The relationship between clinical outcomes and quality of life for residents of aged care facilities

Objectives It is widely assumed improving care in residential facilities will improve quality of life (QoL), but little research has explored this relationship. The Clinical Care Indicators (CCI) Tool was developed to fill an existing gap in quality assessment within Australian residential aged care facilities and it was used to explore potential links between clinical outcomes and QoL. Design and Setting Clinical outcome and QoL data were collected within four residential facilities from the same aged care provider. Subjects Subjects were 82 residents of four facilities. Outcome Measures Clinical outcomes were measured using the CCI Tool and QoL data was obtained using the Australian WHOQOL‑100. Results Independent t‑test analyses were calculated to compare individual CCIs with each domain of the WHOQOL‑100, while Pearson’s product moment coefficients (r) were calculated between the total number of problem indicators and QoL scores. Significant results suggested poorer clinical outcomes adversely affected QoL. Social and spiritual QoL were particularly affected by clinical outcomes and poorer status in hydration, falls and depression were most strongly associated with lower QoL scores. Poorer clinical status as a whole was also significantly correlated with poorer QoL. Conclusions Hydration, falls and depression were most often associated with poorer resident QoL and as such appear to be key areas for clinical management in residential aged care. However, poor clinical outcomes overall also adversely affected QoL, which suggests maintaining optimum clinical status through high quality nursing care, would not only be important for resident health but also for enhancing general life quality.

Information interventions for orienting patients and their carers to cancer care facilities (Protocol)

To assess the effects of information interventions which orient patients and their carers/family to a cancer care facility and the services available in the facility.

Malnutrition and pressure ulcer risk in adults in Australian health care facilities

Aims To determine the effect of nutritional status on the presence and severity of pressure ulcers in statewide? public healthcare facilities, in Queensland, Australia. Research Methods A multicentre, cross sectional audit of nutritional status of a convenience sample of subjects was carried out as part of a large audit of pressure ulcers in a sample of state based public healthcare facilities in 2002 and 2003. Dietitians in 20 hospitals and six residential aged care facilities conducted single day nutritional status audits of 2208 acute and 839 aged care subjects using the Subjective Global Assessment. The effect of nutritional status on the presence, highest stage and number of pressure ulcers was determined by logistic regression in a model controlling for age, gender, medical specialty and facility location. The potential clustering effect of facility was accounted for in the model using an analysis of correlated data approach. Results Subjects with malnutrition had an adjusted odds risk of 2.6 (95% CI 1.8-3.5, p<0.001) of having a pressure ulcer in acute facilities and 2.0 (95% CI 1.5-2.7, p<0.001) for residential aged care facilities. There was also increased odds risk of having a pressure ulcer, having a higher stage pressure ulcer and a higher number of pressure ulcers with increased severity of malnutrition. Conclusion Malnutrition was associated with at least twice the odds risk of having a pressure ulcer of in public healthcare facilities in Queensland. Action must be taken to identify, prevent and treat malnutrition, especially in patients at risk of pressure ulcer.

Development of a Systematic Approach to Assessing Quality within Australian Residential Aged Care Facilities: The Clinical Care Indicators Tool

Recent years have seen the introduction of formalised accreditation processes in both community and residential aged care, but these only partially address quality assessment within this sector. Residential aged care in Australia does not yet have a standardised system of resident assessment related to clinical, rather than administrative, outcomes. This paper describes the development of a quality assessment tool aimed at addressing this gap. Utilising previous research and the results of nominal groups with experts in the field, the 21-item Clinical Care Indicators (CCI) Tool for residential aged care was developed and trialled nationally. The CCI Tool was found to be simple to use and an effective means of collecting data on the state of resident health and care, with potential benefits for resident care planning and continuous quality improvement within facilities and organisations. The CCI Tool was further refined through a small intervention study to assess its utility as a quality improvement instrument and to investigate its relationship with resident quality of life. The current version covers 23 clinical indicators, takes about 30 minutes to complete and is viewed favourably by nursing staff who use it. Current work focuses on psychometric analysis and benchmarking, which should enable the CCI Tool to make a positive contribution to the measurement of quality in aged care in Australia.

