Susan Slaughter

Dr. Susan Slaughter

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

17Years (2010-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
7 September 2015 in Implementation Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SSSusan Slaughter
Susan Slaughter
JHJennifer N. Hill
Jennifer N. Hill
ESErna Snelgrove-Clarke
Erna Snelgrove-Clarke
Implementation fidelity is critical to the internal and external validity of implementation research. Much of what is written about implementation fidelity addresses fidelity of evidence-informed interventions rather than fidelity of implementation strategies. The documentation and reporting of fidelity to implementation strategies requires attention. Therefore, in this scoping review, we identify the extent and quality of documentation and reporting of fidelity of implementation strategies that were used to implement evidence-informed interventions. A six-stage methodological framework for scoping studies guided our work. Studies were identified from the outputs of the Effective Practice and Organization of Care (EPOC) review group within the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. EPOC’s primary focus, implementation strategies influencing provider behavior change, optimized our ability to identify articles for inclusion. We organized the retrieved articles from the systematic reviews by journal and selected the three journals with the largest number of retrieved articles. Using a data extraction tool, we organized retrieved article data from these three journals. In addition, we summarized implementation strategies using the EPOC categories. Data extraction pertaining to the quality of reporting the fidelity of implementation strategies was facilitated with an “Implementation Strategy Fidelity Checklist” based on definitions adapted from Dusenbury et al. We conducted inter-rater reliability checks for all of the independently scored articles. Using linear regression, we assessed the fidelity scores in relation to the publication year. Seventy-two implementation articles were included in the final analysis. Researchers reported neither fidelity definitions nor conceptual frameworks for fidelity in any articles. The most frequently employed implementation strategies included distribution of education materials (n = 35), audit and feedback (n = 32), and educational meetings (n = 25). Fidelity of implementation strategies was documented in 51 (71 %) articles. Inter-rater reliability coefficients of the independent reviews for each component of fidelity were as follows: adherence = 0.85, dose = 0.89, and participant responsiveness = 0.96. The mean fidelity score was 2.6 (SD = 2.25). We noted a statistically significant decline in fidelity scores over time. In addition to identifying the under-reporting of fidelity of implementation strategies in the health literature, we developed and tested a simple checklist to assess the reporting of fidelity of implementation strategies. More research is indicated to assess the definitions and scoring schema of this checklist. Careful reporting of details about fidelity of implementation strategies will make an important contribution to implementation science.

1 March 2014 in Journal of the American Medical Directors Association
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
HKHeather Keller
Heather Keller
NCNatalie Carrier
Natalie Carrier
LDLisa Duizer
Lisa Duizer
CLChristina Lengyel
Christina Lengyel
SSSusan Slaughter
Susan Slaughter
CSCatriona Steele
Catriona Steele

1 February 2015 in Journal of the American Medical Directors Association
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SSSusan Slaughter
Susan Slaughter
AWAdrian S. Wagg
Adrian S. Wagg
CJC. Allyson Jones
C. Allyson Jones
DSDon Schopflocher
Don Schopflocher
CICarla Ickert
Carla Ickert
CECarole A. Estabrooks
Carole A. Estabrooks

20 March 2020 in International Journal of Older People Nursing
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
LCLisa A. Cranley
Lisa A. Cranley
SSSusan Slaughter
Susan Slaughter
SCSienna Caspar
Sienna Caspar
MHMelissa Heisey
Melissa Heisey
MHMei Huang
Mei Huang
KMKatherine McGilton
Katherine McGilton
Aim: The aim of this study was to explore shared decision‐making among residents, their families and staff to determine relevant strategies to support shared decision‐making in long‐term care (LTC).Background: Meaningful engagement of long‐term care home (LTCH) residents and their families in care decisions is key in the provision of quality of care. Shared decision‐making is an interprofessional approach to increasing resident and family engagement in care decisions which can lead to higher quality decisions, more relevant care interventions and greater resident, family, and staff satisfaction. Despite these advantages, shared decision‐making has not been widely implemented in practice in LTC.Methods: The study took place in one LTCH in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. A qualitative descriptive design was used to explore how residents, family members and staff described how they collaborate when making decisions concerning resident care, and their perceptions of facilitators and challenges to a collaborative approach to decision‐making. Individual interviews were conducted with nine participants: residents, families and staff. Data were analysed using content and thematic analysis.Findings: Four main themes that described resident, family and staff perspectives of shared decision‐making were as follows: (a) oral communication pathways for information sharing; (b) supporting resident decision‐making autonomy; (c) relational aspects of care facilitate shared decision‐making; and (d) lack of effective communication creates barriers to shared decision‐making.Conclusion: As the demand for LTC continues to increase, it is crucial that healthcare providers engage in collaborative, relational practices that foster high‐quality resident care. While a relational approach to care can facilitate shared decision‐making, there are opportunities to further cultivate shared decision‐making in LTCHs through more effective communication and collaboration.Implications for practice: Understanding how information is shared and decisions are made can facilitate shared decision‐making in LTCHs. The strategies identified from this study could be further co‐developed and implemented in LTCHs.

13 January 2017 in BMC Geriatrics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
HKHeather Keller
Heather Keller
NCNatalie Carrier
Natalie Carrier
SSSusan Slaughter
Susan Slaughter
CLChristina Lengyel
Christina Lengyel
CSCatriona M. Steele
Catriona M. Steele
LVLita Villalon
Lita Villalon
Older adults living in long term care (LTC) homes are nutritionally vulnerable, often consuming insufficient energy, macro- and micronutrients to sustain their health and function. Multiple factors are proposed to influence food intake, yet our understanding of these diverse factors and their interactions are limited. The purpose of this paper is to fully describe the protocol used to examine determinants of food and fluid intake among older adults participating in the Making the Most of Mealtimes (M3) study. A conceptual framework that considers multi-level influences on mealtime experience, meal quality and meal access was used to design this multi-site cross-sectional study. Data were collected from 639 participants residing in 32 LTC homes in four Canadian provinces by trained researchers. Food intake was assessed with three-days of weighed food intake (main plate items), as well as estimations of side dishes, beverages and snacks and compared to the Dietary Reference Intake. Resident-level measures included: nutritional status, nutritional risk; disease conditions, medication, and diet prescriptions; oral health exam, signs of swallowing difficulty and olfactory ability; observed eating behaviours, type and number of staff assisting with eating; and food and foodservice satisfaction. Function, cognition, depression and pain were assessed using interRAI LTCF with selected items completed by researchers with care staff. Care staff completed a standardized person-directed care questionnaire. Researchers assessed dining rooms for physical and psychosocial aspects that could influence food intake. Management from each site completed a questionnaire that described the home, menu development, food production, out-sourcing of food, staffing levels, and staff training. Hierarchical regression models, accounting for clustering within province, home and dining room will be used to determine factors independently associated with energy and protein intake, as proxies for intake. Proportions of residents at risk of inadequate diets will also be determined. This rigorous and comprehensive data collection in a large and diverse sample will provide, for the first time, the opportunity to consider important modifiable factors associated with poor food intake of residents in LTC. Identification of factors that are independently associated with food intake will help to develop effective interventions that support food intake. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02800291 , retrospectively registered June 7, 2016.

1 May 2018 in Geriatric Nursing
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ANAshwini Namasivayam-MacDonald
Ashwini Namasivayam-MacDonald
SSSusan Slaughter
Susan Slaughter
JMJill Morrison
Jill Morrison
CSCatriona M. Steele
Catriona M. Steele
NCNatalie Carrier
Natalie Carrier
HKHeather Keller
Heather Keller