Dataset Information

Aged care residents' prioritization of care: A mixed-methods study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Eliciting residents' priorities for their care is fundamental to delivering person-centred care in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). Prioritization involves ordering different aspects of care in relation to one another by level of importance. By understanding residents' priorities, care can be tailored to residents' needs while considering practical limitations of RACFs.

Objectives

To investigate aged care residents' prioritization of care.

Design

A mixed-methods study comprising Q methodology and qualitative methods.

Setting and participants

Thirty-eight residents living in one of five Australian RACFs.

Method

Participants completed a card-sorting activity using Q methodology in which they ordered 34 aspects of care on a pre-defined grid by level of importance. Data were analysed using inverted factor analysis to identify factors representing shared viewpoints. Participants also completed a think-aloud task, demographic questionnaire, post-sorting interview and semi-structured interview. Inductive content analysis of qualitative data was conducted to interpret shared viewpoints and to identify influences on prioritization decision making.

Results

Four viewpoints on care prioritization were identified through Q methodology: Maintaining a sense of spirituality and self in residential care; information sharing and family involvement; self-reliance; and timely access to staff member support. Across the participant sample, residents prioritized being treated with respect, the management of medical conditions, and their independence. Inductive content analysis revealed four influences on prioritization decisions: level of dependency; dynamic needs; indifference; and availability of staff.

Conclusions

Recommendations for providing care that align with residents' priorities include establishing open communication channels with residents, supporting residents' independence and enforcing safer staffing ratios.

SUBMITTER: Ludlow K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8077118 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Residents of Residential Age Care Facilities (RACFs) have particularly high rates of Emergency Department (ED) visits, with up to 55% being potentially avoidable (e.g. not resulting in a hospital admission). This is concerning as ED visits by RACF residents are associated with negative outcomes including longer hospital stays, iatrogenic illness, complications and mortality. Limited English proficiency (LEP) has significant negative impacts on the healthcare quality and outcomes for older people but has not been studied as a factor in ED visits from RACFs. This study aimed to examine if RACF residents with LEP have a lower rate of hospital admission via the ED compared to non-LEP controls and identify any associated factors. We hypothesised that LEP-related communication difficulties would reduce the ability to manage minor health issues in the RACF, leading to a lower proportion of LEP ED transfers being admitted. We used a parallel mixed-methods design, comprising a quantitative matched cohort study of ED visit data from two Local Hospital Networks (LHNs) in South-East Melbourne, Australia and secondary thematic analysis of 25 interviews with LEP residents, family carers and staff from two RACFs in the same region. We found no differences in the proportion of hospital ED transfers that led to admission (LHN1, 87.1% LEP, 85.6% non-LEP controls, p = 0.57; LHN2, 76.0% LEP, 76.9% non-LEP controls, p = 0.41) and no direct qualitative evidence suggesting that resident LEP affected decisions to transfer residents to ED, despite communication difficulties being reported during the transfer process. These results may be due to the high level of family carer involvement in residents' care identified in the qualitative study. However, additional research using different measures of LEP is recommended to further explore a broader range of cultural and linguistic factors in both rates of ED presentations and the decision-making processes underpinning resident transfers to ED.

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:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Individuals receiving in-center hemodialysis experience a high symptom burden that detrimentally affects their quality of life. There are few evidence-based interventions for symptom relief in this population. To stimulate innovation in symptom management, data on patient symptom prioritization and treatment preferences are needed. We undertook this study to (1) identify patient-prioritized symptoms for the development of symptom relief therapies and (2) elicit preferences for treatments among individuals receiving hemodialysis. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS:We conducted a mixed methods study that included focus groups in Carrboro, North Carolina; Tucson, Arizona; and Seattle, Washington and a nationally distributed online survey. Focus group transcripts were analyzed for patterns, and the highest priority symptoms were determined on the basis of frequency and report severity. We used focus group findings to inform survey items. Focus group and survey results were crossvalidated and synthesized for final symptom prioritization. RESULTS:There were 32 participants across three focus groups and 87 survey respondents from 27 states in the United States. The physical symptoms of insomnia, fatigue, muscle cramping, and nausea/vomiting and the mood symptoms of anxiety and depressed mood were reported by participants in all focus groups. Among survey respondents, fatigue (94%), cramping (79%), and body aches (76%) were the most common physical symptoms, and feeling depressed (66%), worried (64%), and frustrated (63%) were the most common mood symptoms. The top-prioritized symptoms were consistent across focus group and survey participants and included the physical symptoms insomnia, fatigue, and cramping and the mood symptoms anxiety, depression, and frustration. Participants indicated that symptom frequency, duration, unpredictability, and social and financial effects factored most heavily into symptom prioritization. CONCLUSIONS:Patients prioritized the physical symptoms of insomnia, fatigue, and cramping and the mood symptoms of anxiety, depression, and frustration as the top symptoms for which to find new therapies.

