Dataset Information

COVID-19 preparedness in aged care: A qualitative study exploring residential aged care facility managers experiences planning for a pandemic.

ABSTRACT:

Aims and objectives

The study aims to understand the changing context of RACFs and the role of RACF managers in preparing to confront the COVID-19 pandemic and to provide insights into how the use of visual telehealth consultation might be incorporated to assist with managing whatever might arise.

Design

An interpretive descriptive study design was employed, and data were collected using semi-structured interviews conducted via telephone or videoconference. Purposive recruitment targeted clinical managers responsible for the COVID-19 response in RACFs.

Methods

RACF clinical managers were invited to discuss their responses to COVID-19 including the management of RACF and staff. Semi-structured interviews explored the COVID-19-related challenges, the response to these challenges and how telehealth might assist in overcoming some of these challenges. This study followed Thorne's (2008) three-stage process of interpretive description. The COREQ checklist was used in preparing this manuscript.

Results

Two main themes were identified. The first theme 'keeping people safe' was comprised of three subthemes; fear and uncertainty, managing the risks and retaining and recruiting staff. The second theme was 'keeping people connected', had two subthemes; being disconnected and isolated and embracing technology.

Conclusion

Findings from this study provide valuable insight into understanding the context and the challenges for RACFs and the staff as they attempt to keep residents safe and connected with healthcare providers and the outside world.

Relevance to clinical practice

Understanding the experiences of RACF managers in preparing to respond to the pandemic will better inform practice development in aged care in particular the use of telehealth and safe practices during COVID-19. Increased awareness of the challenges faced by RACFs during a pandemic provides policymakers with valuable insights for future planning of pandemic responses.

SUBMITTER: Sunner C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8447410 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Collaborative care treatment is widely recognized as an effective approach to improve the quality of mental healthcare through enhanced and structured collaboration between general practice and specialized psychiatry. However, studies indicate that the complexity of collaborative care treatment interventions challenge the implementation in real-life general practice settings. Four Danish Collaborative Care Models were launched in 2014 for patients with mild/moderate anxiety and depression. These involved collaboration between general practitioners, care managers and consultant psychiatrists. Taking a multi-practice bottom-up approach, this paper aims to explore the perceived barriers and enablers related to collaborative care for patients with mental health problems and to investigate the actual experiences with a Danish collaborative care model in a single-case study in order to identify enablers and barriers for successful implementation. METHODS:Combining interviews and observations of usual treatment practices, we conducted a multi-practice study among general practitioners who were not involved in the Danish collaborative care models to explore their perspectives on existing mental health treatment and to investigate (from a bottom-up approach) their perceptions of and need for collaborative care in mental health treatment. Additionally, by combining observations and qualitative interviews, we followed the implementation of a Danish collaborative care model in a single-case study to convey identified barriers and enablers of the collaborative care model. RESULTS:Experienced and perceived enablers of the Danish collaborative care model mainly consisted of a need for new treatment options to deal with mild/moderate anxiety and depression. The model was considered to meet the need for a free fast track to high-quality treatment. Experienced barriers included: poor adaptation of the model to the working conditions and needs in daily general practice, time consumption, unsustainable logistical set-up and unclear care manager role. General practitioners in the multi-practice study considered access to treatment and not collaboration with specialised psychiatry to be essential for this group of patients. CONCLUSIONS:The study calls for increased attention to implementation processes and better adaptation of collaborative care models to the clinical reality of general practice. Future interventions should address the treatment needs of specific patient populations and should involve relevant stakeholders in the design and implementation processes.

Project description:BackgroundA cloud-based mobile electronic prescribing and medication management system (ePMMS), in which prescribers' orders directly populate residential aged care facility (RACF) medication administration records (MARs) and are communicated electronically to the RACF's pharmacy, may create efficiencies and improve patient safety when compared to the paper-based and hybrid paper-electronic medication management systems used in most Australian RACFs. Little is known about general-practitioners' (GPs'), nurses' and pharmacists' acceptance of, or experiences with, ePMMS.ObjectivesTo explore the uptake of an ePMMS by GPs, and the experiences and perceptions of GPs, nurses and pharmacists, at a 90-bed RACF that tested a beta-version ePMMS.MethodsRetrospective audit to determine the proportion of medicines ordered by GPs via the ePMMS over a three-month period. Focus groups conducted three-to-four months after implementation: one with GPs (n=5), one with nurses (n=12); in-depth interview/survey of pharmacists (n=2). Qualitative data were analysed thematically.ResultsThree of seven GPs used the ePMMS to order medicines; 53/205(25.9%) medicines were ordered via the ePMMS by GPs. Two broad themes were identified: benefits of the ePMMS, and barriers/limitations. Benefits related to patient safety and workforce efficiency, and included GPs' ability to access and modify residents' MARs remotely, no need for nurses to fax orders to the pharmacy, and no need for pharmacy transcription of GPs' handwritten orders to create electronic MARs. Barriers and limitations related to inefficiency, low GP uptake and training/support, and included slower prescribing compared to written orders, the need for GP-signed paper copies of the MAR, lack of integration with GP clinic software, and low GP motivation to use the system, especially GPs with few patients at the RACF.ConclusionsGPs, nurses and pharmacists felt the ePMMS improved medication-safety and workforce-efficiency, however a number of barriers were identified that contributed to low GP-uptake and limited the benefits.

Project description:BackgroundThe provision of residential aged care is underpinned by information, and is reliant upon systems that adequately capture and effectively utilise and communicate this information. The aim of this study was to explicate and quantify the volume and method by which information is collected, exchanged within facilities and with external providers, and retrieved from facility information systems and hospitals.MethodsA survey of staff (n?=?119), including managers, health informatics officers (HIOs), quality improvement staff, registered nurses (RNs), enrolled nurses (ENs)/endorsed enrolled nurses (EENs) and assistants in nursing (AINs) was carried out in four residential aged care facilities in New South Wales and Victoria, Australia. Sites varied in size and displayed a range of information technology (IT) capabilities. The survey investigated how and by whom information is collected, retrieved and exchanged, and the frequency and amount of time devoted to these tasks. Descriptive analysis was performed using SPSS, and open responses to questions were coded into key themes.ResultsStaff completed a median of six forms each, taking a median of 30 min per shift. 68.8% of staff reported transferring information from paper to a computer system, which took a median of 30 min per shift. Handover and face-to-face communication was the most frequently used form of information exchange within facilities. There was a large amount of faxing and telephone communication between facility staff and General Practitioners and community pharmacists, with staff reporting sending a median of 2 faxes to pharmacy and 1.5 faxes to General Practitioners, and initiating 2 telephone calls to pharmacies and 1.5 calls to General Practitioners per shift. Only 38.5% of respondents reported that they always had information available at the point-of-care and only 35.4% of respondents reported that they always had access to hospital stay information of residents after hospital discharge.ConclusionsThis survey identified a high volume of information exchange activities, as well as inefficient procedures, such as the transfer of information from paper to computer systems and the reliance upon faxes for communication with external providers. These findings contribute to evidence for the need for interoperable IT systems to allow more efficient and reliable information exchange between facilities and external providers.