Dataset Information

Environment in institutional care settings as a promoting factor for older individuals' mobility: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Mobility is important for health and well-being; however, older individuals in institutional care settings are relatively sedentary. The environment has an increased influence on mobility in older age due to changes in individual functioning; thus, environmental mobility support solutions for this population are needed.

Objectives

The aim of this systematic review was to identify elements of the environment that have been used in the content and delivery of interventions to promote mobility and to assess the effects of these interventions on mobility outcomes.

Design

A systematic literature search was conducted using CINAHL and MEDLINE from the earliest date through 30 September 2020 for randomised controlled trials, quasi-experimental and pre-post design studies. Inclusion and critical appraisal of articles were conducted by two independent researchers. Data were extracted and synthesised.

Setting and participants

Studies were included if they had employed some element of the environment in the content and/or delivery of the intervention and had assessed mobility-related outcomes of older individuals in institutional long-term care settings providing full-time care.

Measures

Studies were included if they reported data on mobility-related outcomes including aspects of physical activity, physical function, life space and functional autonomy.

Results

Eight studies were included. Physical, social and symbolic elements of the environment were utilised in the interventions. Positive effects on mobility outcomes were reported in exercise interventions utilising environmental elements mostly as supportive components.

Conclusions and implications

Empirical evidence about effective mobility interventions employing elements of the environment as main intervention components is lacking. A serious dilemma exists about the need for older individuals' independence and mobile/active late life and the lack of support for such initiatives in long-term care. Given the emphasised relationship of the environment and mobility with age due to changes in functioning, environmental solutions require further examination.

SUBMITTER: Narsakka N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9300114 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPatient-centeredness is central to healthcare. Hospitals should address patients' unique needs to improve safety and quality. Patient engagement in healthcare, which may help prevent adverse events, can be approached as an independent patient safety practice (PSP) or as part of a multifactorial PSP.ObjectivesThis review examines how interventions encouraging this engagement have been implemented in controlled trials.MethodsWe searched Medline, CINAHL, Embase and Cochrane from 2000 to 2012 for English language studies in hospital settings with prospective controlled designs, addressing the effectiveness or implementation of patient/family engagement in PSPs. We separately reviewed interventions implemented as part of selected broader PSPs by way of example: hand hygiene, ventilator-associated pneumonia, rapid response systems and care transitions.ResultsSix articles met the inclusion criteria for effectiveness with a primary focus on patient engagement. We identified 12 studies implementing patient engagement as an aspect of selected broader PSPs. A number of studies relied on patients' possible function as a reporter of error to healthcare workers and patients as a source of reminders regarding safety behaviours, while others relied on direct activation of patients or families. Definitions of patient and family engagement were lacking, as well as evidence regarding the types of patients who might feel comfortable engaging with providers, and in what contexts.ConclusionsWhile patient engagement in safety is appealing, there is insufficient high-quality evidence informing real-world implementation. Further work should evaluate the effectiveness of interventions on patient and family engagement and clarify the added benefit of incorporating engagement in multifaceted approaches to improve patient safety endpoints. In addition, strategies to assess and overcome barriers to patients' willingness to actively engage in their care should be investigated.

Project description:BACKGROUND:It is well known that older adults are high users of the health care system. Older adults with chronic conditions receive care from multiple providers, across multiple settings, and this care is often unorganized and confusing. In 2005, Ontario established a model of inter-professional primary care (family health teams) with the aim of providing enhanced interdisciplinary primary care to patients. Primary care requires an in-depth understanding of the operations of primary care teams and their relationships with other community services. The aim of this study was to develop a deeper understanding of the current operations of two family health teams in Ontario, including their current processes for referrals, information sharing, and engagement of patients in decision-making. METHODS:Focus group and individual semi-structured interviews with health care providers were conducted. Purposeful sampling was used to ensure information was obtained from different professional perspectives. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Using NVivo 10, data were analyzed using line by line thematic analysis techniques. A cluster technique was then applied to group similar codes into themes. RESULTS:Three focus group interviews (involving 4-6 health care providers/focus group) and six individual interviews were conducted with health care providers from two primary care teams and surrounding community care organizations. Six key themes were identified: 1) challenges engaging older adults in decisions about their care; 2) who is responsible for coordinating the care? 3) fragmented information sharing between health care providers; 4) lack of standardized referral processes and follow-up; 5) identifying services in the community for older adults; and 6) caring for older adults in rural communities. CONCLUSIONS:The results of this study provide an in-depth understanding of the current context in which the primary care teams are currently operating. Improved primary care will require stronger processes of coordination, greater knowledge of and connections with other community services, and enhanced patient engagement processes. This information provides a helpful basis for implementing interventions in primary care.