Peer Mentorship with Lewy Body Disease: A protocol for co‐developing and piloting a program for post‐diagnostic support

The challenges of COVID-19 for people with dementia with Lewy bodies and family caregivers.

Aim/Purpose: In this paper, we examine how first-year education doctoral (EdD) students in a peer mentoring program may be supported in the academic and psychosocial domains to increase timely degree completion, decrease attrition, and improve the EdD program for students and faculty. Background: EdD students often face unique trials based on academic, social, professional, and personal challenges that arise during their degree program. The paper addresses how peer mentoring programs may help students overcome these challenges while completing their EdD program. Methodology: To investigate the effectiveness of a peer mentoring program for students, we focused on a single case study of an EdD peer mentoring program with 11 first-year EdD students who participated in the program. Using mixed methods, we collected and analyzed data from pre- and post-surveys, individual interviews, and a focus group. Contribution: Few studies about peer mentoring programs for EdD students exist. This study is unique because it focuses on first-year EdD students’ perspectives and, unlike other studies on peer mentoring programs, peer mentors are defined as graduates of the EdD program or current EdD students who are further along in the program. Whilst many studies of peer mentoring recommend peer mentoring for new students, our findings suggest that in the case of EdD students, extended or later peer mentoring may be more beneficial. Findings: From the quantitative and qualitative data results, five themes related to mentee perspectives of the benefits of EdD peer mentoring program emerged: 1) receiving academic advice and program support; 2) focusing on the future; 3) receiving emotional support and work-life balance advice; 4) having an experienced and relatable mentor; and 5) needing more mentoring to derive benefits. While mentees reported positive feelings about the mentoring program, many expressed that they did not yet have a need for mentoring. Considering that most mentoring studies focus on early program mentees, these results present the possibility of a need for extended or later-program mentoring. Based on the data, we identified a need for additional research which focuses on determining the correct timing for EdD students to begin peer mentoring program since students take coursework during their first year and have not begun work in the dissertation phase of the program. Recommendations for Practitioners: Sustainability of peer mentoring programs can present challenges based on the time and needs of mentees, mentors, and faculty. Doctoral faculty should evaluate the benefits of an EdD peer mentoring program for mentees on a regular basis to ensure that the program effectively supports and guides mentees to degree completion. Recommendation for Researchers: Literature and research on the evaluation, impact, and value of peer mentoring programs for EdD students and first-year doctoral students are limited. Researchers could study further the perspectives of mentees in an EdD peer mentoring program throughout their degree program from taking coursework to writing a dissertation. The benefits of early-program mentoring in comparison to later-program mentoring could be investigated further. Impact on Society: Providing mentoring opportunities to EdD students may help them overcome academic, social, and emotional challenges, and in turn, allow more education leaders to successfully complete their EdD and use their education to improve their school communities. Future Research: Future studies should examine other options of mentoring programs for first-year EdD students and EdD students who completed their EdD coursework and are working on their dissertation. Longitudinal studies are also needed to track mentees’ progression throughout the program.

BackgroundThe RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) framework is a useful tool for evaluating the impact of programs in community settings. RE-AIM has been applied to evaluate individual programs but seldom used to evaluate the collective impact of community-based, public health programming developed and delivered by multiple autonomous organizations. The purposes of this paper were to (a) demonstrate how RE-AIM can be operationalized and applied to evaluate the collective impact of similar autonomous programs that promote health and well-being and (b) provide preliminary data on the collective impact of Canadian spinal cord injury (SCI) peer mentorship programs on the delivery of peer mentorship services.MethodsCriteria from all five RE-AIM dimensions were operationalized to evaluate multiple similar community-based programs. For this study, nine provincial organizations that serve people with SCI were recruited from across Canada. Organizations completed a structured self-report questionnaire and participated in a qualitative telephone interview to examine different elements of their peer mentorship program. Data were analyzed using summary statistics.ResultsHaving multiple indicators to assess RE-AIM dimensions provided a broad evaluation of the impact of Canadian SCI peer mentorship programs. Peer mentorship programs reached 1.63% of the estimated Canadian SCI population. The majority (67%) of organizations tracked the effectiveness of peer mentorship through testimonials and reports. Setting-level adoption rates were high with 100% of organizations offering peer mentorship in community and hospital settings. On average, organizations allocated 10.4% of their operating budget and 9.8% of their staff to implement peer mentorship and 89% had maintained their programming for over 10 years. Full interpretation of the collective impact of peer mentorship programs was limited as complete data were only collected for 52% of survey questions.ConclusionsThe lack of available organizational data highlights a significant challenge when using RE-AIM to evaluate the collective impact of multiple programs that promote health and well-being. Although researchers are encouraged to use RE-AIM to evaluate the collective impact of programs delivered by different organizations, documenting limitations and providing recommendations should be done to further the understanding of how best to operationalize RE-AIM in these contexts.

