Cranley LA, Lo TKT, Weeks LE, Hoben M, Ginsburg LR, Doupe M, et al.
Implement Sci Commun. 2022 Nov 21;3(1):120.
BACKGROUND: The importance of reporting research evidence to stakeholders in ways that balance complexity and usability is well-documented. However, guidance for how to accomplish this is less clear. We describe a method of developing and visualising dimension-specific scores for organisational context (context rank method). We explore perspectives of leaders in long-term care nursing homes (NHs) on two methods for reporting organisational context data: context rank method and our traditionally presented binary method-more/less favourable context. METHODS: We used a multimethod design. First, we used survey data from 4065 healthcare aides on 290 care units from 91 NHs to calculate quartiles for each of the 10 Alberta Context Tool (ACT) dimension scores, aggregated at the care unit level based on the overall sample distribution of these scores. This ordinal variable was then summed across ACT scores. Context rank scores were assessed for associations with outcomes for NH staff and for quality of care (healthcare aides’ instrumental and conceptual research use, job satisfaction, rushed care, care left undone) using regression analyses. Second, we used a qualitative descriptive approach to elicit NH leaders’ perspectives on whether the methods were understandable, meaningful, relevant, and useful. With 16 leaders, we conducted focus groups between December 2017 and June 2018: one in Nova Scotia, one in Prince Edward Island, and one in Ontario, Canada. Data were analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: Composite scores generated using the context rank method had positive associations with healthcare aides’ instrumental research use (p < .0067) and conceptual research use and job satisfaction (p < .0001). Associations were negative between context rank summary scores and rushed care and care left undone (p < .0001). Overall, leaders indicated that data presented by both methods had value. They liked the binary method as a starting point but appreciated the greater level of detail in the context rank method. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend careful selection of either the binary or context rank method based on purpose and audience. If a simple, high-level overview is the goal, the binary method has value. If improvement is the goal, the context rank method will give leaders more actionable details.
Cassell, Jackie ; Regan, Martyn ; O’Moore, Éamonn ; Willner, Steve ; Huyton, Rita ; McMahon, Melissa ; Arora, Shona ; Watkins, John ; de Gruchy, Jeanelle.
Department Health and Social Services, Government UK, 1 December 2022.
This chapter reviews key public health interventions in UK care homes during this pandemic, first setting out an overview of the epidemiology of the pandemic in care homes as this is important context for interventions.
Frank, Lori, Thomas W. Concannon, Jordan M. Harrison, and Sarah Zelazny,
Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2022.
This report lays the groundwork for cultural change and a move toward inclusive policy decisionmaking in long-term care through a review of infection-control policy decisions and action items proposed in guided discussions with a diversity of stakeholders—long-term care residents, direct care staff, and consumer advocates to facility administrators, clinicians, researchers, and industry organizations. Transforming the culture of long-term care to elevate the needs of residents will require attention to facility leadership, along with steps to increase inclusiveness, transparency, and accountability in decisionmaking.
Axenhus M, Frederiksen KS, Zhou RZ, Waldemar G, Winblad B.
BMC Geriatr. 2022 Nov 19;22(1):878.
INTRODUCTION: Significant mortality amongst vulnerable populations, such as people living with dementia, might go undetected during pandemic conditions due to refocus of care efforts. There is an urgent need to fully evaluate the pandemic impact on mortality amongst people living with dementia in order to facilitate future healthcare reforms and prevent deaths. The purpose of this study was to determine whether there was any significant difference in mortality amongst people with dementia without COVID-19 during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to previous years. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in 5 databases. The relative risk ratio and confidence interval was used to estimate the change in mortality rates amongst people with dementia during the COVID-19 pandemic. The I(2) value was used to assess heterogeneity, publication bias, and sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Pooled analysis of 11 studies showed that mortality amongst people living with dementia was significantly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic for people with dementia without COVID-19. Mortality risk increased by 25% during the time period studied. Subgroup analysis was not performed due the low number of included studies. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that people with dementia had a significant increased mortality during the pandemic even if they did not have COVID-19. People with dementia should participate in efforts that reduce general social spread and pandemic impact on healthcare system such as vaccinations, mask mandates, and testing. These results have clinical implications as preventing direct COVID-19 infection is not enough to adequately protect people living with dementia from increased mortality. Measures to limit social spread of infections and help support patients should also be a focus for clinicians. Further research should focus on the identification of mechanisms and other explanations for increased mortality as well as contributing factors such as living in care homes and differences between countries with various pandemic strategies.
