Self-neglect: development and evaluation of a self-neglect (SN-37) measurement instrument

Aim: To develop and evaluate the psychometric properties of an instrument for the measurement of self-neglect (SN).Conceptual Framework: An elder self-neglect (ESN) conceptual framework guided the literature review and scale development. The framework has two key dimensions physical/psycho-social and environmental and seven sub dimensions which are representative of the factors that can contribute to intentional and unintentional SN. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional design was adopted to achieve the research aim. The study was conducted in two phases. Phase 1 involved the development of the questionnaire content and structure. Phase 2 focused on establishing the psychometric properties of the instrument. Content validity was established by a panel of 8 experts and piloted with 9 health and social care professionals. The instrument was subsequently posted with a stamped addressed envelope to 566 health and social care professionals who met specific eligibility criteria across the four HSE areas. A total of 341 questionnaires were returned, a response rate of 60% and 305 (50%) completed responses were included in exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Item and factor analyses were performed to elicit the instruments underlying factor structure and establish preliminary construct validity. Findings: Item and factor analyses resulted in a logically coherent, 37 items, five factor solution, explaining 55.6% of the cumulative variance. The factors were labelled: ‘Environment’, ‘Social Networks’, ‘Emotional and Behavioural Liability’, ‘Health Avoidance’ and ‘Self-Determinism’. The factor loadings were >0.40 for all items on each of the five subscales. Preliminary construct validity was supported by findings. Conclusion: The main outcome of this research is a 37 item Self-Neglect (SN-37) measurement instrument that was developed by EFA and underpinned by an ESN conceptual framework. Preliminary psychometric evaluation of the instrument is promising. Future work should be directed at establishing the construct and criterion related validity of the instrument.

End-of-life care: identifying an appropriate legal framework for specialist palliative care in Ireland

This thesis argues that the legal framework in Ireland for specialist palliative care is inadequate and consequently a more appropriate legal framework must be identified. This research is guided by three central research questions. The first central research question examines the legitimacy of the distinction between specialist palliative care and euthanasia. The second central research question asks what legal framework currently exists in Ireland for specialist palliative care. The third central research question examines an alternative legal framework for specialist palliative. This thesis is composed of seven chapters. The first Chapter is an introduction to the thesis and defines the terminology and the central research questions. Chapter Two explores the development and practice of palliative care in Ireland. Chapter Three examines the distinction in criminal law between specialist palliative care practices and euthanasia. Chapter Four examines the human rights framework for specialist palliative care. Chapter Five critiques the regulatory framework in Ireland for specialist palliative care. Having gained a thorough understanding of palliative care and the related legal framework, this thesis then engages in comparative analysis of the Netherlands which is used as a source of ideas for reform in Ireland. Chapter Seven is the concluding chapter and, in it, the main findings of this thesis are summarised. The main findings being that: the distinction between specialist palliative care and euthanasia is not sufficiently supported by justifications such as a double effect or the acts and omissions distinction, there is no clear decision-making framework in Ireland for specialist palliative care, and the current legal framework lacks clarity and does not promote consistency between providers of specialist palliative care. This Chapter also proposes that detailed professional standards and guidelines are likely to be the most appropriate way to effect individual and institutional change in the provision of specialist palliative care.

Time-limited home-care reablement services for maintaining and improving the functional independence of older adults

Background: Reablement, also known as restorative care, is one possible approach to home-care services for older adults at risk of functional decline. Unlike traditional home-care services, reablement is frequently time-limited (usually six to 12 weeks) and aims to maximise independence by offering an intensive multidisciplinary, person-centred and goal-directed intervention. Objectives: To assess the effects of time-limited home-care reablement services (up to 12 weeks) for maintaining and improving the functional independence of older adults (aged 65 years or more) when compared to usual home-care or wait-list control group. Search methods: We searched the following databases with no language restrictions during April to June 2015: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE (OvidSP); Embase (OvidSP); PsycINFO (OvidSP); ERIC; Sociological Abstracts; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses; CINAHL (EBSCOhost); SIGLE (OpenGrey); AgeLine and Social Care Online. We also searched the reference lists of relevant studies and reviews as well as contacting authors in the field. Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster randomised or quasi-randomised trials of time-limited reablement services for older adults (aged 65 years or more) delivered in their home; and incorporated a usual home-care or wait-list control group. Data collection and analysis: Two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias of individual studies and considered quality of the evidence using GRADE. We contacted study authors for additional information where needed. Main results: Two studies, comparing reablement with usual home-care services with 811 participants, met our eligibility criteria for inclusion; we also identified three potentially eligible studies, but findings were not yet available. One included study was conducted in Western Australia with 750 participants (mean age 82.29 years). The second study was conducted in Norway (61 participants; mean age 79 years). We are very uncertain as to the effects of reablement compared with usual care as the evidence was of very low quality for all of the outcomes reported. The main findings were as follows. Functional status: very low quality evidence suggested that reablement may be slightly more effective than usual care in improving function at nine to 12 months (lower scores reflect greater independence; standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.30; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.53 to -0.06; 2 studies with 249 participants). Adverse events: reablement may make little or no difference to mortality at 12 months' follow-up (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.74 to 1.29; 2 studies with 811 participants) or rates of unplanned hospital admission at 24 months (RR 0.94; 95% CI 0.85 to 1.03; 1 study with 750 participants). The very low quality evidence also means we are uncertain whether reablement may influence quality of life (SMD -0.23; 95% CI -0.48 to 0.02; 2 trials with 249 participants) or living arrangements (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.34; 1 study with 750 participants) at time points up to 12 months. People receiving reablement may be slightly less likely to have been approved for a higher level of personal care than people receiving usual care over the 24 months' follow-up (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.77 to 0.98; 1 trial, 750 participants). Similarly, although there may be a small reduction in total aggregated home and healthcare costs over the 24-month follow-up (reablement: AUD 19,888; usual care: AUD 22,757; 1 trial with 750 participants), we are uncertain about the size and importance of these effects as the results were based on very low quality evidence. Neither study reported user satisfaction with the service. Authors' conclusions: There is considerable uncertainty regarding the effects of reablement as the evidence was of very low quality according to our GRADE ratings. Therefore, the effectiveness of reablement services cannot be supported or refuted until more robust evidence becomes available. There is an urgent need for high quality trials across different health and social care systems due to the increasingly high profile of reablement services in policy and practice in several countries.