PurposeThe transition from school to higher education is a complex process. Peer mentoring is often used by institutions to facilitate this process. The purpose of this research, which was conducted at a South African university, was to determine whether a peer mentoring programme, which involved a large number of students and a limited number of mentors, could successfully assist students to adapt to the academic and psychosocial demands of university life.Design/methodology/approachA sequential explanatory mixed method design was implemented. In the first phase, a questionnaire was used to collect data to establish participants' experience of the programme. The findings from the questionnaire were used to inform the qualitative phase, in which the participants' perceptions of the benefits of the mentor programme were further explored by means of group interviews. The qualitative data were analysed using inductive qualitative content analysis.FindingsThe results indicate that a structured peer mentoring programme, in which a mentor works with up to 70 mentees in a group setting, can be a useful tool to assist with students' transition to university. The research found that the peer mentoring programme contributed to the students' academic, social and personal integration into the higher education environment.Research limitations/implicationsThe perspectives of mentors and faculty were not included. No comparative study with students who did not participate in the programme was conducted.Practical implicationsThis research illustrates that it is possible to mentor large groups of disadvantaged and vulnerable students notwithstanding limited resources.Originality/valueIn contrast to the existing literature on peer mentoring in higher education, which focuses on one-on-one or small-group mentoring, this research suggests that peer mentoring of larger groups can also play an important role in assisting students to transition to higher education. The description of the programme and the benefits students derived from it offer other institutions with limited resources some ideas about how a peer mentoring programme can be implemented.

The Hartford Gerontological Nursing Leaders (HGNL) formerly known as the Building Academic Geriatric Nursing Capacity Initiative (BAGNC), in conjunction with the National Hartford Centers of Gerontological Nursing Excellence (NHCGNE), developed and executed a peer mentoring program beginning in 2011 to enhance both (a) the experience of newly selected scholars and fellows to the NHCGNE and (b) the ongoing professional development of HGNL members. The purpose of this article is to describe key strategies used to develop and execute the peer mentoring program and to present formative program evaluation. The program was launched in January 2011 with seven peer mentor and mentee matches. In June 2012, the peer mentoring committee solicited feedback on the development of the peer mentoring program and changes were made for the subsequent cohorts. An additional 12 matches were made in the following 2 years (2012 and 2013), for a total of 31 matches to date. We have learned several key lessons from our three cohorts regarding how to structure, implement, and carefully evaluate a peer mentoring program. Informal evaluation of our peer mentoring program noted several challenges for both peer mentors and mentees. Having knowledge of and addressing those challenges may increase the overall quality and effectiveness of peer mentoring programs and, in turn, benefit academic nursing by strengthening the faculty workforce. Findings from development and implementation of a peer mentoring program for gerontological faculty could lead to new and adaptable programs in a variety of clinical and education settings.