J Prim Care Community Health. 2022 Dec;13:21501319221138424.
PURPOSE: Effective communication is a key component to managing an event such as a global pandemic. In Canada, federal/provincial reports indicated that effective communication was a challenge in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to examine the communication strategies used within long term care facilities in the Canadian province of New Brunswick. METHODS: Online surveys were used to collect data from administrators, staff, and individuals with family members living in long-term care facilities. RESULTS: The findings show an overall satisfaction with the information received by staff and families, however the frequency and format in which information was communicated were inconsistent. All participants indicated that too much information and poor quality information was a challenge. The importance of digital platforms to provide COVID-19 information was consistently identified as a successful communication strategy. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study reveal that the quantity and quality of information provided during the pandemic created challenges for administrators, staff, and families. This is in line with reports from Canadian provincial/federal reports on COVID-19 and long-term care. Recommendations have been made that would benefit the long-term care sector, not only for pandemics, but for communication in general.
French C, Dowrick A, Fudge N, Pinnock H, Taylor SJC.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022 Nov 25;22(1):302.
BACKGROUND: Process evaluations aim to understand how complex interventions bring about outcomes by examining intervention mechanisms, implementation, and context. While much attention has been paid to the methodology of process evaluations in health research, the value of process evaluations has received less critical attention. We aimed to unpack how value is conceptualised in process evaluations by identifying and critically analysing 1) how process evaluations may create value and 2) what kind of value they may create. METHODS: We systematically searched for and identified published literature on process evaluation, including guidance, opinion pieces, primary research, reviews, and discussion of methodological and practical issues. We conducted a critical interpretive synthesis and developed a practical planning framework. RESULTS: We identified and included 147 literature items. From these we determined three ways in which process evaluations may create value or negative consequences: 1) through the socio-technical processes of ‘doing’ the process evaluation, 2) through the features/qualities of process evaluation knowledge, and 3) through using process evaluation knowledge. We identified 15 value themes. We also found that value varies according to the characteristics of individual process evaluations, and is subjective and context dependent. CONCLUSION: The concept of value in process evaluations is complex and multi-faceted. Stakeholders in different contexts may have very different expectations of process evaluations and the value that can and should be obtained from them. We propose a planning framework to support an open and transparent process to plan and create value from process evaluations and negotiate trade-offs. This will support the development of joint solutions and, ultimately, generate more value from process evaluations to all.
Gadbois EA, Brazier JF, Meehan A, Rafat A, Rahman M, Grabowski DC, et al.
Health Serv Res. 2022 Nov 23.
OBJECTIVE: To characterize the experiences of nursing home administrators as they manage facilities across the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: We conducted 156 interviews, consisting of four repeated interviews with administrators from 40 nursing homes in eight health care markets across the country from July 2020 through December 2021. STUDY DESIGN: We subjected the interview transcripts to a rigorous qualitative analysis to identify overarching themes using a modified grounded theory approach to applied thematic analysis. DATA COLLECTION METHODS: In-depth, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted virtually or by phone, and audio-recorded, with participants’ consent. Audio recordings were transcribed. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Interviews with nursing home administrators revealed a number of important cross-cutting themes. In interviewing each facility’s administrator four times over the course of the pandemic, we heard perspectives regarding the stages of the pandemic, and how they varied by the facility and changed over time. We also heard how policies implemented by federal, state, and local governments to respond to COVID-19 were frequently changing, confusing, and conflicting. Administrators described the effect of COVID-19 and efforts to mitigate it on residents, including how restrictions on activities, communal dining, and visitation resulted in cognitive decline, depression, and weight loss. Administrators also discussed the impact of COVID-19 on staff and staffing levels, reporting widespread challenges in keeping facilities staffed as well as strategies used to hire and retain staff. Administrators described concerns for the sustainability of the nursing home industry resulting from the substantial costs and pressures associated with responding to COVID-19, the reductions in revenue, and the negative impact of how nursing homes appeared in the media. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from our research reflect nursing home administrator perspectives regarding challenges operating during COVID-19 and have substantial implications for policy and practice.
Gussin GM, Singh RD, Nguyen KP, Huang SS.
Am J Infect Control. 2022 Nov 17;S0196-6553(22)00788-X.
