Clarke. The consolidated criteria for Reporting Qualitative research checklist were used to support the research process.

Results

Four main themes emerged from the analysis: (1) The significance of food, emphasising the centrality of food quality and variety in residents' mealtime experiences. (2) Security through routines, illustrating how established mealtime routines provide comfort and predictability. (3) Variability in staff influence, reflecting residents' perceptions of staff competence and their impact on the dining experience. (4) Limited social interactions, highlighting the varied social dynamics and their effects on residents' sense of community and isolation.

Conclusion

The study underscores the critical importance of food quality, staff compliance and consistent routines in enhancing mealtime experiences in nursing homes. Additionally, it reveals that the ability to choose social interactions plays a significant role in residents' satisfaction and social well-being.

Implication for Patient Care

This study provides valuable insights for improving mealtime experiences in nursing homes, suggesting that person-centred care and resident involvement in meal planning can enhance satisfaction and nutritional intake.

Impact

The findings offer practical guidance for healthcare management, emphasising the need to prioritise and personalise mealtime environments to better meet residents' needs and preferences.

Objective: The Serious Illness Care Program was developed to support goals and values discussions between seriously ill patients and their clinicians. The core competencies, that is, the essential clinical conversation skills that are described as requisite for effective serious illness conversations (SICs) in practice, have not yet been explicated. This integrative systematic review aimed to identify core competencies for SICs in the context of the Serious Illness Care Program. Methods: Articles published between January 2014 and March 2023 were identified in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and PubMed databases. In total, 313 records underwent title and abstract screening, and 96 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. The articles were critically appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Guidelines, and data were analyzed using thematic synthesis. Results: In total, 53 articles were included. Clinicians' core competencies for SICs were described in 3 themes: conversation resources, intrapersonal capabilities, and interpersonal capabilities. Conversation resources included using the conversation guide as a tool, together with applying appropriate communication skills to support better communication. Intrapersonal capabilities included calibrating one's own attitudes and mindset as well as confidence and self-assurance to engage in SICs. Interpersonal capabilities focused on the clinician's ability to interact with patients and family members to foster a mutually trusting relationship, including empathetic communication with attention and adherence to patient and family members views, goals, needs, and preferences. Conclusions: Clinicians need to efficiently combine conversation resources with intrapersonal and interpersonal skills to successfully conduct and interact in SICs.

Background Ariadne Labs’ Serious Illness Care Program (SICP), inclusive of the Serious Illness Conversation Guide (SICG), has been adapted for use in a variety of settings and among diverse population groups. Explicating the core elements of serious illness conversations could support the inclusion or exclusion of certain components in future iterations of the programme and the guide.

Aim This integrative systematic review aimed to identify and describe core elements of serious illness conversations in relation to the SICP and/or SICG.

Design Literature published between 1 January 2014 and 20 March 2023 was searched in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and PubMed. All articles were evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Guidelines. Data were analysed with thematic synthesis.

Results A total of 64 articles met the inclusion criteria. Three themes were revealed: (1) serious illness conversations serve different functions that are reflected in how they are conveyed; (2) serious illness conversations endeavour to discover what matters to patients and (3) serious illness conversations seek to align what patients want in their life and care.

Conclusions Core elements of serious illness conversations included explicating the intention, framing, expectations and directions for the conversation. This encompassed discussing current and possible trajectories with a view towards uncovering matters of importance to the patient as a person. Preferences and priorities could be used to inform future preparation and recommendations. Serious illness conversation elements could be adapted and altered depending on the intended purpose of the conversation.

Older adults have multiple medical and social care needs, requiring a shift toward an integrated person-centered model of care. Our objective was to describe and summarize Swedish experiences of integrated person-centered care by reviewing studies published between 2000 and 2023, and to identify the main challenges and scientific gaps through expert discussions. Seventy-three publications were identified by searching MEDLINE and contacting experts. Interventions were categorized using two World Health Organization frameworks: (1) Integrated Care for Older People (ICOPE), and (2) Integrated People-Centered Health Services (IPCHS). The included 73 publications were derived from 31 unique and heterogeneous interventions pertaining mainly to the micro- and meso-levels. Among publications measuring mortality, 15% were effective. Subjective health outcomes showed improvement in 24% of publications, morbidity outcomes in 42%, disability outcomes in 48%, and service utilization outcomes in 58%. Workshop discussions in Stockholm (Sweden), March 2023, were recorded, transcribed, and summarized. Experts emphasized: (1) lack of rigorous evaluation methods, (2) need for participatory designs, (3) scarcity of macro-level interventions, and (4) importance of transitioning from person- to people-centered integrated care. These challenges could explain the unexpected weak beneficial effects of the interventions on health outcomes, whereas service utilization outcomes were more positively impacted. Finally, we derived a list of recommendations, including the need to engage care organizations in interventions from their inception and to leverage researchers' scientific expertise. Although this review provides a comprehensive snapshot of interventions in the context of Sweden, the findings offer transferable perspectives on the real-world challenges encountered in this field. image

