Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T18:36:07.120Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Family group conferencing in dementia care: an exploration of opportunities and challenges

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 October 2015

Sylwia Górska ,
Kirsty Forsyth ,
Susan Prior ,
Linda Irvine  and
Peter Haughey
Sylwia Górska*
Affiliation:
Queen Margaret University, Queen Margaret Drive, Edinburgh, EH21 6UU, Scotland
Kirsty Forsyth
Affiliation:
Queen Margaret University, Queen Margaret Drive, Edinburgh, EH21 6UU, Scotland
Susan Prior
Affiliation:
Queen Margaret University, Queen Margaret Drive, Edinburgh, EH21 6UU, Scotland
Linda Irvine
Affiliation:
Mental Health and Wellbeing, NHS Lothian, Waverley Gate, 2-4 Waterloo Place, Edinburgh, EH1 3EG, Scotland
Peter Haughey
Affiliation:
Midlothian Council, Dalkeith, Scotland
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Sylwia Górska, Research Practitioner, Queen Margaret University, Queen Margaret Drive, Edinburgh, EH21 6UU, Scotland. Phone: +0044131 4740000; Fax +0044131 4740001. Email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

The Family Group Conference (FGC) is an approach to partnership working which brings together service users, their support network and care professionals in a family-led decision making forum. Evidence, though limited, indicates that that FGC can enhance outcomes for service providers and their users. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the pilot FGC service, delivered to people with dementia and their families, in terms of the experience of care provision by families and care professionals involved in the project.

Methods:

Focus group interviews were conducted with families and professionals participating in the pilot intervention.

Results:

FGC was perceived as having the potential to positively impact service users, their families, service providers and the wider culture of care. However, despite an overall positive evaluation the participants identified a number of challenges related to service implementation. Both the opportunities and challenges identified in this study are discussed in the context of the existing international evidence base.

Conclusions:

This study contributes to a better understanding of the applicability of FGC as a strategy to support people with dementia and their families. Although promising in terms of potential outcomes for service users and providers, FGC presents challenges which need to be carefully managed in order to secure maximum benefit to all parties.

