ORCID Profile
0000-0003-1676-9853
Current Organisation
University of Nottingham
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 15-09-2020
Abstract: The care and support of older people residing in long-term care facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic has created new and unanticipated uncertainties for staff. In this short report, we present our analyses of the uncertainties of care home managers and staff expressed in a self-formed closed WhatsApp™ discussion group during the first stages of the pandemic in the UK. We categorised their wide-ranging questions to understand what information would address these uncertainties and provide support. We have been able to demonstrate that almost one-third of these uncertainties could have been tackled immediately through timely, responsive and unambiguous fact-based guidance. The other uncertainties require appraisal, synthesis and summary of existing evidence, commissioning or provision of a sector- informed research agenda for medium to long term. The questions represent wider internationally relevant care home pandemic-related uncertainties.
Publisher: MDPI AG
Date: 05-07-2023
DOI: 10.3390/JCM12134504
Abstract: While eHealth can help improve outcomes for older patients receiving geriatric rehabilitation, the implementation and integration of eHealth is often complex and time-consuming. To use eHealth effectively in geriatric rehabilitation, it is essential to understand the experiences and needs of healthcare professionals. In this international multicentre cross-sectional study, we used a web-based survey to explore the use, benefits, feasibility and usability of eHealth in geriatric rehabilitation settings, together with the needs of working healthcare professionals. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize quantitative findings. The survey was completed by 513 healthcare professionals from 16 countries. Over half had experience with eHealth, although very few (52 of 263 = 20%) integrated eHealth into daily practice. Important barriers to the use or implementation of eHealth included insufficient resources, lack of an organization-wide implementation strategy and lack of knowledge. Professionals felt that eHealth is more complex for patients than for themselves, and also expressed a need for reliable information concerning available eHealth interventions and their applications. While eHealth has clear benefits, important barriers hinder successful implementation and integration into healthcare. Tailored implementation strategies and reliable information on effective eHealth applications are needed to overcome these barriers.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 07-01-2022
DOI: 10.1186/S12877-021-02705-W
Abstract: Care homes provide long term care for older people. Countries with standardised approaches to residents’ assessment, care planning and review (known as minimum data sets (MDS)) use the aggregate data to guide resource allocation, monitor quality, and for research. Less is known about how an MDS affects how staff assess, provide and review residents’ everyday care. The review aimed to develop a theory-driven understanding of how care home staff can effectively implement and use MDS to plan and deliver care for residents. The realist review was organised according to RAMESES (Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: and Evolving Standards) guidelines. There were three overlapping stages: 1) defining the scope of the review and theory development on the use of minimum data set 2) testing and refining candidate programme theories through iterative literature searches and stakeholders’ consultations as well as discussion among the research team and 3) data synthesis from stages 1 and 2. The following databases were used MEDLINE via OVID, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), ASSIA [Applied Social Sciences Citation Index and Abstracts]) and sources of grey literature. Fifty-one papers informed the development of three key interlinked theoretical propositions: motivation (mandates and incentives for Minimum Data Set completion) frontline staff monitoring (when Minimum Data Set completion is built into the working practices of the care home) and embedded recording systems (Minimum Data Set recording system is integral to collecting residents’ data). By valuing the contributions of staff and building on existing ways of working, the uptake and use of an MDS could enable all staff to learn with and from each other about what is important for residents’ care Minimum Data Sets provides commissioners service providers and researchers with standardised information useful for commissioning planning and analysis. For it to be equally useful for care home staff it requires key activities that address the staff experiences of care, their work with others and the use of digital technology. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020171323.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 16-07-2016
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 25-06-2020
Abstract: Older people are disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has had a profound impact on research as well as clinical service delivery. This commentary identifies key challenges and opportunities in continuing to conduct research with and for older people, both during and after the current pandemic. It shares opinions from responders to an international survey, a range of academic authors and opinions from specialist societies. Priorities in COVID-19 research include its specific presentation in older people, consequences for physical, cognitive and psychological health, treatments and vaccines, rehabilitation, supporting care homes more effectively, the impact of social distancing, lockdown policies and system reconfiguration to provide best health and social care for older people. COVID-19 research needs to be inclusive, particularly involving older people living with frailty, cognitive impairment or multimorbidity, and those living in care homes. Non-COVID-19 related research for older people remains of critical importance and must not be neglected in the rush to study the pandemic. Profound changes are required in the way that we design and deliver research for older people in a world where movement and face-to-face contact are restricted, but we also highlight new opportunities such as the ability to collaborate more widely and to design and deliver research efficiently at scale and speed.
