REAGERA edu: Responding to Elder Abuse in GERiAtric Care: Educational Intervention
Study Details
Study Description
Brief Summary
The prevalence of elder abuse has been reported between 10-15% in international studies. Elder abuse may include both physical, emotional, sexual and financial abuse as well as neglect and it occurs at the hand of both professionals and family members, including adult children and intimate partners. Elder abuse has been associated with psychological ill-health, disability, increased hospitalization, emergency department use and admission to nursing facilities. Elder abuse is however often unknown to health care providers. Older adults are hesitant to disclose abuse and health care providers are often reluctant to ask questions.
In this study an interactive educational model for health care professionals about elder abuse will be tested. The model consist of theoretical lectures, brief films showing patient encounters, group discussions and forum play, a form of participatory theater. Both group discussions and forum play will be using case scenarios as a cornerstone.
The validated questionnaire REAGERA-P will be used for self-reported measures
| Condition or Disease | Intervention/Treatment | Phase |
|---|---|---|
|
N/A |
Detailed Description
Please refer to the uploaded study protocol and statistical analysis plan for a detailed description of the study.
Study Design
Arms and Interventions
| Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
|---|---|
| Experimental: Education Participants that have undergone the educational intervention |
Other: Education
Training for health care professionals on how to identify and manage cases of elder abuse among their patients
|
| No Intervention: Waitlist Participants still waiting to cross over to intervention arm |
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
- Change between baseline and follow up concerning asking questions about abuse, as reported in the questionnaire REAGERA-P [Baseline, 6 month follow up, 12 month follow up, 18 month follow up]
Self-report measure of asking older patients about abusive experience. Will be measure both as a dichotomous value (have ever asked questions during the last 6 months) as well as a frequency measure where participants report how often they have asked patients questions about abuse during the last 6 months (on a scale from 0 to 10 or more)
Secondary Outcome Measures
- Change between baseline and follow up concerning adequate follow up, as reported in the questionnaire REAGERA-P [Baseline, 6 month follow up, 12 month follow up, 18 month follow up]
Frequency of respondents reporting that identified cases of elder abuse were given adequate follow up
- Change between baseline and follow up concerning self-reported hesitancy for asking questions about elder abuse, as reported in the questionnaire REAGERA-P [Baseline, 6 month follow up, 12 month follow up, 18 month follow up]
Frequency of respondents reporting that they have suspected cases of elder abuse but refrained from asking questions
- Degree of changed practice as reported in the questionnaire REAGERA-P [6 month follow up]
Frequency of participants self-reporting that they have changed their working practices as a result of the educational intervention
- Change between baseline and follow up concerning self-efficacy, as reported in the questionnaire REAGERA-P [Baseline, Immediate post-intervention, 6 month follow up, 12 month follow up, 18 month follow up]
Self-reported self-efficacy for asking questions about elder abuse and managing the response
- Change between baseline and follow up concerning perceived individual level barriers (1), as reported in the questionnaire REAGERA-P [Baseline, immediate post-intervention, 6 month follow up, 12 month follow up, 18 month follow up]
Self-reported perceived individual level barriers for asking questions about abuse: a) Worrying about a) negative reactions from the patient or b) negative consequences for the patient-provider relationship if asking questions about abuse c) Worrying about not being able to give proper follow up
- Change between baseline and follow up concerning perceived individual level barriers (2), as reported in the questionnaire REAGERA-P [Baseline, 6 month follow up, 12 month follow up, 18 month follow up]
Self-reported perceived individual level barriers for asking questions about abuse: d) Own lack of awareness as a barrier e) Knowledge about judicial concerns f) Knowledge on how to properly document cases in the patient chart
- Change between baseline and follow up concerning perceived organizational level barriers, as reported in the questionnaire REAGERA-P [Baseline, 6 month follow up, 12 month follow up, 18 month follow up]
Self-reported perceived organizational level barriers. Lack of a) Time b) Routines for asking questions c) Routines for managing the response d) Preparedness at the workplace to care for victims of elder abuse
- Change between baseline and follow up concerning sense of responsibility, as reported in the questionnaire REAGERA-P [Baseline, Immediate post-intervention, 6 month follow up, 12 month follow up, 18 month follow up]
Self reported sense of responsibility for asking questions about abuse (own responsibility, professions responsibility, health care system's responsibility)
- Change between baseline and follow up concerning level of awareness of abuse in contact with patients, as reported in the questionnaire REAGERA-P [Baseline, 12 month follow up]
Patient case ("Vignette") with indicators of abuse present and participants self-report if they think they would have asked the patient questions about abuse
Other Outcome Measures
- Change between baseline and follow up concerning number of elder abuse victims identified at the clinics included in the study, as reported in the medical records [Baseline, 6 month follow up, 12 month follow up, 18 month follow up]
Anonymous data from the medical records counting the number of older patients treated at each clinic that have been identified as victims of abuse during the last 6 months
Eligibility Criteria
Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
-
Employee at one of the clinics participating in the trial
-
Work tasks involves direct patient contact, at least part time
-
Participation at the training sessions
Exclusion Criteria:
-
Only administrative work and no direct patient contact
-
Not participating at the training session
Contacts and Locations
Locations
| Site | City | State | Country | Postal Code | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Region Jönköpings län | Eksjö | Sweden | ||
| 2 | Region Jönköpings Län | Jönköping | Sweden | ||
| 3 | Region Östergötland | Linköping | Sweden | ||
| 4 | Region Östergötland | Norrköping | Sweden |
Sponsors and Collaborators
- Region Östergötland
- Linkoeping University
- Region Jönköping County
- Linnaeus University
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Johanna Simmons, MD, PhD, Region Östergötland
Study Documents (Full-Text)
More Information
Publications
- RÖ-786