Maria’s baby

What is the evidence for the activities of Namaste Care? A rapid assessment review

“…Twelve articles assessed as having medium to strong quality evidence were identified using the search term 'doll' (mean REA score = 19.5, strong). Despite some staff and family members viewing dolls as patronising or infantilising (Hubbard & Olsen, 2016;Braden & Gaspar, 2015;Shin, 2015;Hahn, 2015;Mitchell & Templeton, 2014;James, Mackenzie, & Mukaetova-Ladinska, 2006;Alander, Prescott, & James, 2015), all 12 articles agreed regarding the positive impact of offering dolls to care home residents with dementia, including: improved communication and social interaction (Ng, Ho, Koh, Tan, & Chan, 2017;Mitchell, McCormack, and McCance, 2016;Alander et al 2015;Shin, 2015;Bisiani & Angus, 2013;Cohen-Mansfield, Marx, Dakheel-Ali, Regier, and Thein, 2010); reduced anxiety (Alander et al 2015;Bisiani & Angus, 2013); and reduction in behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (Cantarella, Borella, Faggian, Navuzzi, & De Beni, 2018). Mitchell et al (2016) reported an improvement in eating, however, Cantarella et al (2018) did not.…”

“…Dolls also provided a tangible object to be cared for, offering companionship and a sense of connectedness and inclusion (Alander et al, 2015), and reducing loneliness (Bisiani & Angus, 2013). Helpful suggestions towards assuaging previously noted negative attitudes towards using dolls within this population were provided by Hubbard and Olsen (2016), Alander et al (2015) and Mitchell and Templeton (2014). The importance of providing the option of dolls to residents was also highlighted (Alander et al, 2015;Bisiani & Angus, 2013;James et al, 2006;Mitchell et al, 2016), as it is impossible to predict who will choose a doll on any given day.…”

“…The importance of providing the option of dolls to residents was also highlighted (Alander et al, 2015;Bisiani & Angus, 2013;James et al, 2006;Mitchell et al, 2016), as it is impossible to predict who will choose a doll on any given day. Two additional potential obstacles included the overpossessiveness of a doll (James et al, 2006;Mitchell et al, 2016), or confusion of a doll for a real baby (Hubbard & Olsen, 2016;James et al, 2006;Shin, 2015).…”