We hosted a confidential helpline to address concerns about COVID-19 prevention among staff in 12 nursing homes in Orange County, California. We fielded 301 inquiries from April 2021-April 2022, most commonly involving questions about vaccines (40%), nursing home COVID-19 prevention (28%), SARS-CoV-2 variants (18%), symptom reporting (10%), and home and community COVID-19 prevention (5%). During COVID-19 surges, staff dominantly expressed fear, anger, and exhaustion. During nadirs, sentiment shifted towards optimism and acceptance.
Garnett A, Connelly D, Yous ML, Hung L, Snobelen N, Hay M, et al.
JMIR Nurs. 2022 Nov 25.
BACKGROUND: Worldwide, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in profound loss of life among older adults living in long-term care (LTC) homes. As a pandemic response, LTC homes enforced infection control processes including isolating older adults in their rooms, cancelling therapeutic programs, and restricting family member visits. Social isolation negatively impacts older adults in LTC, which may result in increased rates of anxiety, depression, physical and cognitive decline, disorientation, fear, apathy, and premature death. Isolation of older adults can also cause an increase in responsive behaviours (e.g., yelling, hitting, calling out) to express frustration, fear, restricted movement and boredom. To respond to the challenges in LTC and support frontline staff, older adults and family members, a novel Registered Practical Nurse (RPN)-led delivery of the PIECESTM approach for addressing responsive behaviours among older adults with dementia using virtual training/mentoring was implemented in Canadian LTC homes. PIECESTM employs a person and family/care partner-centred, collaborative team-based approach to provide education and capacity building for nurses, engages families as active participants in care, and embeds evidence-informed practices to provide person- and family-centered care to older adults with complex needs including dementia. OBJECTIVE: To describe experiences of LTC staff, family/care partners, and older adult research partners with implementing a novel RPN-led virtual adaptation of the PIECES care planning approach for responsive behaviors in two Canadian long-term care homes during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Using a qualitative descriptive design, two focus groups were held with three to four staff members (e.g., RPNs, managers) per LTC home in Ontario. A third was held with three PIECES mentors. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with RPN champions, family/care partners, and older adult research partners. Research team meeting notes provided an additional source of data. Content analysis was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 22 participants took part in a focus group (n=11) or an in-depth individual interview (n=11). Participant experiences suggest that implementation of RPN-led virtual PIECES fostered individualized care, included family as partners in care, increased interdisciplinary collaboration and improved staff practices. However, virtual PIECES, as delivered, lacked opportunities for family member feedback on older adult outcomes. Implementation facilitators included the provision of mentorship and leadership at all levels of implementation, and suitable technological infrastructure. Barriers were related to availability and use of virtual communication technology (family members) and older adults became upset due to lack of comprehension during virtual care conferences. CONCLUSIONS: Findings give promising support to adopting virtual PIECES – a team approach to gather valuable family input and engagement to address residents’ unmet needs and responsive behaviours in LTC. Future research should investigate a hybridized communication format to foster sustainable person and family-centered care planning practices to include active collaboration of families in individualized care plans. CLINICALTRIAL: Not applicable.
Hull L, Boulton R, Jones F, Boaz A, Sevdalis N.
Transl Behav Med. 2022 Nov 21;12(11):1049–64.
The pragmatic (i.e., practical) quality of quantitative implementation measures has received increased attention in the implementation science literature in recent years. Implementation measures that are judged to be pragmatic by implementation stakeholders are thought to be more likely to be applied in research and practice. Despite the need for pragmatic implementation measures, ambiguity and uncertainty regarding what constitutes a pragmatic measure remains. This study sought to identify and critically appraise the published literature to understand (i) how pragmatism is defined as a measurement construct/quality of implementation determinants and outcome instruments; (ii) how pragmatic qualities of instruments are evaluated; (iii) identify key gaps and limitations of the current evidence-base and (iv) identify recommendations for future research. We conducted a scoping review of the literature also employing methods of critical review. PubMed and PsycINFO databases, using the OVID interface, were searched for relevant articles published between January 2010 and September 2020. Articles that contained a definition and/or described characteristics of “pragmatism” as a measurement construct of quantitative implementation outcomes (as defined by Proctor’s Implementation Outcomes taxonomy) and/or implementation determinants were eligible for inclusion. Nine articles met inclusion criteria. A degree of overlap in definitions and terms used to describe the pragmatic qualities of quantitative implementation determinant and outcome instruments were found. The most frequently cited descriptors of pragmatism were “not burdensome”, “brief”, “reliable”, “valid” and “sensitive to change”. 3 of the 9 included articles involved international implementation stakeholders in defining and conceptualizing pragmatism and employed specific methods to do so, including a systematic literature review, stakeholder interviews, concept mapping, and a Delphi process. All other articles defined pragmatism, with or without citing relevant literature. One article objectively assessed the pragmatic qualities, above and beyond the psychometric qualities, of implementation measures, using the Psychometric and Pragmatic Evidence Rating Scale (PAPERS). The evidence base within the implementation instrumentation literature on what pragmatism is and how it might be assessed is limited. Some of the research identified in the review provides a strong foundation to build upon, by testing its applicability in other settings (including healthcare areas and countries) and among a more diverse group of stakeholders. We discuss directions for further development of the concept of pragmatism relating to the measurement of implementation determinants and outcomes.
