Healthcare settings are increasingly adopting nature-based interventions (NBIs) to support users’ health and well-being, but these interventions are often underutilized. To get a grip on utilization problems, insight into factors that affect use and uptake of NBIs in routine care is needed. This scoping review aimed to provide an overview of factors that facilitate or impede successful implementation of NBIs in hospitals, long-term care facilities for the elderly (LTCF), and rehabilitation centers. Systematic searches were conducted across various databases to identify studies that collected qualitative and/or quantitative data on the implementation of NBIs in healthcare settings. Findings were classified into the five domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. A total of 57 articles were included in the review. The articles provide detailed insight into facilitating and impeding implementation factors related to the intervention (e.g., awareness, adaptability, type of natural elements, accessibility, safety, weather conditions, comfort, privacy, supportive design factors, activities). Other found factors related to the inner setting (e.g., culture, implementation climate) and individuals (e.g., characteristics and opportunities of stakeholders). Factors related to the outer setting (e.g., financing) and implementation process (e.g., teaming, assessing needs, planning, engaging, doing, integration in care and therapy, reflection and evaluation, maintenance) also emerged, but to a lesser extent. This review identified a broad range of factors important for the successful implementation of NBIs, which can guide implementation of future NBIs. To complement these findings, future studies should consider conducting implementation studies
MULTIFILE
Light therapy for older persons with dementia is often administered with light boxes, even though indoor ambient light may more comfortably support the diverse lighting needs of this population. Our objective is to investigate the influence of indoor daylight and lighting on the health of older adults with dementia living in long-term care facilities. A systematic literature search was performed within PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Scopus databases. The included articles (n=37) were published from 1991 to 2020. These articles researched the influence of existing and changed indoor light conditions on health and resulted in seven categories of health outcomes. Although no conclusive evidence was found to support the ability of indoor light to decrease challenging behaviors or improve circadian rhythms, findings of two studies indicate that exposure to (very) cool light of moderate intensity diminished agitation. Promising effects of indoor light were to reduce depressive symptoms and facilitate spatial orientation. Furthermore, there were indications that indoor light improved one’s quality of life. Despite interventions with dynamic lighting having yielded little evidence of its efficacy, its potential has been insufficiently researched among this study population. This review provides a clear and comprehensive description of the impact of diverse indoor light conditions on the health of older adults with dementia living in long-term care facilities. Variation was seen in terms of research methods, (the description of) light conditions, and participants’ characteristics (types and severity of dementia), thus confounding the reliability of the findings. The authors recommend further research to corroborate the beneficial effects of indoor light on depression and to clarify its role in supporting everyday activities of this population. An implication for practice in long-term care facilities is raising the awareness of the increased lighting needs of aged residents. Original article at: https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S297865
MULTIFILE
Purpose: Collaborative deliberation comprises personal engagement, recognition of alternative actions, comparative learning, preference elicitation, and preference integration. Collaborative deliberation may be improved by assisting preference elicitation during shared decision-making. This study proposes a framework for preference elicitation to facilitate collaborative deliberation in long-term care consultations. Methods: First, a literature overview was conducted comprising current models for the elicitation of preferences in health and social care settings. The models were reviewed and compared. Second, qualitative research was applied to explore those issues that matter most to clients in long-term care. Data were collected from clients in long-term care, comprising 16 interviews, 3 focus groups, 79 client records, and 200 online client reports. The qualitative analysis followed a deductive approach. The results of the literature overview and qualitative research were combined. Results: Based on the literature overview, five overarching domains of preferences were described: “Health”, “Daily life”, “Family and friends”, ”Living conditions”, and “Finances”. The credibility of these domains was confirmed by qualitative data analysis. During interviews, clients addressed issues that matter in their lives, including a “click” with their care professional, safety, contact with loved ones, and assistance with daily structure and activities. These data were used to determine the content of the domains. Conclusion: A framework for preference elicitation in long-term care is proposed. This framework could be useful for clients and professionals in preference elicitation during collaborative deliberation.
