Background
-
introduce Kinaesthetics and show the lack of research evidence for the benefits of Kinaesthetics in geriatric care
-
conclude that there is need for a strict and multi-step research programme, that considers complexity of this kind of intervention,
-
describe the study protocol of the first trial in our programme, a pilot in order to check feasibility of a training programme for nurses as well as feasibility of learned skills implementation for nurses and for residents in clinical practice.
Introduction to Kinaesthetics and review of effectiveness studies
The Kinaesthetics conceptual framework
Main concepts | Sub-themes |
---|---|
1 Interaction | Senses (visual, auditory, taste, smell, tactile, kinaesthetic) |
Movement elements (time, effort, space) | |
Types of interaction (mutual, serial, unilateral) | |
2 Functional anatomy | Bones and muscles |
Masses and spaces | |
Orientation to one's own body | |
3 Human movement | Postural and transport movement |
Parallel and spiral movement patterns | |
4 Effort | Pulling and pushing |
5 Human functions | Simple human functions (positions) |
Complex human functions (locomotion and movement in place) | |
6 Environment | Movement supporting and restricting environment |
Conception for nurse education in Kinaesthetics
Studies on the effects of Kinaesthetics for the nursing staff
Studies on the effects of Kinaesthetics for the elderly residents
Program theory and research plan
Reasons and objectives of the pilot trial and criteria of feasibility
Main reason for conducting a pilot study | Feasibility objective | Feasibility questions | Programme level | Criterion for feasibility success |
---|---|---|---|---|
Resources | Efforts for and completeness of recording data | Are the efforts for the participation in the trial reasonable? Is enough data obtained for a reasonable decision-making? Are the expenses justifiable? | residents | Less than 50% the residents would not participate again in the trial or drop out during the trial (RES_1) |
nurses | Less than 50% the nurses would not participate again in the trial or drop out during the trial (RES_2) | |||
both | Percentage of missing values below 20% for SOPMAS, below 50% for MOTPA (RES_3) | |||
Scientific | Minimum effects (justifying further research) | Is Kinaesthetics mobilisation able to increase safety, participation and comfort as well as decrease pain for the residents? | residents | After staff training, at least 50% of the residents (a) perceive more safety, comfort and participation during mobilisation (at least 2 points, SCI_1) (b) perceive less pain during mobilisation (at least 2 points) SCI_2 (c) receive a higher median SOPMAS score of item "patient movement" (at least 1 point) (SCI_3) |
Is Kinaesthetics mobilisation able to decrease perceived physical strain and increase movement competence of the nurses ? | nurses | After staff training, at least 50% of the nurses (a) perceive less physical strain during mobilisation (at least 2 points) or increased Borg values can be ascribed to improvements in body perception (SCI_4) (b) receive a higher median SOPMAS score (at least 1 point) (SCI_5) | ||
Process | Continuing Participation | Will residents and nurses be ready to participate in the trial over the full period? | residents | 50% or less of the residents leave the programme on their own decision (i.e. not due to an adverse event or death (PRO_1) |
nurses | 30% or less of the nurses leave the programme on their own decision (i.e. not due to an adverse event, PRO_2) |
Methods/Design
Design, ethics approval and registration
Setting and Sample
-
participation in the Kinaesthetics training course during trial
-
no Kinaesthetics training before
-
informed consent
-
needs assistance in mobility
-
physical condition allows for participation
-
can read and speak German
-
is able to understand the study information
-
informed consent