Nauenberg E, Ng C, Zhu Q.
J Popul Ageing. 2022 Nov 5;1–15.
To examine COVID-19 mortality demographics to determine if there will be any substantive shifts in population forecasts that will impact health and long-term care planning for seniors in both countries. Demographic data from Statistics Canada and the U.S. Census Bureau to 2060 are adjusted for COVID-19 age-group-specific mortality and then projected forward in five-year increments. These projections are then annualized using a linear imputation between each projected value. Consideration is given to the seniors 65 + , 75 + and 85 + as well as dependency ratios of each age category. Forecasts suggest that the proportion of seniors in the population will roughly plateau in 2035 at approximately 21% (U.S.) and 24% (Canada)-with another uptick observed beginning in 2050 for those aged 75 + . Adjustments due to the pandemic have had little impact on these projections suggesting that-unless there is a major shift in the demographics of pandemic-related mortality-the resource planning implications will be largely inconsequential. Investments in resources to serve seniors need not be done with the intention to repurpose these assets before they are fully depleted. While the demonstrated demographic plateau is likely to hold steady, there is uncertainty around the expected rate of decline in the health of seniors. Depending on this trajectory, community-level social supports could play a large role in lengthening the duration of senior health and independence.
Schmachtenberg T, Monsees J, Thyrian JR.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Nov 18;22(1):1372.
BACKGROUND: Dementia is a disease that impacts people with dementia, their families, and the healthcare system. In 2018, the number of people with dementia in the EU, the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), and the UK was estimated to be 9.1 million. National dementia strategies and publications by organisations such as Alzheimer Europe outline how dementia-specific care should be designed. This study aims to provide insights into existing formal care structures, models of good practise, and gaps in dementia-specific care for people with dementia in 17 European countries. METHODS: The research is based on guided interviews with country-specific care experts. A mixed-methods approach with a combination of open and closed questions was used. All interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim based on the transcription rules of Kuckarts (2010). For data evaluation, the qualitative content analysis model of Mayring (2014) was used. RESULTS: In all 17 countries, efforts for dementia-friendly care and models of good care practise exist. However, there are large differences between European countries regarding the spread of dementia-specific services. In nine countries (Bulgaria, Finland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, the UK), there are already nationwide structures, while in five countries (Belgium, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Romania), services are only available in certain regions. In three countries (Austria, Denmark, Germany) dementia-specific outpatient services are widespread nationwide, whereas inpatient services are not. Simultaneously, in all countries, areas with major care gaps exist. Several European states have an urgent need for action concerning the expansion of the provision of dementia-specific services, the reduction of regional differences regarding the provision of care, the elimination of barriers to access to care, the dementia-friendliness of services, and the participation of people with dementia and their relatives in care and research. CONCLUSIONS: To reduce the existing structural inequalities in care between and within European countries, and to establish quality-related minimum standards in the care of people with dementia, transnational concepts are needed. The EU, in cooperation with care planners, research institutions, care providers, and patient organisations, should develop European care guidelines or dementia plans that contain concrete measures, schedules, and budgets.
Sibley KM, Khan M, Banner D, Driedger SM, Gainforth HL, Graham ID, et al.
