Dataset Information

Development of a family caregiver needs-assessment scale for end-of-life care for senility at home (FADE).

ABSTRACT:

Aim

This study aimed to develop a "family caregiver needs-assessment scale for end-of-life care for senility at home" (FADE) and examine its reliability and validity.

Method

A draft item pool was developed based on a literature review, and simplified to 30 items in four domains. Next, the item pool was reviewed by four visiting nurses and four researchers and refined to 15 items. A cross-sectional study was then conducted using a self-reported questionnaire. Questionnaires were sent to 2703 visiting nurses. The survey questions included participants' basic demographic information, the importance of each item according to a modified scale, basic demographics for cases of death by senility at home, satisfaction with each item of the modified scale in an example case, and assessment of the case using the Japanese version of the Support Team Assessment Schedule (STAS-J). Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. Construct validity was confirmed using confirmatory factor analysis, and correlation between the new scale and the STAS-J was used to assess criterion-related validity.

Results

In total, 461 visiting nurses provided valid responses. The exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses identified 12 items from two factors: "Needs for adaptation to senility bereavement" and "Needs for essential skills in supporting a dignified death by senility." The final model showed appropriate index values: standardized root mean residual = 0.057, Tucker-Lewis index = 0.920, Akaike information criterion = 191.6, and Bayesian information criterion = 298.2. Cronbach's alpha for the entire scale was 0.908, and was above 0.840 for each factor. The correlation coefficient between STAS-J and the entire scale was 0.259-0.427 (p<0.001).

Conclusions

The FADE scale showed acceptable internal consistency and concurrent validity. The scale can help clarify issues and desires that present themselves at home related to adaptation to senility bereavement and essential skills in supporting a dignified death by senility. Addressing these issues and desires is expected to reduce caregivers' anxiety and burden, and means the older adults under their care may be respected and enabled to live with dignity and peace.

SUBMITTER: Saito M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6738926 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background/objectivesMedicare-certified home health agencies are required to offer family caregiver training, but little is known regarding the potential impact of this training on outcomes during home health care. We estimate the proportion of family caregivers assisting Medicare home health patients who have unmet training needs and examine whether these unmet training needs are associated with older adults' risk of acute care utilization during home health care.DesignObservational, nationally representative cohort study.SettingLinked National Health and Aging Trends Study, Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS), Medicare Provider of Services file, and Medicare claims data from 2011 to 2016.ParticipantsThousand two hundred seventeen (weighted n = 5,870,905) community-living Medicare beneficiaries who received home health care between 2011 and 2016.MeasurementsFamily caregivers' unmet training needs measured from OASIS and Medicare claims; home health patients' acute care utilization (including emergency department use and hospitalization) measured from OASIS.ResultsRates of unmet need for training varied by activity, from 8.2% of family caregivers assisting with household chores to 16.0% assisting with self-care tasks. After controlling for older adult and home health provider characteristics, older adults whose family caregivers had an unmet need for training with any caregiving activity were twice as likely to incur acute care utilization during their home health episode (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.01, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.20-3.38). This relationship held across specific caregiving activities including household chores (aOR: 1.98; 95% CI: 1.13-3.46), medication management (aOR: 2.50; 95% CI: 1.46-4.26), patient supervision (aOR: 2.92; 95% CI: 1.36-6.24), and self-care tasks (aOR: 3.11; 95% CI: 1.62-6.00).Conclusions and relevanceUnmet training needs among family caregivers are associated with greater likelihood of acute care utilization among Medicare beneficiaries receiving home health care. Identifying and addressing family caregivers' training needs may reduce older adults' risk of acute care utilization during home health care.

