Eating Difficulties among Older Adults with Dementia in Long-Term Care Facilities: A Scoping Review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Jung D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8508293 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundCaring for older persons has become a global necessity to ensure functional ability and healthy ageing. It is of paramount importance that standards of care are monitored, especially for older persons who live in long term care facilities (LTCF). We, therefore, scoped and summarised evidence relating to standards and the quality of care for older persons in LTCFs in gerontological literature globally.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review using Askey and O'Malley's framework, including Levac et al. recommendations. PubMed, CINAHL, Health Sources, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched with no date limitation up to May 2020 using keywords, Boolean terms, and medical subject headings. We also consulted the World Health Organization website and the reference list of included articles for evidence sources. This review also included peer-reviewed publications and grey literature in English that focused on standards and quality of care for older residents in LTCFs. Two reviewers independently screened the title, abstract, and full-text of evidence sources screening stages and performed the data extraction. Thematic content analysis was used, and a summary of the findings are reported narratively.ResultsSixteen evidence sources published from 1989 to 2017 met this study's eligibility criteria out of 73,845 citations obtained from the broader search. The majority of the studies were conducted in the USA 56% (9/16), and others were from Canada, Hong Kong, Ireland, Norway, Israel, Japan, and France. The included studies presented evidence on the effectiveness of prompted voiding intervention for urinary incontinence in LTCFs (37.5%), the efficacy of professional support to LTCF staff (18.8%), and the prevention-effectiveness of a pressure ulcer programme in LTCFs (6.3%). Others presented evidence on regulation and quality of care (12.5%); nursing documentation and quality of care (6.3%); medical, nursing, and psychosocial standards on the quality of care (6.3%); medication safety using the Beer criteria (6.3%); and the quality of morning care provision (6.3%).ConclusionThis study suggests most studies relating to standards and quality of care in LTCFs focus on effectiveness of interventions, few on people-centredness and safety, and are mainly conducted in European countries and the United States of America. Future studies on people-centerdness, safety, and geographical settings with limited or no evidence are recommended.
| S-EPMC8933989 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDigital technologies were implemented to address the disruption of long-term care facility residents' socialization needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. A literature review regarding this topic is needed to inform public policy, facility managers, family caregivers, and nurses and allied health professionals involved in mediating the use of digital devices for residents' social ties.ObjectiveOur study outlines key concepts, methodologies, results, issues, and gaps in articles published during pandemic-related visitation restrictions.MethodsFollowing the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) protocol, a scoping review was conducted by searching 3 database aggregator platforms (EBSCO, ProQuest, and PubMed) for studies published in peer-reviewed journals from early 2020 to the end of June 2021, when the most stringent restrictions were in place. We included qualitative and quantitative studies, reviews, commentaries, viewpoints, and letters to the editors in French or English focusing on digital technologies aiming to support the social contact of residents in long-term care facilities during pandemic-related visitation restrictions.ResultsAmong 763 screened articles, 29 met our selection criteria. For each study, we characterized the (1) authors, title, and date of the publication; (2) country of the first author; (3) research fields; (4) article type; and (5) type of technology mentioned. The analysis distinguished 3 main themes emerging from the literature: (1) impact and expectations of remote social contact on the physical and mental health and well-being of the residents (n=12), (2) with whom or what the social contact took place (n=17), and (3) limitations and barriers to significant social contact related to digital technologies (n=14). The results first underlined the highly positive impact expected by the authors of the digital technologies on health and quality of life of residents of long-term care facilities. Second, they highlighted the plurality of ties to consider, since social contact takes place not only with family caregivers to maintain contact but also for other purposes (end-of-life videoconferences) and with other types of contact (eg, with staff and robots). Third, they exposed the limitations and barriers to significant contact using digital technologies and outlined the required conditions to enable them.ConclusionsThe review demonstrated the opportunities and risks outlined by the literature about the implementation of digital technologies to support remote social contact. It showed the plurality of ties to consider and revealed the need to evaluate the positive impact of remote contact from the residents' perspectives. Therefore, to go beyond the risk of digital solutionism, there is a need for studies considering the holistic impact on health regarding the implementation of digital technologies, including the meaning residents give to interpersonal exchanges and the organizational constraints.Trial registrationOSF Registries osf.io/yhpx3; https://osf.io/yhpx3.