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 07-01-2019
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 11-2020
DOI: 10.1136/BMJOPEN-2020-040397
Abstract: Care homes provide nursing and social care for older people who can no longer live independently at home. In the UK, there is no consistent approach to how information about residents’ medical history, care needs and preferences are collected and shared. This limits opportunities to understand the care home population, have a systematic approach to assessment and documentation of care, identifiy care home residents at risk of deterioration and review care. Countries with standardised approaches to residents’ assessment, care planning and review (eg, minimum data sets (MDS)) use the data to understand the care home population, guide resource allocation, monitor services delivery and for research. The aim of this realist review is to develop a theory-driven understanding of how care home staff implement and use MDS to plan and deliver care of in idual residents. A realist review will be conducted in three research stages. Stage 1 will scope the literature and develop candidate programme theories of what ensures effective uptake and sustained implementation of an MDS. Stage2 will test and refine these theories through further iterative searches of the evidence from the literature to establish how effective uptake of an MDS can be achieved. Stage 3 will consult with relevant stakeholders to test or refine the programme theory (theories) of how an MDS works at the resident level of care for different stakeholders and in what circumstances. Data synthesis will use realist logic to align data from each eligible article with possible context–mechanism–outcome configurations or specific elements that answer the research questions. The University of Hertfordshire Ethics Committee has approved this study (HSK/SF/UH/04169). Findings will be disseminated through briefings with stakeholders, conference presentations, a national consultation on the use of an MDS in UK long-term care settings, publications in peer-reviewed journals and in print and social media publications accessible to residents, relatives and care home staff. CRD42020171323 this review protocol is registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews.
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 11-2018
DOI: 10.1136/BMJOPEN-2018-023287
Abstract: This protocol describes a study of a quality improvement collaborative (QIC) to support implementation and delivery of comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in UK care homes. The QIC will be formed of health and social care professionals working in and with care homes and will be supported by clinical, quality improvement and research specialists. QIC participants will receive quality improvement training using the Model for Improvement. An appreciative approach to working with care homes will be encouraged through facilitated shared learning events, quality improvement coaching and assistance with project evaluation. The QIC will be delivered across a range of partnering organisations which plan, deliver and evaluate health services for care home residents in four local areas of one geographical region. A realist evaluation framework will be used to develop a programme theory informing how QICs are thought to work, for whom and in what ways when used to implement and deliver CGA in care homes. Data collection will involve participant observations of the QIC over 18 months, and interviews/focus groups with QIC participants to iteratively define, refine, test or refute the programme theory. Two researchers will analyse field notes, and interview/focus group transcripts, coding data using inductive and deductive analysis. The key findings and linked programme theory will be summarised as context-mechanism-outcome configurations describing what needs to be in place to use QICs to implement service improvements in care homes. The study protocol was reviewed by the National Health Service Health Research Authority (London Bromley research ethics committee reference: 205840) and the University of Nottingham (reference: LT07092016) ethics committees. Both determined that the Proactive HEAlthcare of Older People in Care Homes study was a service and quality improvement initiative. Findings will be shared nationally and internationally through conference presentations, publication in peer-reviewed journals, a graphical illustration and a dissemination video.