Project description:BackgroundThe policy in a number of countries is to provide people with a terminal illness the choice of dying at home. This policy is supported by surveys indicating that the general public and people with a terminal illness would prefer to receive end-of-life care at home. This is the fourth update of the original review.ObjectivesTo determine if providing home-based end-of-life care reduces the likelihood of dying in hospital and what effect this has on patients' symptoms, quality of life, health service costs, and caregivers, compared with inpatient hospital or hospice care.Search methodsWe searched the following databases until April 2015: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library), Ovid MEDLINE(R) (from 1950), EMBASE (from 1980), CINAHL (from 1982), and EconLit (from 1969). We checked the reference lists of potentially relevant articles identified and handsearched palliative care publications, clinical trials registries, and a database of systematic reviews for related trials (PDQ-Evidence 2015).Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials, interrupted time series, or controlled before and after studies evaluating the effectiveness of home-based end-of-life care with inpatient hospital or hospice care for people aged 18 years and older.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently extracted data and assessed study quality. We combined the published data for dichotomous outcomes using fixed-effect Mantel-Haenszel meta-analysis. When combining outcome data was not possible, we reported the results from individual studies.Main resultsWe included four trials in this review and did not identify new studies from the search in April 2015. Home-based end-of-life care increased the likelihood of dying at home compared with usual care (risk ratio (RR) 1.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14 to 1.55, P = 0.0002; Chi(2) = 1.72, df = 2, P = 0.42, I(2) = 0%; 3 trials; N = 652; high quality evidence). Admission to hospital while receiving home-based end-of-life care varied between trials, and this was reflected by a high level of statistical heterogeneity in this analysis (range RR 0.62 to RR 2.61; 4 trials; N = 823; moderate quality evidence). Home-based end-of-life care may slightly improve patient satisfaction at one-month follow-up and reduce it at six-month follow-up (2 trials; low quality evidence). The effect on caregivers is uncertain (2 trials; low quality evidence). The intervention may slightly reduce healthcare costs (2 trials, low quality evidence). No trial reported costs to patients and caregivers.Authors' conclusionsThe evidence included in this review supports the use of home-based end-of-life care programmes for increasing the number of people who will die at home, although the numbers of people admitted to hospital while receiving end-of-life care should be monitored. Future research should systematically assess the impact of home-based end-of-life care on caregivers.

Project description:Even though more than 25% of Americans die in nursing homes, end-of-life care has consistently been found to be less than adequate in this setting. Even for those residents on hospice, end-of-life care has been found to be problematic. This study had 2 research questions; (1) How do family members of hospice nursing home residents differ in their anxiety, depression, quality of life, social networks, perceptions of pain medication, and health compared with family members of community dwelling hospice patients? (2) What are family members' perceptions of and experiences with end-of-life care in the nursing home setting?This study is a secondary mixed methods analysis of interviews with family members of hospice nursing home residents and a comparative statistical analysis of standard outcome measures between family members of hospice patients in the nursing home and family members of hospice patients residing in the community.Outcome measures for family members of nursing home residents were compared (n = 176) with family members of community-dwelling hospice patients (n = 267). The family members of nursing home residents reported higher quality of life; however, levels of anxiety, depression, perceptions of pain medicine, and health were similar for hospice family members in the nursing home and in the community. Lending an understanding to the stress for hospice family members of nursing home residents, concerns were found with collaboration between the nursing home and the hospice, nursing home care that did not meet family expectations, communication problems, and resident care concerns including pain management. Some family members reported positive end-of-life care experiences in the nursing home setting.These interviews identify a multitude of barriers to quality end-of-life care in the nursing home setting, and demonstrate that support for family members is an essential part of quality end-of-life care for residents. This study suggests that nursing homes should embrace the opportunity to demonstrate the value of family participation in the care-planning process.

Project description:ObjectivesTo understand current practices, challenges, and opportunities for a systematic assessment of family caregivers' needs and risks in primary care.DesignQualitative study consisting of in-depth semi-structured interviews.SettingFour primary care practices located in urban and rural settings.ParticipantsPrimary care clinicians, staff, and administrators (N = 30), as well as older adult patients and family caregivers (N = 40), recruited using purposive and maximum variation sampling.MeasurementsCurrent experiences, challenges, and opportunities for integrating standardized caregiver assessment into primary care delivery. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed; transcripts were analyzed using the constant comparative method of data analysis.ResultsParticipating clinicians had been in practice for an average of 12.8 years (range = 1-36 y). Patients had a mean age of 84.0 years (standard deviation [SD] = 9.7); caregivers had a mean age of 67.0 years (SD = 9.3). There was wide variability in current practices for identifying caregivers' needs and risks, encompassing direct and indirect approaches, when such issues are considered. Participants posited that integrating standardized caregiver assessment into primary care delivery could help improve patient care, enhance clinician-caregiver communication, and validate caregivers' efforts. Barriers to assessment included insufficient time and reimbursement, liability concerns, lack of awareness of community resources, and concerns about patient autonomy. To facilitate future uptake of caregiver assessment, participants recommended brief self-administered assessment tools and post-screen discussions with practice staff.ConclusionIdentification of caregivers' needs and risks in primary care is highly variable. Integration of standardized caregiver assessment into practice requires coordinated changes to policy, revision of practice workflows, and an interdisciplinary approach to the development of appropriate assessment tools. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1262-1270, 2020.