To understand general practitioners’ (GPs’) experience of existing care pathways for people with moderate-severe Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) and explore their attitudes towards potential modifications to these pathways.
Secondary thematic analysis of qualitative interviews, originally conducted with GPs to explore prescribing of memantine in general practice. The theoretical domains framework was used to structure the data.
The study participants were recruited via an online survey completed by GPs across England.
Semi-structured, qualitative interviews were conducted with thirteen male and ten female GPs from a range of general practices in England.
Insights into GPs’ views and experiences regarding existing and possible care pathways for individuals with moderate to severe AD.
Gaps in GPs’ current levels of knowledge and skill in respect of caring for patients with moderate-to-severe AD affect their confidence and ability to identify opportunities for additional treatments. While GPs emphasise their role as providers of holistic care, features of the current healthcare context, including a lack of additional funding, inhibit their willingness to assume additional responsibilities as part of a revised pathway.
A considerable knowledge, skills and confidence gap must be addressed to support the implementation of new care pathways that include revised responsibilities for GPs. GPs need appropriate support and resources to manage their patients’ changing needs and to provide the best possible pharmacological management as the disease develops.
To analyse existing knowledge on the psychometric properties of the Braden Scale when used within the acute care setting.
Systematic review and narrative synthesis.
A database search was conducted in June 2023 and updated in February 2024, seeking studies testing the psychometric properties of the Braden scale in the acute care setting. Data were sourced from five electronic databases (CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science). Study selection, data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were completed, with two reviewers independently conducting each stage and an independent reviewer arbitrating discrepancies. Data were extracted using a customised template and synthesised narratively. Risk of bias was assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist.
Thirty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Internal consistency was reported between 0.64 and 0.78 (Cronbach's alpha). Inter-rater reliability was high, reported as ranging from 0.946 to 0.964 (intra-class correlations) or 0.86 to 0.949 (Pearson's correlation). Most validity studies tested predictive validity with wide variances reported.
The Braden Scale is reliable for assessing the risk of PI in acute care, but the validity of the scale is variable. Further research investigating validity beyond predictive validity is required.
Nurses working in acute care can use the Braden Scale with confidence of scale reliability. However, validity is variable and warrants a cautious approach. The true value resides in the capacity to trigger recognition of pressure injury risk.
Trial Registration: The protocol was registered a priori with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews PROSPERO ref: CRD42023407545