290 resultados para NURSING-HOMES
Resumo:
Background: Hip protectors are protective pads designed to cover the greater trochanter and attenuate or disperse the force of a fall sufficiently to prevent a hip fracture. Promising results from randomised controlled trials in nursing homes have resulted in hip protectors being widely recommended in the health care literature and in national guidelines. Objectives: The objectives of the study were to identify characteristics of individual residents, and the organisational features of the homes in which they live, which may affect adherence to wearing hip protectors. Design: An observational, correlation study designed to identify factors related to adherence. Setting: Forty nursing and residential homes in the UK. Participants: 1346 residents of the homes who were not confined to bed and with no pressure sore on the hip. Methods: The introduction of an evidence-based policy to offer Safehips hip protectors to residents free of charge and with support from a nurse facilitator. Adherence to wearing the hip protectors was observed over 72 weeks. Results: Initial acceptance of the hip protectors was 37.2%. Continued adherence was 23.9% at 24 weeks; 23.2% at 48 weeks; and 19.9% at 72 weeks. Greater adherence was associated with the following individual resident characteristics: a greater degree of dependency (95% CI 1.39 - m3.78) and cognitive impairment (95% CI 1.01 - 2.98); being male rather than female (95% CI 1.06 - 2.48). Greater adherence was also associated with the following organisational characteristics of homes: fewer changes of senior manager during the study period (95% CI 1.01 - 8.51), and being resident in a home with a resident profile showing a greater proportion of residents with a higher degree of dependency (95% CI 1.04 - 1.27). There was wide a variation in the degree of success in implementation between homes (adherence of 0 - 100% at 24 weeks). Conclusions: Those implementing a policy of introducing hip protectors into nursing and residential homes should consider targeting residents with cognitive impairment. Such residents are at greater risk of hip fracture and appear to be more likely to continue wearing hip protectors. Those charged with implementing changes inpractice or policy should consider how the context for implementation can be optimised to increase the likelihood of success.
Resumo:
Objectives: to evaluate the effectiveness of a policy of making hip protectors available to residents of nursing homes. Design: a cluster randomised controlled trial of the policy in nursing and residential homes, with the home as the unit of randomisation. Setting: 127 nursing and residential homes in the greater Belfast area of Northern Ireland. Participants: 40 homes in the intervention group (representing 1,366 occupied beds) and 87 homes in the control group (representing 2,751 occupied beds). Interventions: a policy of making hip protectors available free of charge to residents of nursing homes and supporting the implementation process by employing a nurse facilitator to encourage staff in the homes to promote their use, over a 72-week period. Main outcome measures: the rate of hip fractures in intervention and control homes, and the level of adherence to use of hip protectors. Results: there were 85 hip fractures in the intervention homes and 163 in the control homes. The mean fracture rate per 100 residents was 6.22 in the intervention homes and 5.92 in the control homes, giving an adjusted rate ratio for the intervention group compared to the control group of 1.05 (95% CI 0.77, 1.43, P = 0.76). Initial acceptance of the hip protectors was 37.2% (508/1,366) with adherence falling to 19.9% (272/1,366) at 72 weeks. Conclusions: making hip protectors available to residents of nursing and residential homes did not reduce the rate of hip fracture.
Resumo:
Background