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 24-06-2020
DOI: 10.1136/BMJ.M2463
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 02-2023
DOI: 10.1136/BMJOPEN-2023-071686
Abstract: Health and care data are routinely collected about care home residents in England, yet there is no way to collate these data to inform benchmarking and improvement. The Developing research resources And minimum data set for Care Homes’ Adoption and use study has developed a prototype minimum data set (MDS) for piloting. A mixed-methods longitudinal pilot study will be conducted in 60 care homes (approximately 960 residents) in 3 regions of England, using resident data from cloud-based digital care home records at two-time points. These will be linked to resident and care home level data held within routine National Health Service and social care data sets. Two rounds of focus groups with care home staff (n=8–10 per region) and additional interviews with external stakeholders (n=3 per region) will explore implementation and the perceived utility of the MDS. Data will be assessed for completeness and timeliness of completion. Descriptive statistics, including percentage floor and ceiling effects, will establish data quality. For validated scales, construct validity will be assessed by hypothesis testing and exploratory factor analysis will establish structural validity. Internal consistency will be established using Cronbach’s alpha. Longitudinal analysis of the pilot data will demonstrate the value of the MDS to each region. Qualitative data will be analysed inductively using thematic analysis to understand the complexities of implementing an MDS in care homes for older people. The study has received ethical approval from the London Queen’s Square Research Ethics Committee (22/LO/0250). Informed consent is required for participation. Findings will be disseminated to: academics working on data use and integration in social care, care sector organisations, policy makers and commissioners. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals. Partner NIHR Applied Research Collaborations, the National Care Forum and the British Geriatrics Society will disseminate policy briefs.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 05-2019
DOI: 10.1016/J.JAMDA.2019.01.123
Abstract: To support person-centered, residential long-term care internationally, a consortium of researchers in medicine, nursing, behavioral, and social sciences from 21 geographically and economically erse countries have launched the WE-THRIVE consortium to develop a common data infrastructure. WE-THRIVE aims to identify measurement domains that are internationally relevant, including in low-, middle-, and high-income countries, prioritize concepts to operationalize domains, and specify a set of data elements to measure concepts that can be used across studies for data sharing and comparisons. This article reports findings from consortium meetings at the 2016 meeting of the Gerontological Society of America and the 2017 meeting of the International Association of Gerontology and Geriatrics, to identify domains and prioritize concepts, following best practices to identify common data elements (CDEs) that were developed through the US National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Nursing Research's CDEs initiative. Four domains were identified, including organizational context, workforce and staffing, person-centered care, and care outcomes. Using a nominal group process, WE-THRIVE prioritized 21 concepts across the 4 domains. Several concepts showed similarity to existing measurement structures, whereas others differed. Conceptual similarity (convergence eg, concepts in the care outcomes domain of functional level and harm-free care) provides further support of the critical foundational work in LTC measurement endorsed and implemented by regulatory bodies. Different concepts ( ergence eg, concepts in the person-centered care domain of knowing the person and what matters most to the person) highlights current gaps in measurement efforts and is consistent with WE-THRIVE's focus on supporting resilience and thriving for residents, family, and staff. In alignment with the World Health Organization's call for comparative measurement work for health systems change, WE-THRIVE's work to date highlights the benefits of engaging with erse LTC researchers, including those in low-, middle-, and high-income countries, to develop a measurement infrastructure that integrates the aspirations of person-centered LTC.
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 13-05-2020
Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected care home residents internationally, with 19–72% of COVID-19 deaths occurring in care homes. COVID-19 presents atypically in care home residents and up to 56% of residents may test positive whilst pre-symptomatic. In this article, we provide a commentary on challenges and dilemmas identified in the response to COVID-19 for care homes and their residents. We highlight the low sensitivity of polymerase chain reaction testing and the difficulties this poses for blanket screening and isolation of residents. We discuss quarantine of residents and the potential harms associated with this. Personal protective equipment supply for care homes during the pandemic has been suboptimal and we suggest that better integration of procurement and supply is required. Advance care planning has been challenged by the pandemic and there is a need to for healthcare staff to provide support to care homes with this. Finally, we discuss measures to implement augmented care in care homes, including treatment with oxygen and subcutaneous fluids, and the frameworks which will be required if these are to be sustainable. All of these challenges must be met by healthcare, social care and government agencies if care home residents and staff are to be physically and psychologically supported during this time of crisis for care homes.