Background: Previous research found that healthcare professionals had low preparedness for palliative care. Thus, it is necessary to explore healthcare professionals' self-efficacy. The Swedish Self-Efficacy in Palliative Care Scale (SEPC-SE) evaluates readiness in communication, patient management and multidisciplinary teamwork; however, it should be tested on a larger population. Furthermore, the constructs of the SEPC-SE should be compared to that of the original SEPC.

Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the consensus between the construct validity and reliability of the SEPC and the translated and adapted SEPC-SE. Furthermore, it aimed to describe and compare the self-efficacy of nurses and physicians in hospitals and explore the associated factors.

Methods: The nurses (n = 288) and physicians (n = 104) completed the SEPC-SE. Factor analysis with Cronbach's alpha evaluated validity and reliability, and an analysis using the Mann-Whitney U test compared self-efficacy and multiple linear regression-associated factors.

Results: The SEPC-SE revealed three factors with high reliability. Education or experience in specialised palliative care was minor, especially for nurses. Self-efficacy was highest in patient management (nurses, median [md] = 74.57, physicians md = 81.71, p = 0.010) and communication (nurses md = 69.88, physicians md = 77.00, p = 0.141) and lowest in multidisciplinary teamwork (nurses md = 52.44, physicians md = 62.88, p = 0.001). The strongest associations with self-efficacy were education at work and advanced homecare experiences. In addition, there were significant associations between years in the profession, male sex, physicians and university education.

Conclusion: The SEPC-SE is valid and reliable for measuring self-efficacy. Nurses had lower self-efficacy than physicians. Physicians were associated with higher self-efficacy and had more education and experience in palliative care settings, which may explain their levels of self-efficacy.

Objectives This study aimed to describe and compare symptoms, care needs and types of diagnoses in hospitalised patients with palliative care needs in Spain and Sweden.Methods A cross-sectional, population-based study was carried out at two hospitals in both Spain and Sweden. Using a questionnaire, we performed 154 one-day inventories (n=4213) in Spain and 139 in Sweden (n=3356) to register symptoms, care needs and diagnoses. Descriptive analyses were used.Results The proportion of patients with care needs in the two countries differed (Spain 7.7% vs Sweden 12.4%, p<0.001); however, the percentage of patients with cancer and non-cancer patients was similar. The most prevalent symptoms in cancer and non-cancer patients in both countries were deterioration, pain, fatigue and infection. The most common cancer diagnosis in both countries was lung cancer, although it was more common in Spain (p<0.01), whereas prostate cancer was more common among Swedish men (p<0.001). Congestive heart failure (p<0.001) was a predominant non-cancer diagnosis in Sweden, whereas in Spain, the most frequent diagnosis was dementia (p<0.001). Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was common in both countries, although its frequency was higher in Spain (p<0.05). In total, patients with cancer had higher frequencies of pain (p<0.001) and nausea (p<0.001), whereas non-cancer patients had higher frequencies of deterioration (p<0.001) and infections (p<0.01).Conclusions The similarities in symptoms among the patients indicate that the main focus in care should be on patient care needs rather than diagnoses. Integrating palliative care in hospitals and increasing healthcare professional competency can result in providing optimal palliative care.

För att möta dagens och morgondagens samhällsutmaningar krävs kunskap ur ett bredare och större perspektiv. På Linnéuniversitetet samlar vi därför framstående forskning, utbildning och samverkan i något vi kallar kunskapsmiljöer. Våra kunskapsmiljöer är tvärvetenskapliga för att ta ett mångsidigt grepp om utmaningarna.

Inom kunskapsmiljön Hållbar hälsa arbetar vi för att främja hälsa och välbefinnande för alla människor i alla åldrar. Några av de utmaningar som vi tar oss an är:

·        Demografiska förändringar

·        Ändrade mönster för funktionshinder och sjukdomar

·        Traumatiska händelser 

·        Brist på delaktighet 

·        Organisatoriska utmaningar

Men med en åldrande befolkning och fler personer som lever länge med kroniska sjukdomar både ökar och förändras vårdbehoven samtidigt. Dessa faktorer, tillsammans med ökad migration, globalisering samt förändrade behov av hälsovård, är de demografiska utmaningar vi behöver inrikta oss mot. De förändringar i livsstilar som vi ser idag, till exempel näringsbrist på grund av mindre hälsosamma matvanor och en ökande psykisk ohälsa måste också adresseras. 