Clinical diagnosis of multiple system atrophy is challenging and many patients with Lewy body disease (i.e. Parkinson's disease or dementia with Lewy bodies) or progressive supranuclear palsy are misdiagnosed as having multiple system atrophy in life. The clinical records of 203 patients with a clinical diagnosis of multiple system atrophy were reviewed to identify diagnostic pitfalls. We also examined 12 features supporting a diagnosis of multiple system atrophy (red flag features: orofacial dystonia, disproportionate antecollis, camptocormia and/or Pisa syndrome, contractures of hands or feet, inspiratory sighs, severe dysphonia, severe dysarthria, snoring, cold hands and feet, pathological laughter and crying, jerky myoclonic postural/action tremor and polyminimyoclonus) and seven disability milestones (frequent falls, use of urinary catheters, wheelchair dependent, unintelligible speech, cognitive impairment, severe dysphagia, residential care). Of 203 cases, 160 (78.8%) were correctly diagnosed in life and had pathologically confirmed multiple system atrophy. The remaining 21.2% (43/203) had alternative pathological diagnoses including Lewy body disease (12.8%; n = 26), progressive supranuclear palsy (6.4%; n = 13), cerebrovascular diseases (1%; n = 2), amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (0.5%; n = 1) and cerebellar degeneration (0.5%; n = 1). More patients with multiple system atrophy developed ataxia, stridor, dysphagia and falls than patients with Lewy body disease; resting tremor, pill-rolling tremor and hallucinations were more frequent in Lewy body disease. Although patients with multiple system atrophy and progressive supranuclear palsy shared several symptoms and signs, ataxia and stridor were more common in multiple system atrophy. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed increased likelihood of multiple system atrophy versus Lewy body disease and progressive supranuclear palsy if a patient developed orthostatic hypotension or urinary incontinence with the requirement for urinary catheters [multiple system atrophy versus Lewy body disease: odds ratio (OR): 2.0, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.1-3.7, P = 0.021; multiple system atrophy versus progressive supranuclear palsy: OR: 11.2, 95% CI: 3.2-39.2, P < 0.01]. Furthermore, autonomic dysfunction within the first 3 years from onset can differentiate multiple system atrophy from progressive supranuclear palsy (multiple system atrophy versus progressive supranuclear palsy: OR: 3.4, 95% CI: 1.2-9.7, P = 0.023). Multiple system atrophy patients with predominant parkinsonian signs had a higher number of red flag features than patients with Lewy body disease (OR: 8.8, 95% CI: 3.2-24.2, P < 0.01) and progressive supranuclear palsy (OR: 4.8, 95% CI: 1.7-13.6, P < 0.01). The number of red flag features in multiple system atrophy with predominant cerebellar signs was also higher than in Lewy body disease (OR: 7.0, 95% CI: 2.5-19.5, P < 0.01) and progressive supranuclear palsy (OR: 3.1, 95% CI: 1.1-8.9, P = 0.032). Patients with multiple system atrophy had shorter latency to reach use of urinary catheter and longer latency to residential care than progressive supranuclear palsy patients, whereas patients with Lewy body disease took longer to reach multiple milestones than patients with multiple system atrophy. The present study has highlighted features which should improve the ante-mortem diagnostic accuracy of multiple system atrophy.

Knowing that a person who has firsthand experience recovering from a serious mental illness is available for support may help reduce symptoms, substance use, and rehospitalization rates in patients with a serious mental illness.

Accessible Summary Many young adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities also have mental health challenges, such as anxiety, depression or post‐traumatic stress disorder. Peer mentoring is when people with disabilities support another person with a disability. We worked together to make a peer mentoring programme to help young adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities have better mental health. People enjoyed peer mentoring—they thought it was fun and that their mentors were nice. A few people thought that mentoring would be better if there was more time to do activities with their mentor. Some people felt like mentoring helped them learn ways to cope with their mental health challenges. This article describes the peer mentoring programme, what people liked, what they did not like and how we want to change peer mentoring in the future. This is important, because other people might want to try peer mentoring so people with disabilities can learn from each other. AbstractBackgroundWe conducted feasibility testing of a novel peer mentoring intervention addressing self‐awareness and proactive coping for young adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities and co‐occurring mental health conditions. Aligned with regulatory flexibility theory, we hypothesised that if young adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities and co‐occurring mental health conditions learned a range of coping strategies, then they would have greater self‐efficacy for managing their emotions and, subsequently, decreased mental health symptoms.MethodsFive participants (Mage: 20, range: 16–22) were mentored by another young adult with intellectual and developmental disabilities and co‐occurring mental health conditions for 10 sessions. Feasibility data collected included the following: enrollment data, attendance rates, participant and parent member experiences and observation of change (via post‐intervention interviews), and mentoring satisfaction via a mentoring questionnaire (range 15–60).FindingsOur enrolment rate was 16%. Mentoring was acceptable to young adults, as demonstrated by high attendance rates (98% of sessions attended), mentoring questionnaire responses (M=49.4) and feedback describing the intervention as enjoyable and mentors as “nice,” and “understanding.” Participants and parents reported potential change in self‐efficacy for managing emotions (proximal outcome), use of coping strategies and self‐awareness of needs, but few changes in mental health symptoms (distal outcomes).ConclusionsThe peer mentoring intervention was feasible and acceptable for young adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities and co‐occurring mental health conditions. Results suggest a longer intervention duration may be necessary to elicit changes in mental health symptoms. To enhance feasibility, different recruitment strategies should be considered.