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 04-2019
DOI: 10.1136/BMJOPEN-2018-026921
Abstract: Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) may be a way to deliver optimal care for care home residents. We used realist review to develop a theory-driven account of how CGA works in care homes. Realist review. Care homes. The review had three stages: first, interviews with expert stakeholders and scoping of the literature to develop programme theories for CGA second, iterative searches with structured retrieval and extraction of the literature third, synthesis to refine the programme theory of how CGA works in care homes. We used the following databases: Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, PsychInfo, PubMed, Google Scholar, Greylit, Cochrane Library and Joanna Briggs Institute. 130 articles informed a programme theory which suggested CGA had three main components: structured comprehensive assessment, developing a care plan and working towards patient-centred goals. Each of these required engagement of a multidisciplinary team (MDT). Most evidence was available around assessment, with tension between structured assessment led by a single professional and less structured assessment involving multiple members of an MDT. Care planning needed to accommodate visiting clinicians and there was evidence that a core MDT often used care planning as a mechanism to seek external specialist support. Goal-setting processes were not always sufficiently patient-centred and did not always accommodate the views of care home staff. Studies reported improved outcomes from CGA affecting resident satisfaction, prescribing, healthcare resource use and objective measures of quality of care. The programme theory described here provides a framework for understanding how CGA could be effective in care homes. It will be of use to teams developing, implementing or auditing CGA in care homes. All three components are required to make CGA work—this may explain why attempts to implement CGA by interventions focused solely on assessment or care planning have failed in some long-term care settings. CRD42017062601.
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 10-2017
DOI: 10.1136/BMJOPEN-2017-017270
Abstract: Care home residents are relatively high users of healthcare resources and may have complex needs. Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) may benefit care home residents and improve efficiency of care delivery. This is an approach to care in which there is a thorough multidisciplinary assessment (physical and mental health, functioning and physical and social environments) and a care plan based on this assessment, usually delivered by a multidisciplinary team. The CGA process is known to improve outcomes for community-dwelling older people and those in receipt of hospital care, but less is known about its efficacy in care home residents. Realist review was selected as the most appropriate method to explore the complex nature of the care home setting and multidisciplinary delivery of care. The aim of the realist review is to identify and characterise a programme theory that underpins the CGA intervention. The realist review will extract data from research articles which describe the causal mechanisms through which the practice of CGA generates outcomes. The focus of the intervention is care homes, and the outcomes of interest are health-related quality of life and satisfaction with services for both residents and staff. Further outcomes may include appropriate use of National Health Service services and resources of older care home residents. The review will proceed through three stages: (1) identifying the candidate programme theories that underpin CGA through interviews with key stakeholders, systematic search of the peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed evidence, (2) identifying the evidence relevant to CGA in UK care homes and refining the programme theories through refining and iterating the systematic search, lateral searches and seeking further information from study authors and (3) analysis and synthesis of evidence, involving the testing of the programme theories. The PEACH project was identified as service development following submission to the UK Health Research Authority and subsequent review by the University of Nottingham Research Ethics Committee. The study protocols have been reviewed as part of good governance by the Nottinghamshire Healthcare Foundation Trust. We aim to publish this realist review in a peer-reviewed journal with international readership. We will disseminate findings to public and stakeholders using knowledge mobilisation techniques. Stakeholders will include the Quality Improvement Collaboratives within PEACH study. National networks, such as British Society of Gerontology and National Care Association will be approached for wider dissemination. The realist review has been registered on International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO 2017: CRD42017062601).
Publisher: MDPI AG
Date: 05-02-2020
Abstract: Organisational context is known to impact on the successful implementation of healthcare initiatives in care homes. We undertook a systematic mapping review to examine whether researchers have considered organisational context when planning, conducting, and reporting the implementation of healthcare innovations in care homes. Review data were mapped against the Alberta Context Tool, which was designed to assess organizational context in care homes. The review included 56 papers. No studies involved a systematic assessment of organisational context prior to implementation, but many provided post hoc explanations of how organisational context affected the success or otherwise of the innovation. Factors identified to explain a lack of success included poor senior staff engagement, non-alignment with care home culture, limited staff capacity to engage, and low levels of participation from health professionals such as general practitioners (GPs). Thirty-five stakeholders participated in workshops to discuss findings and develop questions for assessing care home readiness to participate in innovations. Ten questions were developed to initiate conversations between innovators and care home staff to support research and implementation. This framework can help researchers initiate discussions about health-related innovation. This will begin to address the gap between implementation theory and practice.
