Understanding the consumer, carer and stakeholder experiences of residential respite care

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Andrew Liem Hieu Huynh, Kathryn Lee, Christa Dang, Steven Savvas, Frances Batchelor, Paul Yates, Sanka Amadoru
{"title":"Understanding the consumer, carer and stakeholder experiences of residential respite care","authors":"Andrew Liem Hieu Huynh,&nbsp;Kathryn Lee,&nbsp;Christa Dang,&nbsp;Steven Savvas,&nbsp;Frances Batchelor,&nbsp;Paul Yates,&nbsp;Sanka Amadoru","doi":"10.1111/ajag.13404","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>Residential aged care respite clients are vulnerable and prone to poor health-care outcomes. Improvements in the quality of care for this cohort are urgently needed. However, before proposing changes in care models, a nuanced understanding of relevant issues affecting respite care consumers and professionals is required. We aimed to explore perspectives of consumers, carers, health-care workers and aged care workers involved in residential respite care (RRC).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We used purposive sampling to recruit respite consumers, their family members, residential aged care staff and health-care workers across metropolitan Melbourne for semi-structured telephone interviews and electronic surveys regarding RRC. Thematic analysis of interviews and surveys was performed.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Twenty-three semi-structured in-depth interviews (five family members, four residential aged care staff, five general practitioners, two nurse practitioners, seven hospital staff) and 12 electronic surveys (five family members, three general practitioners, four hospital staff) were completed. Five key themes were identified: (1) reasons for using respite care vary; (2) expectations and understanding of respite care vary; (3) structural and funding factors influence the experience and quality of care; (4) care professionals often lack timely access to accurate health-care information; and (5) medical management and health-care needs of respite residents are complex.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>These findings from multiple stakeholders highlight several issues regarding the benefits of and problems with RRC, and the interfaces between the aged care and health-care sectors. Understanding these issues is pivotal in informing targeted and systemic interventions to improve RRC.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55431,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal on Ageing","volume":"44 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian Journal on Ageing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajag.13404","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

Residential aged care respite clients are vulnerable and prone to poor health-care outcomes. Improvements in the quality of care for this cohort are urgently needed. However, before proposing changes in care models, a nuanced understanding of relevant issues affecting respite care consumers and professionals is required. We aimed to explore perspectives of consumers, carers, health-care workers and aged care workers involved in residential respite care (RRC).

Methods

We used purposive sampling to recruit respite consumers, their family members, residential aged care staff and health-care workers across metropolitan Melbourne for semi-structured telephone interviews and electronic surveys regarding RRC. Thematic analysis of interviews and surveys was performed.

Results

Twenty-three semi-structured in-depth interviews (five family members, four residential aged care staff, five general practitioners, two nurse practitioners, seven hospital staff) and 12 electronic surveys (five family members, three general practitioners, four hospital staff) were completed. Five key themes were identified: (1) reasons for using respite care vary; (2) expectations and understanding of respite care vary; (3) structural and funding factors influence the experience and quality of care; (4) care professionals often lack timely access to accurate health-care information; and (5) medical management and health-care needs of respite residents are complex.

Conclusions

These findings from multiple stakeholders highlight several issues regarding the benefits of and problems with RRC, and the interfaces between the aged care and health-care sectors. Understanding these issues is pivotal in informing targeted and systemic interventions to improve RRC.

了解消费者,护理者和利益相关者的住宿暂托经验。
目的:寄宿制老年护理临时客户是脆弱的,容易出现不良的保健结果。迫切需要提高这一群体的护理质量。然而,在提出护理模式的变化之前,需要对影响临时护理消费者和专业人员的相关问题有细致入微的了解。本研究旨在探讨消费者、护理者、卫生保健工作者和老年护理工作者参与住宿暂托(RRC)的观点。方法:采用有目的抽样的方法,在墨尔本市区招募休养消费者、休养消费者家庭成员、养老院工作人员和卫生保健工作者,对休养消费者进行半结构化电话访谈和电子调查。对访谈和调查进行了专题分析。结果:共完成23份半结构化深度访谈(5名家庭成员、4名养老院工作人员、5名全科医生、2名执业护士、7名医院工作人员)和12份电子调查(5名家庭成员、3名全科医生、4名医院工作人员)。确定了五个关键主题:(1)使用临时护理的原因各不相同;(2)对暂歇护理的期望和理解存在差异;(3)结构和资金因素影响护理体验和质量;(4)保健专业人员往往无法及时获得准确的保健信息;(5)暂托居民的医疗管理和保健需求较为复杂。结论:这些来自多个利益相关者的发现突出了关于RRC的好处和问题的几个问题,以及老年护理和卫生保健部门之间的接口。了解这些问题对于告知有针对性和系统性的干预措施以改善RRC至关重要。
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
Australasian Journal on Ageing
Australasian Journal on Ageing 医学-老年医学
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
6.20%
发文量
114
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Australasian Journal on Ageing is a peer reviewed journal, which publishes original work in any area of gerontology and geriatric medicine. It welcomes international submissions, particularly from authors in the Asia Pacific region.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信