PLoS One. 2022;17(11):e0276586.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There has been growing emphasis on increasing impacts of academic health research by integrating research findings in healthcare. The concept of knowledge translation (KT) has been widely adopted in Canada to guide this work, although lack of recognition in tenure and promotion (T&P) structures have been identified as barrier to researchers undertaking KT. Our objective was to explore how KT is considered in institutional T&P documentation in Canadian academic health sciences. METHODS: We conducted content analysis of T&P documents acquired from 19 purposively sampled research-intensive or largest regional Canadian institutions in 2020-2021. We coded text for four components of KT (synthesis, dissemination, exchange, application). We identified clusters of related groups of documents interpreted together within the same institution. We summarized manifest KT content with descriptive statistics and identified latent categories related to how KT is considered in T&P documentation. RESULTS: We acquired 89 unique documents from 17 institutions that formed 48 document clusters. Most of the 1057 text segments were categorized as dissemination (n = 851, 81%), which was included in 47 document clusters (98%). 15 document clusters (31%) included all four KT categories, while one (2%) did not have any KT categories identified. We identified two latent categories: primarily implicit recognition of KT; and an overall lack of clarity on KT. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis of T&P documents from primarily research-intensive Canadian universities showed a lack of formal recognition for a comprehensive approach to KT and emphasis on traditional dissemination. We recommend that institutions explicitly and comprehensively consider KT in T&P and align documentation and procedures to reflect these values.
van der Weide H, Lovink MH, Luijkx KG, Gerritsen DL.
Int J Nurs Stud. 2022 Oct 24;137:104382.
BACKGROUND: For people with dementia living in nursing homes, autonomy is important. However, they experience difficulty with being heard as an autonomous person, as well as with expressing their preferences and choices. The question is how to support their autonomy. OBJECTIVE: Despite extensive efforts to support autonomy in daily care for people with dementia living in nursing homes, we do not know exactly what works for whom, in which context, how and why. The objective of this realist review is to explore what is known in literature on autonomy support interventions for people with dementia in nursing homes. DESIGN: A rapid realist review of literature. REVIEW METHODS: To understand how autonomy is supported, a realist approach was applied that entailed identifying the research question, searching for information, performing a quality appraisal, extracting data, synthesizing the evidence and validating the findings with a panel of experts. Causal assumptions were derived from articles found in four bibliographic databases (PubMed, PsychInfo, Cochrane and CINAHL) leading to context (C)-mechanism (M)-outcome (O) configurations. RESULTS: Data extraction from the included articles ultimately resulted in sixteen CMO configurations on four themes: a. preferences and choice: interventions for supporting autonomy in nursing homes and their results, b. personal characteristics of residents and family: people with dementia and their family being individuals who have their own character, habits and behaviors, c. competent nursing staff each having their own level of knowledge, competence and need for support, and d. interaction and relationships in care situations: the persons involved are interrelated, continuously interacting in different triangles composed of residents, family members and nursing staff. CONCLUSION: The findings showed that results from interventions on autonomy in daily-care situations are likely to be just as related not only with the characteristics and competences of the people involved, but also to how they interact. Autonomy support interventions appear to be successful when the right context factors are considered.
Al-Adili L, Boström AM, Orrevall Y, Lang NR, Peersen C, Persson I, et al.
Scand J Caring Sci. 2022 Nov 3.
BACKGROUND: The documentation of goals and outcomes of nutrition care in Electronic Health Records is insufficient making further exploration of this of particular interest. Identifying common features in documentation practice among Scandinavian dietitians might provide information that can support improvement in this area. AIMS: To explore the associations between clinical dietitians’ self-reported documentation of patients’ goals and outcomes and demographic factors, self-reported implementation of the systematic framework the Nutrition Care Process 4th step (NCP) and its associated terminology, and factors associated with the workplace. METHODS: Data from a cross-sectional study based on a previously tested web-based survey (INIS) disseminated in 2017 to dietitians in Scandinavia (n = 494) was used. Respondents were recruited through e-mail lists, e-newsletters and social media groups for dietitians. Associations between countries regarding the reported documentation of goals and outcomes, implementation levels of the NCP 4th step, demographic information and factors associated with the workplace were measured through Chi-square test. Associations between dependent- and independent variables were measured through logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Clinically practicing dietitians (n = 347) working in Scandinavia, Sweden (n = 249), Norway (n = 60), Denmark (n = 38), who had completed dietetic education participated. The reported documentation of goals and outcomes from nutrition intervention was highly associated with the reported implementation of NCP 4th step terminology (OR = 5.26; p = 0.009, OR = 3.56; p = 0.003), support from the workplace (OR = 4.0, p < 0.001, OR = 8.89, p < 0.001) and area of practice (OR = 2.02, p = 0.017). Years since completed dietetic training and educational level did not have any significant associations with documentation practice regarding goals and outcomes. CONCLUSION: Findings highlight strong associations between the implementation of the NCP 4th step terminology and the documentation of goals and outcomes. Strategies to support dietitians in using standardized terminology and the development of tools for comprehensive documentation of evaluation of goals and outcome are required.