Publisher: Swansea University
Date: 15-12-2020
Abstract: UK care home residents are invisible in national datasets. The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed data failings that have hindered service development and research for years. Fundamental gaps, in terms of population and service demographics coupled with difficulties identifying the population in routine data are a significant limitation. These challenges are a key factor underpinning the failure to provide timely and responsive policy decisions to support care homes. In this commentary we propose changes that could address this data gap, priorities include: (1) Reliable identification of care home residents and their tenure (2) Common identifiers to facilitate linkage between data sources from different sectors (3) In idual-level, anonymised data inclusive of mortality irrespective of where death occurs (4) Investment in capacity for large-scale, anonymised linked data analysis within social care working in partnership with academics (5) Recognition of the need for collaborative working to use novel data sources, working to understand their meaning and ensure correct interpretation (6) Better integration of information governance, enabling safe access for legitimate analyses from all relevant sectors (7) A core national dataset for care homes developed in collaboration with key stakeholders to support integrated care delivery, service planning, commissioning, policy and research. Our suggestions are immediately actionable with political will and investment. We should seize this opportunity to capitalise on the spotlight the pandemic has thrown on the vulnerable populations living in care homes to invest in data-informed approaches to support care, evidence-based policy making and research.
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 16-02-2021
Abstract: Quality improvement collaboratives (QICs) bring together multidisciplinary teams in a structured process to improve care quality. How QICs can be used to support healthcare improvement in care homes is not fully understood. A realist evaluation to develop and test a programme theory of how QICs work to improve healthcare in care homes. A multiple case study design considered implementation across 4 sites and 29 care homes. Observations, interviews and focus groups captured contexts and mechanisms operating within QICs. Data analysis classified emerging themes using context-mechanism-outcome configurations to explain how NHS and care home staff work together to design and implement improvement. QICs will be able to implement and iterate improvements in care homes where they have a broad and easily understandable remit recruit staff with established partnership working between the NHS and care homes use strategies to build relationships and minimise hierarchy protect and pay for staff time enable staff to implement improvements aligned with existing work help members develop plans in manageable chunks through QI coaching encourage QIC members to recruit multidisciplinary support through existing networks facilitate meetings in care homes and use shared learning events to build multidisciplinary interventions stepwise. Teams did not use measurement for change, citing difficulties integrating this into pre-existing and QI-related workload. These findings outline what needs to be in place for health and social care staff to work together to effect change. Further research needs to consider ways to work alongside staff to incorporate measurement for change into QI.
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 04-07-2022
Abstract: Despite recent focus on improving health care in care homes, it is unclear what role general practitioners (GPs) should play. To provide evidence for future practice we set out to explore how GPs have been involved in such improvements. Realist review incorporated theory-driven literature searches and stakeholder interviews, supplemented by focussed searches on GP-led medication reviews and end-of-life care. Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library were searched. Grey literature was identified through internet searches and professional networks. Studies were included based upon relevance. Data were coded to develop and test contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes for improvements involving GPs. Evidence was synthesized from 30 articles. Programme theories described: (i) "negotiated working with GPs," where other professionals led improvement and GPs provided expertise and (ii) "GP involvement in national/regional improvement programmes." The expertise of GPs was vital to many improvement programmes, with their medical expertise or role as coordinators of primary care proving pivotal. GPs had limited training in quality improvement (QI) and care home improvement work had to be negotiated in the context of wider primary care commitments. GPs are central to QI in health care in care homes. Their contributions relate to their specialist expertise and recognition as leaders of primary care but are challenged by available time and resources to develop this role.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 05-2015
Publisher: National Institute for Health and Care Research
Date: 10-2021
DOI: 10.3310/HSDR09200