Social work faculty roles are complex and multi-faceted, characterized by both satisfaction and challenge. In the post-COVID landscape, new faculty members in particular experience physical and existential isolation and uncertainty; realities that impact their experiences as members of their academic communities. This chapter discusses the practice and research implications of a learner-centered peer mentor program—now in its third year--in which new faculty are paired with more experienced faculty volunteers (from various disciplines). The Peer Mentor Program is an integral part of new faculty orientation, a year-long effort. Mentorship “pairs” have flexibility to create relationships that meet their specific interests and needs. Moreover, the value of reciprocity and mutual aid is built into the program: peer mentors learn from new faculty and new faculty learn from peer mentors. An additional core element of the program is the virtual group check-ins with peer mentor volunteers. The groups are rooted in mutual aid, confidentiality, trust and learning together. (New faculty have their own monthly mutual aid groups.) The chapter will conclude with qualitative data from participants in the program, as well as recommendations for ongoing research to improve and even replicate the program beyond one academic institution.

Peer mentoring programs for nursing students: A mixed methods systematic review

The number of autistic individuals attending college or university is increasing, yet graduation rates are low as postsecondary environments often fail to support autistic students' individual needs. Peer mentorship programs are emerging as a promising approach for providing individualized, one-on-one support to meet this service gap for autistic postsecondary students. However, no literature has systematically described these programs. We conducted a systematic review that described existing peer mentorship programs for autistic students in postsecondary education as well as their effectiveness. Our search of five databases found nine unique programs that were evaluated in 11 peer-reviewed articles. Programs reported positive outcomes in various domains, which included social skills, academic performance, and sense of belonging. The evidence for these programs was primarily qualitative, sample sizes were small, and there was considerable heterogeneity in the format, provision, and goals of these programs, as well as the evaluation methods used. Overall, the state of the research related to the efficacy of peer mentorship programs for autistic students remains in its infancy, and further research is needed to quantify effectiveness and enable program comparisons. Why was this review done?: The number of autistic individuals attending college or university is increasing, yet graduation rates are low as most colleges and universities do not have the neccessary accommodations to support this population. Several peer mentorship programs now exist to provide individualized, one-on-one support for autistic students at college or university.What was the purpose of the review?: While several programs exist, it is unknown how effective these programs are in improving the academic experience for autistic students.What did the researchers do?: We systematically reviewed research describing existing peer mentorship programs for autistic university/college students and their effectiveness. Our search of five databases revealed nine unique programs that were evaluated in 11 peer-reviewed articles.What were the results of the review?: Most peer mentorship programs reported positive outcomes in various areas, including social skills, academic performance, and a sense of belonging. However, many of the studies were quite different in their approach and how they evaluated success, thus making it challenging to compare the programs with one another.What do these findings add to what was already known?: The findings from our systematic review highlight that only a few studies related to peer mentorship programs exist. We need more research to quantify the effectiveness of peer mentoring programs for autistic college/university students.What are potential weaknesses of this review?: There were evident inconsistencies between evaluation methods and types of measurement across studies, and studies often had a small number of participants, which limited our ability to make conclusions about the impact of such programs.How will these findings help autistic adults now or in the future?: This article provides a summary of the kinds of supports available to autistic adults within postsecondary settings, which may help autistic adults explore options for their own education. Advancing research in this area may improve the college/university experience for autistic adults in the future.

Peer mentoring programs have been implemented to address higher education institutions’ demands for promoting academic success and preventing student dropout. However, it is still unclear what elements best contribute to their effectiveness. A systematic literature review on the peer mentoring programs’ elements focused on promoting academic success and preventing dropout was conducted to understand better how to improve peer mentoring effectiveness in academia. Twenty-three studies were included and evaluated for quality. A thematic analysis was developed to report patterns in the elements of the included peer mentoring programs. Results demonstrate the effectiveness of formal peer mentoring programs where participation is voluntary, no financial incentives are provided, and faculty members are involved. Future research must ensure a more detailed description of the peer mentoring programs’ elements and robust methodology quality. It is necessary to evaluate the mentoring program’s effectiveness by considering mentor screening based on academic performance, matching characteristics, mentoring models, and program coordination feedback, in addition to analysing mentor training efficacy.