Ekerstad N, Cederholm T, Boström AM, De Geer L, Ekdahl A, Guidetti S, et al.
Lakartidningen. 2022 Nov 8;119:22040.
The term frailty denotes a multi-dimensional syndrome characterised by reduced physiological reserves and increased vulnerability. Frailty may be used as a marker of biological age, distinct from chronological age. There are several instruments for frailty assessment. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is probably the most commonly used in the acute care context. It is a 9-level scale, derived from the accumulated deficit model of frailty, which combines comorbidity, disability, and cognitive impairment. The CFS assessment is fast and easy to implement in daily clinical practice. The CFS is relevant for risk stratification, and may also be used as a screening instrument to identify frail patients suitable for further geriatric evaluation, i.e. a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA). By providing information on long-term prognosis, it may improve informed decision-making on an individual basis.
Chan RJ, Knowles R, Hunter S, Conroy T, Tieu M, Kitson A.
Semin Oncol Nurs. 2022 Nov 19;151363.
OBJECTIVES: Nurses, as the largest healthcare workforce, are well-positioned to apply knowledge translation. The role of nursing leadership in facilitating evidence-based practice has been extensively discussed in the literature, but this is not the case for knowledge translation. The objective of this study was to examine the potential role of nurse leaders in applying knowledge translation across health settings. DATA SOURCES: We reviewed the existing literature for evidence-based practice as best practice in clinical care; examined how a complex systems approach to knowledge translation may extend beyond evidence-based practice, and considered nursing leadership approaches including transformational leadership. CONCLUSION: In this discursive article, we discuss the differences between evidence-based practice and knowledge translation, highlight the promise of transformational leadership in facilitating knowledge translation through a complex systems lens, and argue for the importance of nurse leaders in facilitating and supporting complex knowledge translation across healthcare settings. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Although future research is needed to test our ideas, we argue that the advanced conceptual understanding generated in this article should inform a roadmap toward a future in which nurse leaders initiate, participate and advocate for complex knowledge translation across healthcare settings.
Humble RM, Scott SD, Dubé E, Olson J, MacDonald SE.
Vaccine 2022 Nov 24.
Background A decline in routine vaccination was reported by some countries early in the COVID-19 pandemic. In the context of the pandemic, determinants of routine childhood vaccination may have changed. Changes over time in parents’ perceptions of routine vaccines and intentions for their children during the pandemic have not been fully explored. Understanding changes provides opportunities to promote routine childhood vaccines and address factors that may compromise parents’ acceptance. Methods We conducted longitudinal analysis of two sequential national surveys during the pandemic (Dec 2020 and Oct/Nov 2021) to assess changes over time in Canadian parents’ perceptions of routine childhood vaccines, intentions to vaccinate, access for their children ≤17 years, and differences among sociodemographic characteristics. McNemar-Bowker tests were used to determine changes in parents’ responses collected at two time points. Results Of the 650 parents in the sample, 25.1% with a child ≤6 years and 20.5% with a child 7-17 years perceived that routine childhood vaccines were more important because of the pandemic. Between the two time points, parents’ confidence in the safety (72.8% to 80.2%, p<.001) and effectiveness (81.7% to 85.2%, p=.007) of routine vaccines increased, parents were more engaged in vaccine decision-making (73.4% to 79.8%, p=.006), and everyday stress preventing vaccination decreased (78.8% to 68.5%, p<.001). Acceptance of routine vaccines increased (82.9% to 86.5%, p=.021), but more parents were undecided about influenza vaccination (12.6% to 20.3%, p=.002). Compared to parents with 1 child, those with 2 children reported increased vaccination acceptance (82.6% to 87.4%, p=.024). Interpretation Under the spotlight of COVID-19, parents’ confidence in routine vaccines, engagement in decision-making, and vaccination acceptance increased. Vaccination providers should support parents’ decision-making as they navigate routine childhood vaccine uncertainties. Differences in parents’ acceptance of routine and influenza vaccines for their children highlight the need for targeted communication strategies for specific vaccines.