Project description:BackgroundPoint-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) competence consists of image acquisition, image interpretation, and clinical integration. Limited data exist on POCUS usage patterns and clinical integration by emergency medicine (EM) residents. We sought to determine actual POCUS usage and clinical integration patterns by EM residents and to explore residents' perspectives on POCUS clinical integration.MethodsWe conducted an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study at a 4-year EM residency program. In phase 1, EM ultrasound (US) attendings observed PGY-4 EM residents' clinical integration of POCUS in real time while on shift in the emergency department (ED). EM US attendings evaluated residents on their intent to perform POCUS, actual POCUS usage, and competence per patient encounter. We used logistic regression to analyze these parameters. In phase 2, we conducted semi-structured interviews with the observed PGY-4 residents regarding POCUS usage and clinical integration in the ED. We analyzed qualitative data for themes.ResultsEmergency medicine US attendings observed 10 PGY-4 EM residents during 254 high-acuity patient encounters from December 2018 to March 2019. EM US attendings considered POCUS indicated for 26% (66/254) of patients, possibly indicated for 12% (30/254) and not indicated for 62% (158/254). Of the 66 patients for whom EM US attendings considered POCUS indicated, PGY-4s intended to perform POCUS for patient management 61% (40/66) of the time. PGY-4s subsequently incorporated POCUS into patient management 73% (48/66) of the time. EM US attendings considered PGY-4s entrustable to perform POCUS independently 81% (206/254) of the time. We did not find a statistically significant association between shift volume, shift type, or POCUS application, and resident intent to perform POCUS nor competence. Interviews identified three factors that influence PGY-4's POCUS clinical integration: motivations to use POCUS, barriers to utilization, and POCUS educational methods.ConclusionsThis mixed-methods study identified a significant gap in POCUS utilization and clinical integration by PGY-4 EM residents for clinically indicated cases identified by EM US attendings. As clinical integration is a cornerstone of POCUS competence, it is important to ensure that EM resident POCUS curricula emphasize training on clinical utilization and indications for POCUS while on shift in the ED.

Project description:Background:To better meet long-term care (LTC) residents' (patients in LTC) needs, nurse practitioners (NPs) were proposed as part of a quality improvement initiative. No research has been conducted in LTC in Québec Canada, where NP roles are new. We collected provider interviews, field notes and resident outcomes to identify how NPs in LTC influence care quality and inform the wider implementation of these roles in Québec. This paper reports on resident outcomes and field notes. Methods:Research Design: This mixed methods quality improvement study included a prospective cohort study in six LTC facilities in Québec. Participants: Data were collected from September 2015-August 2016. The cohort consisted of all residents (n?=?538) followed by the nurse practitioners. Nurse practitioner interventions (n?=?3798) related to medications, polypharmacy, falls, restraint use, transfers to acute care and pressure ulcers were monitored. Analysis: Bivariate analyses and survival analysis of occurrence of events over time were conducted. Content analysis was used for the qualitative data. Results:Nurse practitioners (n?=?6) worked half-time in LTC with an average caseload ranging from 42 to 80 residents. Sites developed either a shared care or a consultative model. The average age of residents was 82, and two thirds were women. The most common diagnosis on admission was dementia (62%, n?=?331). The number of interventions/resident (range: 2.2-16.3) depended on the care model. The average number of medications/resident decreased by 12% overall or 10% for each 30-day period over 12?months. The incidence of polypharmacy, falls, restraint use, and transfers to acute care decreased, and very few pressure ulcers were identified. Conclusions:The implementation of NPs in LTC in Québec can improve care quality for residents. Results show that the average number of medications per day per resident, the incidence of polypharmacy, falls, restraint use, and transfers to acute care all decreased during the study, suggesting that a wider implementation of NP roles in LTC is a useful strategy to improve resident care. Although additional studies are needed, the implementation of a consultative model should be favoured as our project provides preliminary evidence of the contributions of these new roles in LTC in Québec.