| S-EPMC9924058 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This scoping review aimed to explore the characteristics, strengths, and gaps in research conducted in Brazilian long-term care facilities (LTCFs) for older adults. Electronic searches investigating the residents (≥60 years old), their families, and the LTCF workforce in Brazil were conducted in Medline, EMBASE, LILACS, and Google Scholar, within the timescale of 1999 to 2018, limited to English, Portuguese, or Spanish. The reference lists were hand searched for additional papers. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used for critical appraisal of evidence. Data were reported descriptively considering the study design, using content analysis: 327 studies were included (n = 159 quantitative non-randomized, n = 82 quantitative descriptive, n = 67 qualitative, n = 11 mixed methods, n = 6 randomized controlled trials, and n = 2 translation of assessment tools). Regardless of the study design, most were conducted in a single LTCF (45.8%), in urban locations (84.3%), and in non-profit settings (38.7%). The randomized trials and descriptive studies presented the lowest methodological quality based on the MMAT. This is the first review to provide an overview of research on LTCFs for older people in Brazil. It illustrates an excess of small-scale, predominantly qualitative papers, many of which are reported in ways that do not allow the quality of the work to be assured.
| S-EPMC7915754 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To describe Chinese older adults' willingness to enter long-term care facilities and to examine individual factors associated with the willingness of using this growing model of long-term care in China. METHODS:A cross-sectional study involving a random sample of 670 adults aged 60+ in the Hezuo community in Chengdu, China in 2016. Respondents were interviewed by trained staff on socio-demographics, health status, quality of life, social support, and willingness to enter long-term care facilities. RESULTS:Only 11.9% of the respondents were willing to enter long-term care facilities for meeting their medical and social service needs. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that willingness to enter long-term care facilities was associated with higher household income (OR = 4.55, 95% CI:1.72-12.00), insurance of Urban Resident Basic Medical Insurance (OR = 4.80, 95% CI:1.17-19.67) and unemployment (OR = 0.48, 95% CI:0.24-0.99). Among those who were willing to enter long-term care facilities, an overwhelming majority (81.2%) would prefer going to a facility within 30-minute walking distance from their current residence, 82.5% indicated the need of nursing care, and 90.0% expected a partnership between the long-term care facility and a large hospital. CONCLUSIONS:A minority of older Chinese were willing to receive long-term care delivered at a facility within walking distance from their current residence. Recent policy aimed at increasing the supply of long-term care facilities may not be consistent with consumer preference for home and community-based care. Balancing investment between home and community-based care, and establishing long-term care insurance remain the top priorities for long-term care research and policy development in China.
| S-EPMC6095533 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThere is a growing demand for long-term care services for older adults that embrace a model of care centred on individual recipients of care. In long-term care, models of person, resident and relationship-centred care have been developed and implemented to promote independence, decision making and choices of residents. Although the concepts of centredness have been readily adopted in these environments, what constitutes centredness is often vague and lacks conceptual clarity and definition. The research questions guiding this scoping review are: (1) What are the defining attributes, conceptual boundaries and theoretical underpinnings of each centredness term in long-term care? (2) For what purposes have centredness directed models of care been used in this context? (3) What types of study designs have been used to examine centredness in this context? (4) What outcomes related to centredness have been reported or evaluated and how were they measured in long-term care?Methods and analysisThis review uses the methodological framework for conducting a scoping review by Arksey and O'Malley. The search strategy will be applied to nine bibliographic and citation databases, Google Scholar and the grey literature. Study selection will occur in a two-step process. First, the titles and abstracts of all search results will be screened by individual reviewers. Second, a full-text review will be conducted by a pair of reviewers. To be included articles must (1) define centredness in the context of long-term care; (2) describe the defining features of centredness; (3) explore the theoretical underpinnings of centredness; (4) outline outcomes of centredness or (5) use outcome measures related to centredness. Data will be extracted from included studies and analysed using thematic analysis as described by Braun and Clark.Ethics and disseminationResearch ethics approval is not required for this scoping review. Dissemination strategies will follow a targeted and tailored approach based on study findings.
| S-EPMC6089323 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Understanding the sedentary patterns can guide the design of strategies to engage older adults in physical activity. This scoping review aimed to synthesize available evidence on sedentary behaviors in care facilities. We searched PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science for studies published from inception through October 2020. Eighteen studies were included and reviewed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Data obtained were analyzed based on levels of care provided. Overall, daily sedentary time was higher among residents in high level care facilities (e.g., nursing homes) (11.6 h/day) than intermediate/mixed level care facilities (e.g., assisted living) (9.5 h/day). In intermediate/mixed level care facilities, television (TV) viewing was the most common sedentary activity (2.5-2.9 h/day; 26% of daily sedentary time), while napping was the most favorite sedentary activity (4.7 h/day; 36% of waking hours) in high level care facilities. Sex differences in daily patterns of sedentary behavior (sedentary time, uninterrupted bouts, and bout durations) were commonly observed in intermediate/mixed level care facilities, as exemplified by men being more sedentary by 0.7-1.1 h/day. In summary, this study highlights distinctive sedentary patterns among older adults residing in different levels of care facilities, addressing a pressing need for customized interventions to engage care facility residents in physical activity.
