Dataset Information

Proposals for person-centred care in the COVID-19 era. Delphi study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In this COVID-19 era, we need to rethink the criteria used to measure the results of person-centred care strategies.

Objective

To identify priorities, and criteria that health services can use to pursue actually the goal of achieving person-centred care.

Design

Three-phase online qualitative study performed during May-July of 2020 using the Delphi technique.

Setting and participants

An online platform was used for a consensus meeting of 114 participants, including health planning experts, health-care institution managers, clinicians and patients.

Main outcome measures

Criteria and indicators for the achievement of person-centred care.

Main results

The first round began with 125 proposals and 11 dimensions. After the second round, 28 ideas reached a high level of consensus among the participants. Ultimately, the workgroup agreed on 20 criteria for goals in the implementation of person-centred care during the COVID-19 era and 21 related indicators to measure goal achievement.

Discussion

Nine dimensions and 28 priorities were identified. These priorities are also in accordance with the quadruple aim approach, which emphasizes the need for care for health-care professionals, without whom it is impossible to achieve a better quality of care.

Conclusions

Person-centred care continues to be a key objective. However, new metrics are needed to ensure its continued development during the restoration of public health services beyond the control of COVID-19.

Patient or public contribution

Twelve professionals and patient representatives participated voluntarily in the construction of the baseline questionnaire and in the selection of the criteria and indicators using an online platform for consensus meetings.

SUBMITTER: Mira JJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8013374 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFamily-centred care (FCC) is an approach to promote family and health care provider partnership. This has been incorporated into neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) worldwide. However, FCC in low resource health settings, such as Thailand, is challenging and further impacted by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).AimsTo evaluate FCC innovations to improve respect, collaboration and support in a Thai NICU.Study designA quasi-experimental study was conducted in an NICU in southern Thailand. Pre-implementation was prior to COVID-19, and parental and staff perceptions of FCC were measured via Perceptions of Family Centred Care-Parent (PFCC-P) and -Staff (PFCC-S) survey. The FCC innovations were developed by stakeholders based on the COVID-19 restrictions, pre-survey results, parents' and clinicians' interviews and integrative review, then implemented via a flowchart. Post-implementation evaluation was via repeated surveys. Comparisons were made pre-and post-implementation, with Mann-Whitney U-test statistics for parents and Wilcoxon's Rank Sum for staff.ResultsA total of 185 (85 pre; 100 post) parents and 20 (pre and post; paired group) health care professionals participated. Because of COVID-19, many planned interventions were unfeasible, however, other innovations achieved (e.g., structured telephone updates, information booklet revision). There was an increase in parents' perception of respect ([median] 2.50-3.50), collaboration (2.33-3.33) and support (2.60-3.60) domains and overall (2.50-3.43; p < .001; 95% CI: 2.93-3.11). Interdisciplinary professionals' perception of FCC did not significantly change pre-and post-implementation/COVID-19 pandemic for respect (3.00-2.92), collaboration (3.22-3.33), support (3.20-3.20) and overall (3.15-3.20; 95% CI: 3.10-3.25).ConclusionDespite the challenges of COVID-19 restricting NICU access, the provision of FCC was maintained and even improved.Relevance to clinical practiceFurther research is necessary to develop FCC practice innovations associated with communication, across diverse health care systems and resources.

Project description:BackgroundAged Care Assessment Teams are the assessment component of the Australian aged care system. Their purpose is to undertake needs-based assessments to determine an older person's eligibility for, and access to Commonwealth-funded aged care services. There are no measures that tell us if the aged care assessment service is of high quality from the perspective of the person being assessed. Quality measures have been developed and introduced in Australian residential aged care facilities. These however, have not considered the perspectives of those living in this setting. Quality measures for home care services have also been recommended. This research aims to address the gap in person-centred quality measures by asking current and future service users of aged care assessment services to vote on the importance of 24 person-centred quality indicators (PC-QIs), that were developed in a previous study using a modified Delphi method approach supported by engagement with a consumer led Advisory Board.MethodsThis mixed methods study used the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to reach consensus on a final set of PC-QIs. Twenty-five community-dwelling older people in Brisbane, Australia, voted on the importance of 24 PC-QIs using a five-point Likert scale. A consensus statement for PC-QI elimination was determined prior to participants voting. Voting was undertaken with participants individually either face-to-face or via telephone, in their homes. To capture any narrative provided by participants regarding each PC-QI, participant voting sessions were audio-recorded and subsequently transcribed verbatim. Quantitative data from participant votes for each PC-QI were calculated and statistically described by median, interquartile range, consensus met, percentile, percentile rank, rank order, median and standard deviation. PC-QIs were then assessed against the consensus statement for elimination and rank ordered according to importance to participants. Content analysis of qualitative data from audio transcriptions was conducted to determine the presence of certain words supporting participant votes for each PC-QI.ResultsNo PC-QIs were eliminated during voting. Variation existed among participants' ratings of importance for each PC-QI. Final quality domains, their respective title, quality indicator descriptor and supporting qualitative data are presented. Five PC-QIs had a median of five, no votes recorded below four, an interquartile range of zero, and a rank order score of one, two and four, out of a possible ten, indicating they were of highest importance to participants.ConclusionParticipants reached consensus on 24 evidence-based PC-QIs that represent measures of quality of aged care assessment services from the perspectives of current and future service users.

Project description:IntroductionMealtime is a critical daily activity to ensure nutrition, hydration, function and socialisation. Interactions between staff and residents during mealtimes are complex and dynamic processes including verbal and/or nonverbal communication that can be positive/neutral or challenging. This study examined characteristics of and relationships between person-centred and task-centred care and positive/neutral and challenging mealtime behaviours in persons with dementia.MethodsThis study was a secondary behavioural analyses of videotaped mealtime observations (n = 110) involving 42 unique staff-resident dyads (29 staff and 25 residents with dementia) in nine nursing homes. The refined Cue Utilization and Engagement in Dementia mealtime video-coding scheme was used to code videos during 2019-2020. Dependent variables representing resident mealtime behaviours included positive verbal behaviours, positive/neutral nonverbal behaviours, functional impairments (nonverbal) and resistive behaviours (verbal and nonverbal). Independent variables were staff person-centred and task-centred approaches (verbal and nonverbal). Relationships between resident mealtime behaviours and staff approaches were examined using bivariate analysis and logistic regression.ResultsStaff person-centred verbal approaches were associated with resident positive verbal behaviours (OR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.09-1.76), functional impairments (OR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.66-1.00) and resistive behaviours (OR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.18-2.31). Staff person-centred nonverbal approaches were associated with resident functional impairments (OR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.02-1.74). Staff task-centred approaches were not associated with resident positive/neutral or challenging mealtime behaviours.ConclusionThis study characterised staff approaches and resident behaviours during mealtime care and provided preliminary support on associations between staff person-centred approaches and resident positive and challenging behaviours. Person-centred mealtime care practice is recommended by focusing on support of common, challenging behaviours and reinforcement of positive behaviours with adequate consideration of individual needs and preferences.