Quality of care for residents dying in Ontario long-term care facilities:Findings from a survey of directors of care

The purpose of this study was to collect information on the practice of end-of-life (EOL) care in long-term care (LTC) facilities in the Province of Ontario, Canada. A cross-sectional survey of directors of care in all licensed LTC facilities in the province was conducted between September 2003 and April 2004. Directors of care from 426 (76% response rate) facilities completed the postal survey questionnaire. The survey results identified communication problems between service providers and families, inadequate staffing levels to provide quality care to dying residents, and the need for training to improve staff skills in providing EOL care. Directors of care endorsed the use of a number of strategies that would improve the care of dying residents. Logistic regression analysis identified the eight most important items predictive of facility staff having the ability to provide quality EOL care. The findings contribute to the current discussion on policies for meeting the care needs of residents in LTC facilities until life's end. © 2006 Centre for Bioethics, IRCM.

Quality end-of-life care in long-term care facilities:Service providers' perspective

The goal of this project was to provide guidance on what constitutes quality end-of-life care in long-term care (LTC) facilities. Seventy-nine direct care providers from six LTC facilities participated in 12 focus groups. The focus group discussions examined what made the difference between a "good" death and a "bad" death, and what changes in LTC would improve the care of dying residents. Analyses of the focus group data revealed six themes that contribute to quality end-of-life care in LTC facilities: responding to resident needs, creating a homelike environment, supports for families, providing quality care processes, recognizing death as a significant event, and having sufficient institutional resources. These findings challenge policy makers and providers to consider how to normalize life and death in LTC facilities.

Midwifery-led antenatal care models: mapping a systematic review to an evidence-based quality framework to identify key components and characteristics of care

Background: Implementing effective antenatal care models is a key global policy goal. However, the mechanisms of action of these multi-faceted models that would allow widespread implementation are seldom examined and poorly understood. In existing care model analyses there is little distinction between what is done, how it is done, and who does it. A new evidence-informed quality maternal and newborn care (QMNC) framework identifies key characteristics of quality care. This offers the opportunity to identify systematically the characteristics of care delivery that may be generalizable across contexts, thereby enhancing implementation. Our objective was to map the characteristics of antenatal care models tested in Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) to a new evidence-based framework for quality maternal and newborn care; thus facilitating the identification of characteristics of effective care.

Methods: A systematic review of RCTs of midwifery-led antenatal care models. Mapping and evaluation of these models’ characteristics to the QMNC framework using data extraction and scoring forms derived from the five framework components. Paired team members independently extracted data and conducted quality assessment using the QMNC framework and standard RCT criteria.

Results: From 13,050 citations initially retrieved we identified 17 RCTs of midwifery-led antenatal care models from Australia (7), the UK (4), China (2), and Sweden, Ireland, Mexico and Canada (1 each). QMNC framework scores ranged from 9 to 25 (possible range 0–32), with most models reporting fewer than half the characteristics associated with quality maternity care. Description of care model characteristics was lacking in many studies, but was better reported for the intervention arms. Organisation of care was the best-described component. Underlying values and philosophy of care were poorly reported.

Conclusions: The QMNC framework facilitates assessment of the characteristics of antenatal care models. It is vital to understand all the characteristics of multi-faceted interventions such as care models; not only what is done but why it is done, by whom, and how this differed from the standard care package. By applying the QMNC framework we have established a foundation for future reports of intervention studies so that the characteristics of individual models can be evaluated, and the impact of any differences appraised.

Barriers and Facilitators to Providing Palliative Care in Rural Communities: A Nursing Perspective

Nursing plays a key role in the coordination and delivery of palliative care services in rural settings. The purpose of this study is to identify barriers and enablers to providing palliative care in rural communities from a nursing perspective. This study utilized a qualitative descriptive design. Findings highlighted that the remoteness, limited access to resources and professional practice barriers created challenges for nurses as they tried to provide quality palliative care to their clients. System-related barriers were identified and included: lack of services, funding issues, and poor continuity of care. Despite these barriers, nurses drew from supports to optimize palliative care such as using a team approach to care, centers, utilizing local case managers and informal community members, and using palliative care resources. These results may help inform policy decisions around the needs of nurses who practice in rural settings to provide quality care to individuals who are dying and their families.

Use of maternity surveys in improving the care experience – a review of the evidence

The use of surveys and direct feedback from women as a measurement of their maternity experience is seen as a means of stimulating quality improvement. Underpinning the overall rationale behind national maternity surveys is the acknowledgement that there is a need to document women's views of maternity services to inform policymakers with a view to enhancing the delivery of quality care to women. The evidence suggests that using maternity surveys to improve maternity care experience is central to UK health policy. It is also evident that qualitative input from women has the power to highlight mismatches of experience between women and professionals. Trusts are required to look to the future and invest in qualitative methodologies, which elicit rich and detailed information on women's experiences. The aim of this literature review is to critically analyse the use of maternity surveys and their validity in improving the care experienced by users of maternity services.

Grading gems: Appraising the quality of research about social work and social care.

The impetus towards basing practice and policy decisions more explicitly on sound research requires tools to facilitate the systematic appraisal of the quality of research encompassing a diverse range of methods and designs. Five exemplar tools were developed and assessed in terms of their usefulness in selecting studies for inclusion in a systematic review. The widely used ‘hierarchy of evidence’ was adapted and used to appraise internal validity. Four tools were then developed to appraise the external validity dimensions of generalizability (two scales) and methods of data collection (two scales). Methods of combining the scores generated by each tool were explored. Qualitative and quantitative studies were appraised, not separated into two spheres but by using complementary tools developed to appraise different aspects of rigour. There was a high level of agreement between researchers in applying the tools to twenty-two studies on decision making by professionals about the longterm care of older people. The scales for internal validity and generalizability discriminated between the qualities of studies appropriately. The two tools to appraise data collection gave diverse results. Excluding studies that scored in the lowest category on any scale appeared to be the scoring system that was most justifiable. This approach is presented to stimulate debate about the practical application of the evidence-based initiative to social work and social care. This study may assist in developing clearer definitions and common language about appraising rigour that should further the process of selecting robust research for synthesis to inform practice and policy decisions.

Empowerment, Quality of Life and Service Satisfaction: comparisons between hospitalised continuing care patients and deinstitutionalised patients

Objectives: Recent advances in mental health care policy and service delivery have lead to the development of community care initiatives which have enabled those individuals traditionally cared for in hospital environments to be resettled successfully in community living arrangements that foster an ethos of empowerment and recovery. This study sought to identify differences between a hospital continuing care group (n = 16) and a community placement group (n = 20) in relation to quality of life, satisfaction and levels of empowerment. Method: The study was a cross-sectional design. It follows up a cohort of individuals identified as the ‘hospital continuing care group’ (365+ consecutive days in psychiatric hospital care) by Homefirst Community Trust in Northern Ireland. A proportion of this population has been resettled into community care environments and some continue to reside in hospital. Patients both in the hospital continuing care group and the community placement group completed two standard questionnaires that covered a number of variables including empowerment, quality of life and service satisfaction. Results: There were significant differences between the hospital continuing care and community placement groups across scores on service satisfaction, quality of life, and empowerment in the current study. Hypotheses relating to service satisfaction (z = -4.117; p