BackgroundPeer support involves people (mentors) using their own experiences to assist others (mentees). The impetus to include peer support in eating disorder recovery is high, however research on implementation of peer roles in eating disorder management is limited. A previous pilot study found positive but preliminary results for a Peer Mentor Program (PMP) for eating disorders. The PMP has since developed over time, including broadening its eligibility criteria and shifting to predominantly online delivery during COVID-19. This study aimed to evaluate the updated version of the PMP, on a larger and more diverse group of mentees.MethodsPreviously collected PMP service data from July 2020 to April 2022 (during COVID-19 lockdowns) was evaluated for fifty-one mentees using mixed methods. Data from program start (baseline), mid-point (3-months) and end (6-months) for measures of eating disorder symptoms as measured by the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q) and psychological wellbeing as measured by the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS) was evaluated. Frequency of eating disorder-related hospital admissions during PMP participation versus the 6 months prior, direct program costs and qualitative mentee feedback were also analysed. One way ANOVA’s with post hoc tests were used to evaluate symptom change and thematic analysis was conducted on qualitative data.ResultsProgram attendance averaged 12.12 (SD ± 1.57) of a possible 13 sessions. Statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements were demonstrated across all subscales of the eating disorder and psychological wellbeing symptom measures. EDE-Q Global score and DASS scores decreased significantly by program end. Fewer eating disorder-related hospital admissions were reported during PMP than the 6-months prior. Qualitative findings were positive and themed around the unique benefits of lived experience connection, a new kind of space for recovery, hope and motivation for change. Challenges with the time limited nature of the mentee-mentor relationship were expressed.ConclusionsThe important benefits of a PMP for individuals with eating disorders are further supported. There is a pressing need for high quality, co-produced research, utilising a mixture of designs and fidelity to core peer work principles, to inform further implementation of peer work into eating disorder policy and practice.

PurposeWe aimed to examine the participants’ satisfaction and evaluation of the program’s appropriateness, outcomes and benefits from participants’ perspectives and gather suggestions from students to improve peer mentor programs.MethodsFrom 2016 to 2018, 67 mentees and mentors participated in the peer mentoring program. All program participants were asked to participate in the survey, and the respondents were invited to focus group interview (FGI). Quantitative data was collected from the survey questionnaire. Qualitative data was gathered from the open-end questions in the survey and supplemented from additional semi-structured FGIs. The interview data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.ResultsNineteen responded to the survey, and six participated in the further FGI. Qualitative data contained outcomes and mutual benefits, factors for mentoring success, negative experiences, and suggestions for improvement. Especially factors for mentoring success consisted of various methods of studying assistance, motivation, autonomy, responsibility, emotional support, and relational bonding as important topics concerning mentor-mentee experiences. The satisfaction scores about the program appropriateness, others’ attitudes, program implementation, ranged from 3.5 to 3.9 (5-point Likert scores) without significant difference between mentors and mentees. The only negative experience reported by a mentee was feeling the pressure. Specific guidelines on program implementation, pre-education for mentees, appropriate matching, and mentees’ clear purpose and spontaneity were suggested to improve the program.ConclusionParticipants were generally satisfied with the peer mentoring program, gaining academic and non-academic achievements, including emotional support and improved relationships. Furthermore, we expect that this program can be improved with participants’ suggestions in the future.

A university-based, student-run nursing organization improved cultural awareness, academic environment, and performance for members of the organization. The International Student Nursing Organization sponsored cultural events and a peer mentoring program. Members who participated in the peer mentoring program were randomly matched as mentors (seniors) or mentees (juniors); mentors were awarded service hours. Statistical data was tracked over two semesters for the first cohort of students. Mentors had a higher aggregate score on their comprehensive exit and nursing licensure exams when compared to their graduating class as a whole. A collegial and learning environment was created that promoted students' professional and leadership skills.