Back

Barriers and facilitators to implementing DREAMS:START intervention for sleep disturbance in dementia within the NHS: A pre-implementation study

Mehta, V.; Rapaport, P.; Livingston, G.

2025-10-31 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.1101/2025.10.29.25339056 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundSleep disturbances are common in people living with dementia and negatively affect them and their family carers. Non-pharmacological interventions like DREAMS:START (Dementia Related Manual for Sleep: Strategies for Relatives) offer potential benefits but are not yet implemented widely in NHS practice. AimsTo explore the barriers and facilitators to implementing DREAMS:START in UK NHS dementia services, from the perspective of healthcare professionals and intervention facilitators, using qualitative interviews. MethodWe interviewed 19 NHS staff - (n=10) staff with no prior DREAMS:START experience and (n=9) DREAMS:START facilitators using semi-structured interviews and analysed data using reflexive thematic analysis, organized according to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Ethical approval was granted by the London-Camden and Kings Cross Research Ethics Committee (Reference: 20/LO/0894). ResultsFive key themes emerged: 1) perceived need for interventions targeting sleep in dementia; 2) importance of evidence and cost-effectiveness; 3) influence of service manager attitudes and support; 4) inter-professional interconnectedness and training; and 5) staff capacity and attitudes toward change. Participants highlighted the need for flexible, personalised delivery, robust evidence, training, supervision, and local champions to facilitate adoption. ConclusionsImplementation of DREAMS:START in NHS services is feasible but organisational barriers need addressing to enhance staff capacity, and promote evidence-based, cost-effective practices. Findings from this study will inform strategies for scaling up the intervention to improve sleep outcomes for people with dementia and their carers.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.