Benchmarking clinical indicators of quality for Australian residential aged care facilities

To undertake exploratory benchmarking of a set of clinical indicators of quality care in residential care in Australia, data were collected from 107 residents within four medium-sized facilities (40–80 beds) in Brisbane, Australia. The proportion of residents in each sample facility with a particular clinical problem was compared with US Minimum Data Set quality indicator thresholds. Results demonstrated variability within and between clinical indicators, suggesting breadth of assessment using various clinical indicators of quality is an important factor when monitoring quality of care. More comprehensive and objective measures of quality of care would be of great assistance in determining and monitoring the effectiveness of residential aged care provision in Australia, particularly as demands for accountability by consumers and their families increase. What is known about the topic? The key to quality improvement is effective quality assessment, and one means of evaluating quality of care is through clinical outcomes. The Minimum Data Set quality indicators have been credited with improving quality in United States nursing homes. What does this paper add? The Clinical Care Indicators Tool was used to collect data on clinical outcomes, enabling comparison of data from a small Australian sample with American quality benchmarks to illustrate the utility of providing guidelines for interpretation. What are the implications for practitioners? Collecting and comparing clinical outcome data would enable practitioners to better understand the quality of care being provided and whether practices required review. The Clinical Care Indicator Tool could provide a comprehensive and systematic means of doing this, thus filling a gap in quality monitoring within Australian residential aged care.

Clinical indicators of quality for Australian residential aged care facilities : establishing reliability, validity, and quality thresholds

Background: In response to the need for more comprehensive quality assessment within Australian residential aged care facilities, the Clinical Care Indicator (CCI) Tool was developed to collect outcome data as a means of making inferences about quality. A national trial of its effectiveness and a Brisbane-based trial of its use within the quality improvement context determined the CCI Tool represented a potentially valuable addition to the Australian aged care system. This document describes the next phase in the CCI Tool.s development; the aims of which were to establish validity and reliability of the CCI Tool, and to develop quality indicator thresholds (benchmarks) for use in Australia. The CCI Tool is now known as the ResCareQA (Residential Care Quality Assessment). Methods: The study aims were achieved through a combination of quantitative data analysis, and expert panel consultations using modified Delphi process. The expert panel consisted of experienced aged care clinicians, managers, and academics; they were initially consulted to determine face and content validity of the ResCareQA, and later to develop thresholds of quality. To analyse its psychometric properties, ResCareQA forms were completed for all residents (N=498) of nine aged care facilities throughout Queensland. Kappa statistics were used to assess inter-rater and test-retest reliability, and Cronbach.s alpha coefficient calculated to determine internal consistency. For concurrent validity, equivalent items on the ResCareQA and the Resident Classification Scales (RCS) were compared using Spearman.s rank order correlations, while discriminative validity was assessed using known-groups technique, comparing ResCareQA results between groups with differing care needs, as well as between male and female residents. Rank-ordered facility results for each clinical care indicator (CCI) were circulated to the panel; upper and lower thresholds for each CCI were nominated by panel members and refined through a Delphi process. These thresholds indicate excellent care at one extreme and questionable care at the other. Results: Minor modifications were made to the assessment, and it was renamed the ResCareQA. Agreement on its content was reached after two Delphi rounds; the final version contains 24 questions across four domains, enabling generation of 36 CCIs. Both test-retest and inter-rater reliability were sound with median kappa values of 0.74 (test-retest) and 0.91 (inter-rater); internal consistency was not as strong, with a Chronbach.s alpha of 0.46. Because the ResCareQA does not provide a single combined score, comparisons for concurrent validity were made with the RCS on an item by item basis, with most resultant correlations being quite low. Discriminative validity analyses, however, revealed highly significant differences in total number of CCIs between high care and low care groups (t199=10.77, p=0.000), while the differences between male and female residents were not significant (t414=0.56, p=0.58). Clinical outcomes varied both within and between facilities; agreed upper and lower thresholds were finalised after three Delphi rounds. Conclusions: The ResCareQA provides a comprehensive, easily administered means of monitoring quality in residential aged care facilities that can be reliably used on multiple occasions. The relatively modest internal consistency score was likely due to the multi-factorial nature of quality, and the absence of an aggregate result for the assessment. Measurement of concurrent validity proved difficult in the absence of a gold standard, but the sound discriminative validity results suggest that the ResCareQA has acceptable validity and could be confidently used as an indication of care quality within Australian residential aged care facilities. The thresholds, while preliminary due to small sample size, enable users to make judgements about quality within and between facilities. Thus it is recommended the ResCareQA be adopted for wider use.