| S-EPMC7967434 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThis study aimed to explore the dignity and related factors among older adults in long-term care facilities.MethodsCross-sectional data were obtained from a sample of 253 Chinese older adults dwelling in long-term care facilities. Dignity among older adults was measured using the Dignity Scale, and its potential correlates were explored using multiple linear regressions.ResultsResults showed that the total score of the Dignity Scale is 151.95 ± 11.75. From high to low, the different factors of dignity among older adults in long-term care facilities were as follows: caring factors (4.83 ± 0.33), social factors (4.73 ± 0.41), psychological factors (4.66 ± 0.71), value factors (4.56 ± 0.53), autonomous factors (4.50 ± 0.57), and physical factors (4.38 ± 0.55). A higher score of the Dignity Scale was associated with higher economic status, fewer chronic diseases, less medication, better daily living ability and long-time lived in cities.ConclusionOlder adults with low economic status, more chronic diseases, and poor daily living ability, taking more medications, or the previous residence in rural areas seem to be most at low-level dignity in long-term care facilities and thus require more attention than their peers.
| S-EPMC8488850 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesBoth diabetes mellitus (DM) and osteoporosis are very common in older adults who reside in long-term care (LTC) facilities. Nevertheless, few studies have examined the relationship between diabetes and bone quality in this population. The purpose of this study is to determine if bone mineral density (BMD) or trabecular bone score (TBS) is a better measure of bone quality and skeletal health, in LTC residents with and without a history of DM. Methodology. In this longitudinal cohort study, we examined baseline BMD (lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck), TBS, DM, and functional status in 511 LTC residents who were enrolled in two ongoing randomized placebo-controlled osteoporosis clinical trials.ResultsOn average, participants were older than 80 years and majority were prefrail or frail. Women with DM had greater lumbar spine BMD (1.106 vs 1.017, adjusted difference ± standard error = 0.084 ± 0.023 g/cm2, p = 0.0003) and femoral neck BMD (0.695 vs 0.651, 0.027 ± 0.013 g/cm2, p = 0.0463), but lesser lumbar spine TBS (1.211 vs 1.266, -0.036 ± 0.016, p = 0.0299) compared to women without DM. Total hip BMD was also higher based on descriptive statistics (0.780 vs 0.734, p = 0.6255) in diabetic women, although the difference was not statistically significant. Men had similar but attenuated findings.ConclusionsAmong LTC residents, those with DM have greater BMD but lower bone quality measured by TBS. TBS should be considered in assessing older patients with DM. However, further studies are required to confirm the findings with respect to fractures.
| S-EPMC9792231 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This scoping review mapped out the existing literature pertaining to health and social care personnel experiences during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and their work in a long-term care setting for older people. This review identified the gaps in the implications of health and social care personnel's own health and well-being during the pandemic as well as the ethical dilemmas inherent in providing care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors utilised the PRISMA checklist for undertaking scoping reviews. The Databases Medline, PsychINFO, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Web of Science and Google Scholar were searched for relevant articles in English that were published between March 28, 2020 and June 1, 2022. This time period was selected to focus specifically on the COVID-19 pandemic. In the context of this review, long-term care facilities were defined to include institutions such as nursing homes, skilled nursing facilities, retirement homes and residential care homes. The gaps identified were a paucity of research on the experiences of health and social care personnel in long-term care facilities, the impact on their mental health, and the wider challenges experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic is discussed. The findings of this scoping review indicate a need for adequate preparedness during a pandemic within the health and social care sector to protect health and social care personnel and the individuals they care for.
| S-EPMC9538825 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThis study aimed to develop quality indicators for the care of older adults with disabilities in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) based on Maslow's hierarchy of needs.MethodsThe draft of the quality indicators was drawn up based on a literature review and research group discussion. The quality indicators were finalized by two rounds of expert consultation (involving 15 experts) using the Delphi method. The Analytic Hierarchy Process was applied to calculate the indicators' weight.ResultsThe response rates of the two rounds of consultation were 100% and 93%, and the expert authority coefficients were 0.86 and 0.87. After two rounds of consultation, the expert opinion coordination coefficients of the first-, second- and third-level indicators were 0.42, 0.25, and 0.96, respectively (P < 0.05), and the variation coefficient was ≤0.25. The final quality indicators for the care of older adults with disabilities in LTCFs included 7 first-level, 19 second-level, and 107 third-level indicators.ConclusionThe quality indicators for the care of older adults with disabilities in LTCFs are reliable, scientific, comprehensive, and practical and specify the content of person-centered care needs. This can provide a reference for evaluating and improving care quality in LTCFs.
| S-EPMC9587388 | biostudies-literature