Abstract: Organising health-care services for residents living in care homes is an important area of development in the UK and elsewhere. Medical care is provided by general practitioners in the UK, and the unique arrangement of the NHS means that general practitioners are also gatekeepers to other health services. Despite recent focus on improving health care for residents, there is a lack of knowledge about the role of general practitioners. First, to review reports of research and quality improvement (or similar change management) in care homes to explore how general practitioners have been involved. Second, to develop programme theories explaining the role of general practitioners in improvement initiatives and outcomes. A realist review was selected to address the complexity of integration of general practice and care homes. Care homes for older people in the UK, including residential and nursing homes. The focus of the literature review was the general practitioner, along with care home staff and other members of multidisciplinary teams. Alongside the literature, we interviewed general practitioners and held consultations with a Context Expert Group, including a care home representative. The primary search did not specify interventions, but captured the range of interventions reported. Secondary searches focused on medication review and end-of-life care because these interventions have described general practitioner involvement. We sought to capture processes or indicators of good-quality care. Sources were academic databases [including MEDLINE, EMBASE™ (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycInfo ® (American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, USA), Web of Science™ (Clarivate Analytics, Philadelphia, PA, USA) and Cochrane Collaboration] and grey literature using Google Scholar (Google Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA). Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards (RAMESES) guidelines were followed, comprising literature scoping, interviews with general practitioners, iterative searches of academic databases and grey literature, and synthesis and development of overarching programme theories. Scoping indicated the distinctiveness of the health and care system in UK and, because quality improvement is context dependent, we decided to focus on UK studies because of potential problems in synthesising across erse systems. Searches identified 73 articles, of which 43 were excluded. To summarise analysis, programme theory 1 was ‘negotiated working with general practitioners’ where other members of the multidisciplinary team led initiatives and general practitioners provided support with the parts of improvement where their skills as primary care doctors were specifically required. Negotiation enabled matching of the erse ways of working of general practitioners with erse care home organisations. We found evidence that this could result in improvements in prescribing and end-of-life care for residents. Programme theory 2 included national or regional programmes that included clearly specified roles for general practitioners. This provided clarity of expectation, but the role that general practitioners actually played in delivery was not clear. One reviewer screened all search results, but two reviewers conducted selection and data extraction steps. If local quality improvement initiatives were flexible, then they could be used to negotiate to build a trusting relationship with general practitioners, with evidence from specific ex les, and this could improve prescribing and end-of-life care for residents. Larger improvement programmes aimed to define working patterns and build suitable capacity in care homes, but there was little evidence about the extent of local general practitioner involvement. Future work should describe the specific role, capacity and expertise of general practitioners, as well as the ersity of relationships between general practitioners and care homes. This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019137090. This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research Vol. 9, No. 20. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 2019
Abstract: To support the development of internationally comparable common data elements (CDEs) that can be used to measure essential aspects of long-term care (LTC) across low-, middle-, and high-income countries, a group of researchers in medicine, nursing, behavioral, and social sciences from 21 different countries have joined forces and launched the Worldwide Elements to Harmonize Research in LTC Living Environments (WE-THRIVE) initiative. This initiative aims to develop a common data infrastructure for international use across the domains of organizational context, workforce and staffing, person-centered care, and care outcomes, as these are critical to LTC quality, experiences, and outcomes. This article reports measurement recommendations for the care outcomes domain, focusing on previously prioritized care outcomes concepts of well-being, quality of life (QoL), and personhood for residents in LTC. Through literature review and expert ranking, we recommend nine measures of well-being, QoL, and personhood, as a basis for developing CDEs for long-term care outcomes across countries. Data in LTC have often included deficit-oriented measures while important, reductions do not necessarily mean that residents are concurrently experiencing well-being. Enhancing measurement efforts with the inclusion of these positive LTC outcomes across countries would facilitate international LTC research and align with global shifts toward healthy aging and person-centered LTC models.