Information interventions for orienting patients and their carers to cancer care facilities

Background: Cancer patients experience distress and anxiety related to their diagnosis, treatment and the unfamiliar cancer centre. Strategies with the aim of orienting patients to a cancer care facility may improve patient outcomes. Although meeting patients' information needs at different stages is important, there is little agreement about the type of information and the timing for information to be given. Orientation interventions aim to address information needs at the start of a person's experience with a cancer care facility. The extent of any benefit of these interventions is unknown. Objectives: To assess the effects of information interventions which orient patients and their carers/family to a cancer care facility, and to the services available in the facility. Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 2); MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1966 to Jun 2011), EMBASE (Ovid SP) (1966 to Jun 2011), CINAHL (EBSCO) (1982 to Jun 2011), PsycINFO (OvidSP) (1966 to Jun 2011), review articles and reference lists of relevant articles. We contacted principal investigators and experts in the field. Selection Criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs and quasi-RCTs evaluating the effects of information interventions that orient patients and their carers/family to a cancer care facility. Data collection and analysis: Results of searches were reviewed against the pre-determined criteria for inclusion by two review authors. The primary outcomes were knowledge and understanding; health status and wellbeing, evaluation of care, and harms. Secondary outcomes were communication, skills acquisition, behavioural outcomes, service delivery, and health professional outcomes. We pooled results of RCTs using mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Main results: We included four RCTs involving 610 participants. All four trials aimed to investigate the effects of orientation programs for cancer patients to a cancer facility. There was high risk of bias across studies. Findings from two of the RCTs demonstrated significant benefits of the orientation intervention in relation to levels of distress (mean difference (MD) -8.96 (95% confidence interval (CI) -11.79 to -6.13), but non-significant benefits in relation to state anxiety levels (MD -9.77 (95% CI -24.96 to 5.41). Other outcomes for participants were generally positive (e.g. more knowledgeable about the cancer centre and cancer therapy, better coping abilities). No harms or adverse effects were measured or reported by any of the included studies. There were insufficient data on the other outcomes of interest. Authors conclusion: This review has demonstrated the feasibility and some potential benefits of orientation interventions. There was a low level of evidence suggesting that orientation interventions can reduce distress in patients. However, most of the other outcomes remain inconclusive (patient knowledge recall/ satisfaction). The majority of studies were subject to high risk of bias, and were likely to be insufficiently powered. Further well conducted and powered RCTs are required to provide evidence for determining the most appropriate intensity, nature, mode and resources for such interventions. Patient and carer-focused outcomes should be included.

Positive impacts of environmental characteristics on health and wellbeing in health-care facilities : a review

Well-designed indoor environments can support people’s health and welfare. In this literature review, we identify the environmental features that affect human health and wellbeing. Environmental characteristics found to influence health outcomes and/or wellbeing included: environmental safety; indoor air quality (e.g. odour and temperature); sound and noise; premises and interior design (e.g. construction materials, viewing nature and experiencing nature, windows versus no windows, light, colours, unit layout and placement of the furniture, the type of room, possibilities to control environmental elements, environmental complexity and sensory simulations, cleanliness, ergonomics and accessibility, ‛‛wayfinding’’); art, and music, among others. Indoor environments that incorporate healing elements can, for instance, reduce anxiety, lower blood pressure, lessen pain and shorten hospital stays.

A six-year descriptive analysis of hospitalisations for ambulatory care sensitive conditions among people born in refugee-source countries