Keywords

Family Group Conferencingdementiaservice evaluationqualitative analysis
Type
Research Article
Information
International Psychogeriatrics , Volume 28 , Issue 2 , February 2016 , pp. 233 - 246
Copyright
Copyright © International Psychogeriatric Association 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alwin, J., O¨Berg, B. and Kreves, B. (2010). Support/services among family caregivers of persons with dementia perceived importance and services received. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 25, 240–248. doi: 10.1002/gps.2328.Google Scholar
Burford, G. and Hudson, J. (2000). Family Group Conferencing. New Directions in Community-Centered Child & Family Practice. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Connolly, M. (2006). Up front and personal: confronting dynamics in the family group conference. Family Process, 45, 345–357.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Creswell, J. W. and Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39, 124–130. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Day Break. (2010). Daybreak FGCs for Adults. Pilot Project for Elder Abuse Evaluation Report 2007–2010. Available at: http://www.daybreakfgc.org.uk/vulnerable-adults; last accessed 18 February 2013.Google Scholar
Day Break FGCs (2012). Family Group Conferences for Adults Hampshire. Evaluation Report. Available at: http://www.daybreakfgc.org.uk/vulnerable-adults; last accessed 4 July 2013.Google Scholar
De Jong, G., Schout, G. and Abma, T. (2014). Prevention of involuntary admission through family group conferencing: a qualitative case study in community mental health nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 70, 2651–2662. doi:10.1111/jan.12445.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Department of Health. (2009). Living Well with Dementia: A National Dementia Strategy. London: Department of Health.Google Scholar
Department of Health and Ageing. (2006). National Framework for Action on Dementia 2006–2010. Available at: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/D64BD892C6FDD167CA2572180007E717/$File/nfad.pdf; last accessed 25 January 2013.Google Scholar
Egdell, V. (2012). Development of support networks in informal dementia care: guided, organic and chance routes through support. Canadian Journal on Aging, 31, 445–455. doi: 10.1017/S0714980812000323.Google Scholar
Fetherstonhaugh, D., Tarzia, L. and Nay, R. (2013). Being central to decision making means I am still here!: the essence of decision making for people with dementia. Journal of Aging Studies, 27, 143–150. doi: 10.1016/j.jaging.2012.12.007.Google Scholar
FGC Forum (NI). (2012). FGC Standards in Northern Ireland. Available at: http://www.fgcni.org/cmsfiles/FGCF-Standards-document.pdf; last accessed 18 February 2013.Google Scholar
Fox, N., Hunn, A. and Mathers, N. (1998). Trent Focus for Research and Development in Primary Health Care: Sampling. Leicestershire, UK: Trent Focus Group.Google Scholar
Friss Feinberg, L. and Whitlatch, C. J. (2002). Decision-making for persons with cognitive impairment and their family caregivers. American Journal of Alzheimer's Disease and Other Dementias, 17, 237–244.Google Scholar
Frost, N., Abram, F. and Burgess, H. (2014). Family group conferences: evidence, outcomes and future research. Child and Family Social Work, 19, 501–507. doi:10.1111/cfs.12049.Google Scholar
Gallagher, F. and Jasper, M. (2003). Health visitors’ experiences of family group conferences in relation to child protection planning: a phenomenological study. Journal of Nursing Management, 11, 377–386.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York: Aldine.Google Scholar
Górska, S. M. et al. (2013). Service related needs of older people with dementia: perspectives of service users and their unpaid carers. International Psychogeriatrics, 25, 1107–1114. doi: 10.1017/S1041610213000343.Google Scholar
Hines, T. (2000). An evaluation of two qualitative methods (focus group interviews and cognitive maps) for conducting research into entrepreneurial decision making. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 3, 7–16. doi: 10.1108/13522750010310406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobbs, A. and Alonzi, A. (2013). Mediation and family group conferences in adult safeguarding. The Journal of Adult Protection, 15, 69–84.Google Scholar
Horton-Deutsch, S., Twigg, P. and Evans, R. (2007). Health care decision-making of persons with dementia. Dementia, 6, 105–120. doi: 10.1177/1471301207075643.Google Scholar
Lysack, C., Luborsky, M. R. and Dillaway, H. (2006). Gathering qualitative data. In Kielhofner, G. (ed.), Research in Occupational Therapy. Methods of Inquiry for Enhancing Practice (pp. 341–357). Philadelphia: F. A. Davis Company.Google Scholar
Macgovan, M. J. and Pennel, J. (2001). Building social responsibility through family group conferencing. Social Work with Groups, 24, 67–87.Google Scholar
Malmberg-Heimonen, I. (2011). The effects of family group conferences on social support and mental health for longer-term social assistance recipients in norway. British Journal of Social Work, 41, 949–967. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcr001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsh, P. (2007). Kent Adult FGC Development Research. Final Report. Available at: https://shareweb.kent.gov.uk/Documents/childrens-social-sservices/carers-and-family-support/family-group-conference/Adults%20research%20findings.pdf; last accessed 18 April 2013.Google Scholar
Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. (2012). Five-Year Plan for Promotion of Measures Against Dementia (Orange Plan). Available at: http://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/houdou/2r9852000002j8dh-att/2r9852000002j8ey.pdf (in Japanese); last accessed 25 January 2013.Google Scholar
Morris, K. and Connolly, M. (2012). Family decision making in child welfare: challenges in developing a knowledge base for practice. Child Abuse Review, 21, 41–52. doi: 10.1002/car.1143.Google Scholar
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods, 3rd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Podgorski, C. and King, D. A. (2009). Losing function, staying connected: family dynamics in provision of care for people with dementia. Journal of the American Society on Aging, 33, 24–29.Google Scholar
Rosland, A., Heisler, M. and Piette, J. D. (2012). The impact of family behaviors and communication patterns on chronic illness outcomes: a systematic review. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 35, 221–39. doi: 10.1007/s10865-011-9354-4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Samsi, K. and Manthorpe, J. (2013). Everyday decision-making in dementia: findings from a longitudinal interview study of people with dementia and family carers. International Psychogeriatric, 25, 949–961. doi: 10.1017/S1041610213000306.Google Scholar
Schmid, J. E. and Pollack, S. (2009). Developing shared knowledge: family group conferencing as a means of negotiating power in the child welfare system. Practice: Social Work in Action, 21, 175–188. doi:10.1080/09503150902807615.Google Scholar
Sumsion, T. and Lencucha, R. (2007). Balancing challenges and facilitating factors when implementing client-centred collaboration in a mental health setting. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 70, 513–520. doi: 10.1177/030802260707001203.Google Scholar
Sundell, K., Vinnerljung, B. and Ryburn, M. (2001). Social workers’ attitudes towards family group conferences in Sweden and the UK. Child and Family Social Work, 6, 327–336. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2206.2001.00216.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United Nations. (2008). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Available at: http://www.un.org/disabilities/convention/conventionfull.shtml; last accessed 31 October 2013.Google Scholar
Wallcraft, J. (2012). Involvement of service users in adult safeguarding. The Journal of Adult Protection, 14, 142–150. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14668201211236340; last accessed 2 September 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittemore, R., Chase, S. K. and Mandle, C. L. (2001). Validity in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 11, 522–537.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wimo, A. and Prince, M. (2010). World Alzheimer Report 2010. The global economic impact of dementia. London: Alzheimer Disease International.Google Scholar
Wolfs, C. A. G. et al. (2012). Rational decision-making about treatment and care in dementia: a contradiction in terms? Patient Education and Counselling, 87, 43–48. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.07.023.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
World Health organisation. (2012). Dementia. A Public Health Priority. Geneva: WHO.Google Scholar