Piloting a Supplemental Assessment Tool with Younger Residents of Long-Term Care.

IF 1.6 Q4 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Erin M Samson, Elaine Moody, Lori E Weeks
{"title":"Piloting a Supplemental Assessment Tool with Younger Residents of Long-Term Care.","authors":"Erin M Samson, Elaine Moody, Lori E Weeks","doi":"10.5770/cgj.27.690","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Young adults living with disabilities may sometimes end up in long-term care facilities which may not always meet their needs. Our project set out to pilot a supplemental assessment tool, a questionnaire to be used upon admission of younger adults into long-term care. We wanted the opinions of both staff and younger residents on what modifications may be needed in the implementation processes to ensure effectiveness of the tool.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This project followed a qualitative design, implementing a previously designed supplemental assessment tool with five staff members and seven younger residents of two long-term care homes in Halifax, Nova Scotia. Residents completed the questionnaire with members of staff involved in admissions. Each group participated in follow-up interviews regarding their thoughts on implementation of the tool. Responses were analyzed using the constructs of the Consolidated Framework in Implementation Research following direct content analysis methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Feedback from residents and staff suggested that the tool could not be used as a one-size-fits-all solution but that flexibility in the format, content, and structure of the tool would be beneficial to ensure its utility in a variety of settings. Issues raised by staff and residents included, but were not limited to, accessibility of the intervention, the availability of resources, the format of the intervention and topics covered within it, and ensuring that processes for implementation are clearly defined.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both staff and residents approved of the tool for use in the admissions process and agreed that it would enhance the admissions practices already in place.</p>","PeriodicalId":56182,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Geriatrics Journal","volume":"27 1","pages":"20-28"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10896201/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Geriatrics Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5770/cgj.27.690","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Young adults living with disabilities may sometimes end up in long-term care facilities which may not always meet their needs. Our project set out to pilot a supplemental assessment tool, a questionnaire to be used upon admission of younger adults into long-term care. We wanted the opinions of both staff and younger residents on what modifications may be needed in the implementation processes to ensure effectiveness of the tool.

Methods: This project followed a qualitative design, implementing a previously designed supplemental assessment tool with five staff members and seven younger residents of two long-term care homes in Halifax, Nova Scotia. Residents completed the questionnaire with members of staff involved in admissions. Each group participated in follow-up interviews regarding their thoughts on implementation of the tool. Responses were analyzed using the constructs of the Consolidated Framework in Implementation Research following direct content analysis methods.

Results: Feedback from residents and staff suggested that the tool could not be used as a one-size-fits-all solution but that flexibility in the format, content, and structure of the tool would be beneficial to ensure its utility in a variety of settings. Issues raised by staff and residents included, but were not limited to, accessibility of the intervention, the availability of resources, the format of the intervention and topics covered within it, and ensuring that processes for implementation are clearly defined.

Conclusions: Both staff and residents approved of the tool for use in the admissions process and agreed that it would enhance the admissions practices already in place.

在长期护理机构的年轻住院者中试用补充评估工具。
背景:患有残疾的年轻成年人有时可能会被送入长期护理机构,但这些机构并不一定能满足他们的需求。我们的项目旨在试用一种补充评估工具,即在年轻成年人入住长期护理机构时使用的调查问卷。我们希望听取工作人员和年轻住院者的意见,了解在实施过程中可能需要进行哪些修改,以确保该工具的有效性:该项目采用定性设计,在新斯科舍省哈利法克斯市的两家长期护理院中,对五名员工和七名年轻住院者实施了之前设计的补充评估工具。入住者与参与入院的工作人员一起完成了问卷调查。每个小组都参加了后续访谈,了解他们对工具实施的看法。我们采用实施研究综合框架的结构,并根据直接内容分析法对答复进行了分析:结果:住户和工作人员的反馈表明,该工具不能被用作 "一刀切 "的解决方案,但其格式、内容和结构的灵活性将有利于确保其在各种环境中的实用性。员工和居民提出的问题包括(但不限于)干预措施的可及性、资源的可用性、干预措施的形式和其中涵盖的主题,以及确保明确界定实施流程:员工和住院患者都认可在入院流程中使用该工具,并一致认为它将加强现有的入院实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Canadian Geriatrics Journal
Canadian Geriatrics Journal Nursing-Gerontology
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The Canadian Geriatrics Journal (CGJ) is a peer-reviewed publication that is a home for innovative aging research of a high quality aimed at improving the health and the care provided to older persons residing in Canada and outside our borders. While we gratefully accept submissions from researchers outside our country, we are committed to encouraging aging research by Canadians. The CGJ is targeted to family physicians with training or an interest in the care of older persons, specialists in geriatric medicine, geriatric psychiatrists, and members of other health disciplines with a focus on gerontology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信