Background: Hospitalisation for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSHs) has become a recognised tool to measure access to primary care. Timely and effective outpatient care is highly relevant to refugee populations given the past exposure to torture and trauma, and poor access to adequate health care in their countries of origin and during flight. Little is known about ACSHs among resettled refugee populations. With the aim of examining the hypothesis that people from refugee backgrounds have higher ACSHs than people born in the country of hospitalisation, this study analysed a six-year state-wide hospital discharge dataset to estimate ACSH rates for residents born in refugee-source countries and compared them with the Australia-born population. Methods: Hospital discharge data between 1 July 1998 and 30 June 2004 from the Victorian Admitted Episodes Dataset were used to assess ACSH rates among residents born in eight refugee-source countries, and compare them with the Australia-born average. Rate ratios and 95% confidence levels were used to illustrate these comparisons. Four categories of ambulatory care sensitive conditions were measured: total, acute, chronic and vaccine-preventable. Country of birth was used as a proxy indicator of refugee status. Results: When compared with the Australia-born population, hospitalisations for total and acute ambulatory care sensitive conditions were lower among refugee-born persons over the six-year period. Chronic and vaccine-preventable ACSHs were largely similar between the two population groups. Conclusion: Contrary to our hypothesis, preventable hospitalisation rates among people born in refugee-source countries were no higher than Australia-born population averages. More research is needed to elucidate whether low rates of preventable hospitalisation indicate better health status, appropriate health habits, timely and effective care-seeking behaviour and outpatient care, or overall low levels of health care-seeking due to other more pressing needs during the initial period of resettlement. It is important to unpack dimensions of health status and health care access in refugee populations through ad-hoc surveys as the refugee population is not a homogenous group despite sharing a common experience of forced displacement and violence-related trauma.

An evaluation of dog-assisted therapy for residents of aged care facilities with dementia.

Although some research suggests that dog-assisted therapy may be beneficial for people with dementia living in residential aged care facilities, the intervention has not been adequately investigated. To address this shortcoming, we conducted a randomized controlled trial of dog-assisted therapy versus a human-therapist-only intervention for this population. Fifty-five residents with mild to moderate dementia living in three Australian residential aged care facilities completed an 11-week trial of the interventions. Allocation to the intervention was random and participants completed validated measures of mood, psychosocial functioning, and quality of life (QOL), both prior to and following the intervention. No adverse events were associated with the dog-assisted intervention, and following it participants who had worse baseline depression scores demonstrated significantly improved depression scores relative to participants in the human-therapist-only intervention. Participants in the dogassisted intervention also showed significant improvements on a measure of QOL in one facility compared with those in the human-therapist-only group (although worse in another facility that had been affected by an outbreak of gastroenteritis). This study provides some evidence that dog-assisted therapy may be beneficial for some residents of aged care facilities with dementia.

A systematic review of telemedicine services for residents in long term care facilities

We conducted a systematic review of the literature on telemedicine use in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) and assessed the quality of the published evidence. A database search identified 22 papers which met the inclusion criteria. The quality of the studies was assessed and if they contained economic data, they were rated according to standard criteria. The clinical services provided by telemedicine included allied health (n = 5), dermatology (3), general practice (4), neurology (2), geriatrics (1), psychiatry (4) and multiple specialities (3). Most studies (17) employed real-time telemedicine using videoconferencing. The remaining five used store and forward telemedicine. The papers focused on economics (3), feasibility (9), stakeholder satisfaction (12), reliability (5) and service implementation (2). Overall, the quality of evidence for telemedicine in LTCFs was low. There was only one small randomised controlled trial (RCT). Most studies were observational and qualitative, and focused on utilisation. They were mainly based on surveys and interviews of stakeholders. A few studies evaluated the cost associated with implementing telemedicine services in LTCFs. The present review shows that there is evidence for feasibility and stakeholder satisfaction in using telemedicine in LTCFs in a number of clinical specialities.

Implementation of sustainable evidence-based practice for the assessment and management of pain in residential aged care facilities

Pain is common in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). In 2005, the Australian Pain Society developed 27 recommendations for good practice in the identification, assessment, and management of pain in these settings. This study aimed to address implementation of the standards and evaluate outcomes. Five facilities in Australia participated in a comprehensive evaluation of RACF pain practice and outcomes. Pre-existing pain management practices were compared with the 27 recommendations, before an evidence-based pain management program was introduced that included training and education for staff and revised in-house pain-management procedures. Post-implementation audits evaluated the program's success. Aged care staff teams also were assessed on their reports of self-efficacy in pain management. The results show that before the implementation program, the RACFs demonstrated full compliance on 6 to 12 standards. By the project's completion, RACFs demonstrated full compliance with 10 to 23 standards and major improvements toward compliance in the remaining standards. After implementation, the staff also reported better understanding of the standards (p < .001) or of facility pain management guidelines (p < .001), increased confidence in therapies for pain management (p < .001), and increased confidence in their training to assess pain (p < .001) and recognize pain in residents with dementia who are nonverbal (p = .003). The results show that improved evidence-based practice in RACFs can be achieved with appropriate training and education. Investing resources in the aged care workforce via this implementation program has shown improvements in staff self-efficacy and practice.