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 03-2022
Abstract: Care homes are complex settings to undertake intervention research. Barriers to research implementation processes can threaten studies’ validity, reducing the value to residents, staff, researchers and funders. We aimed to (i) identify and categorise contextual factors that may mediate outcomes of complex intervention studies in care homes and (ii) provide recommendations to minimise the risk of expensive research implementation failures. We conducted a systematic review using a framework synthesis approach viewed through a complex adaptive systems lens. We searched: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ASSIA databases and grey literature. We sought process evaluations of care home complex interventions published in English. Narrative data were indexed under 28 context domains. We performed an inductive thematic analysis across the context domains. We included 33 process evaluations conducted in high-income countries, published between 2005 and 2019. Framework synthesis identified barriers to implementation that were more common at the task and organisational level. Inductive thematic analysis identified (i) avoiding procedural drift and (ii) participatory action and learning as key priorities for research teams. Research team recommendations include advice for protocol design and care home engagement. Care home team recommendations focus on internal resources and team dynamics. Collaborative recommendations apply to care homes’ in idual context and the importance of maintaining positive working relationships. Researchers planning and undertaking research with care homes need a sensitive appreciation of the complex care home context. Study implementation is most effective where an intervention is co-produced, with agreed purpose and adequate resources to incorporate within existing routines and care practices.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 09-2014
DOI: 10.1016/J.JAMDA.2014.06.011
Abstract: Long-term institutional care in the United Kingdom is provided by care homes. Residents have prevalent cognitive impairment and disability, have multiple diagnoses, and are subject to polypharmacy. Prevailing models of health care provision (ad hoc, reactive, and coordinated by general practitioners) result in unacceptable variability of care. A number of innovative responses to improve health care for care homes have been commissioned. The organization of health and social care in the United Kingdom is such that it is unlikely that a single solution to the problem of providing quality health care for care homes will be identified that can be used nationwide. Realist evaluation is a methodology that uses both qualitative and quantitative data to establish an in-depth understanding of what works, for whom, and in what settings. In this article we describe a protocol for using realist evaluation to understand the context, mechanisms, and outcomes that shape effective health care delivery to care home residents in the United Kingdom. By describing this novel approach, we hope to inform international discourse about research methodologies in long-term care settings internationally.
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 05-05-2015
DOI: 10.1017/S1463423615000250
Abstract: The number of beds in care homes (with and without nurses) in the United Kingdom is three times greater than the number of beds in National Health Service (NHS) hospitals. Care homes are predominantly owned by a range of commercial, not-for-profit or charitable providers and their residents have high levels of disability, frailty and co-morbidity. NHS support for care home residents is very variable, and it is unclear what models of clinical support work and are cost-effective. To critically evaluate how the NHS works with care homes. A review of surveys of NHS services provided to care homes that had been completed since 2008. It included published national surveys, local surveys commissioned by Primary Care organisations, studies from charities and academic centres, grey literature identified across the nine government regions, and information from care home, primary care and other research networks. Data extraction captured forms of NHS service provision for care homes in England in terms of frequency, location, focus and purpose. Five surveys focused primarily on general practitioner services, and 10 on specialist services to care home. Working relationships between the NHS and care homes lack structure and purpose and have generally evolved locally. There are wide variations in provision of both generalist and specialist healthcare services to care homes. Larger care home chains may take a systematic approach to both organising access to NHS generalist and specialist services, and to supplementing gaps with in-house provision. Access to dental care for care home residents appears to be particularly deficient. Historical differences in innovation and provision of NHS services, the complexities of collaborating across different sectors (private and public, health and social care, general and mental health), and variable levels of organisation of care homes, all lead to persistent and embedded inequity in the distribution of NHS resources to this population. Clinical commissioners seeking to improve the quality of care of care home residents need to consider how best to provide fair access to health care for older people living in a care home, and to establish a specification for service delivery to this vulnerable population.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 24-05-2014
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 06-2020
DOI: 10.1136/BMJOPEN-2019-036221
Abstract: Older people who live in care homes have a high level of need with complex health conditions. In addition to providing medical care to residents, general practitioners (GPs) play a role as gatekeeper for access to services, as well as leadership within healthcare provision. This review will describe how GPs were involved in initiatives to change arrangements of healthcare services in order to improve quality and experience of care. Following RAMESES quality and publication guidelines standards, we will proceed with realist review to develop theories of how GPs work with care home staff to bring about improvements. We identify when improvement in outcomes does not occur and why this may be the case. The first stage will include interviews with GPs to ask their views on improvement in care homes. These interviews will enable development of initial theories and give direction for the literature searches. In the second stage, we will use iterative literature searches to add depth and context to the early theories databases will include Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and ASSIA. In stage 3, evidence that is judged as rigorous and relevant will be used to test the initial theories, and through the process, refine the theory statements. In the final stage, we will synthesise findings and provide recommendations for practice and policy-making. During the review, we will invite a context expert group to reflect on our findings. This group will have expertise in current trends in primary care and the care home sector both in UK and internationally. The study was approved by University of Nottingham Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee: 354-1907. Findings will be shared through stakeholder networks, published in National Institute for Health Research journal and submitted for peer-reviewed journal publication.
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
No related grants have been discovered for Adam Gordon.