Den digitala utvecklingen ger oss helt nya möjligheter till en mer effektiv global hälsovård. Men även här finns utmaningar; ökad digitalisering kan leda till att människor stängs ute på grund av att de saknar kompetens eller den digitala utrustningen som krävs.

För att svara upp mot dessa utmaningar arbetar vi inom kunskapsmiljön brett med forskning, utbildning och samverkan inom en rad olika forskningsområden såsom:

·        e-Hälsa 

·        Palliativ vård 

·        Livsmedelsvetenskap

·        Ögon, syn och optometri

·        Humaniora, hälsa och medicin

·        Åldrande och handikapp

Vanligtvis kommunicerar vi i kunskapsmiljön vår forskning genom artiklar i vetenskapliga tidskrifter, på konferenser eller genom pressmeddelande till media. Denna bok tar ett annorlunda grepp och använder konstens metoder för att illustrera kunskapsmiljöns arbete. Boken har kommit till genom ett samarbete med Det kulturella universitetet som arbetar med att koppla samman konst och vetenskap för en fördjupad förståelse av komplex komplexa och ibland motsägelsefulla förhållanden

Background The Serious Illness Care Programme was developed to promote more, better and earlier serious illness conversations. Conversations about goals and values are associated with improved experiences and outcomes for seriously ill patients. Clinicians' attitudes and beliefs are thought to influence the uptake and performance of serious illness conversations, yet little is known about how clinicians perceive the impact of these conversations on patients. This study aimed to explore physicians' perceptions regarding the impact of serious illness conversations for patients.Methods The Serious Illness Care Programme was implemented as a quality improvement project in two hospitals in Southern Sweden. Focus group evaluation discussions were conducted with 14 physicians and inductive thematic analysis was undertaken.Results The results revealed that physicians considered potential perils and optimised potential payoffs for patients when engaging in serious illness conversations. Potential perils encompassed inappropriate timing, damaging emotions and shattering hopes. Potential payoffs included reflection time, secure space, and united understandings.Conclusions Physicians depicted a balance in evaluating the perils and payoffs of serious illness conversations for patients and recognised the interrelation of these possibilities through continual assessment and adjustment.

Aims and Objectives

To further develop and validate the Mealtime instrument, an observational instrument for assessing mealtime environments in nursing homes originating from the theoretical framework: Five Aspects Meal Model (FAMM).

Methodological Design and Justification

A mealtime experience is significant for a sense of well-being. In nursing homes, residents' personal preferences, combined with their diagnoses and different stages of illness, influence their mealtime experience and provide a complexity that has been found difficult to assess. Using FAMM, a theoretical framework as its base, this study, attempts to look at different parts of the mealtime environment. FAMM structures the mealtime environment in to five aspects: room, meeting, product, management control system and atmosphere.

This study's design includes instrument development and validation.

Ethical Issues and Approval

This study has been approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (dnr 2019–05477).

Design

Methodological study.

Research Method

An existing instrument, the Mealtime instrument with FAMM as a theoretical framework, was used as a foundation for the development of the Five Aspects Mealtime Environment Observation Instrument (FAME-OI). Content validity index (CVI) was used to validate FAME-OI.

Results

FAME-OI's item-CVI, scale-CVI and modified Kappa displayed high validity. Changes were made in its structure and phrasing. These developments resulted in having a distinct structure in FAME-OI, in reference to FAMM.

Conclusion

FAME-OI is applicable for clinical use in nursing homes and in research; however, adjustments may be needed before its use in other health care facilities.

Objective: To translate and adapt the Serious Illness Conversation Guide for use within the Swedish healthcare setting and examine the validity and acceptability of the Swedish Serious Illness Conversation Guide. Methods: Three rounds of cognitive interviews were conducted (T1-3); patients (T1 n = 11; T2 n = 10; T3 n = 8), family members (T1 n = 5; T2 n = 2; T3 n = 2), and healthcare professionals (T1 n = 6; T2 n = 6; T3 n = 5). The guide was iteratively adapted based on interview feedback, clinical experience, and the literature. The guide was tested on training days with physicians and nurses. Results: The Swedish Serious Illness Conversation Guide was found to be useful in supporting serious illness conversations. Clinicians reported that some questions were emotionally challenging. Explicit questions about prognosis and timing were excluded. Instead, the dual approach of "hoping for the best and preparing for the worst" was used to explore patients' thoughts about the future. Conclusions: Patients, family members, and healthcare professionals found the Swedish Serious Illness Conversation Guide to be appropriate, sensitive, and responsive to their needs. The Swedish Serious Illness Conversation Guide may facilitate a more health-promoting approach to serious illness conversations. Further research is needed to understand the impact of these conversations on person-centered and goal-concordant care.