scholarly journals The uptake and use of a minimum data set (MDS) for older people living and dying in care homes: a realist review

2022 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Massirfufulay Kpehe Musa ◽  
Gizdem Akdur ◽  
Sarah Brand ◽  
Anne Killett ◽  
Karen Spilsbury ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Care homes provide long term care for older people. Countries with standardised approaches to residents’ assessment, care planning and review (known as minimum data sets (MDS)) use the aggregate data to guide resource allocation, monitor quality, and for research. Less is known about how an MDS affects how staff assess, provide and review residents’ everyday care. The review aimed to develop a theory-driven understanding of how care home staff can effectively implement and use MDS to plan and deliver care for residents. Methods The realist review was organised according to RAMESES (Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: and Evolving Standards) guidelines. There were three overlapping stages: 1) defining the scope of the review and theory development on the use of minimum data set 2) testing and refining candidate programme theories through iterative literature searches and stakeholders’ consultations as well as discussion among the research team; and 3) data synthesis from stages 1 and 2. The following databases were used MEDLINE via OVID, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), ASSIA [Applied Social Sciences Citation Index and Abstracts]) and sources of grey literature. Results Fifty-one papers informed the development of three key interlinked theoretical propositions: motivation (mandates and incentives for Minimum Data Set completion); frontline staff monitoring (when Minimum Data Set completion is built into the working practices of the care home); and embedded recording systems (Minimum Data Set recording system is integral to collecting residents’ data). By valuing the contributions of staff and building on existing ways of working, the uptake and use of an MDS could enable all staff to learn with and from each other about what is important for residents’ care Conclusions Minimum Data Sets provides commissioners service providers and researchers with standardised information useful for commissioning planning and analysis. For it to be equally useful for care home staff it requires key activities that address the staff experiences of care, their work with others and the use of digital technology. Registration PROSPERO registration number CRD42020171323.

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. e040397
Author(s):  
Massirfufulay Kpehe Musa ◽  
Gizdem Akdur ◽  
Barbara Hanratty ◽  
Sarah Kelly ◽  
Adam Gordon ◽  
...  

IntroductionCare homes provide nursing and social care for older people who can no longer live independently at home. In the UK, there is no consistent approach to how information about residents’ medical history, care needs and preferences are collected and shared. This limits opportunities to understand the care home population, have a systematic approach to assessment and documentation of care, identifiy care home residents at risk of deterioration and review care. Countries with standardised approaches to residents’ assessment, care planning and review (eg, minimum data sets (MDS)) use the data to understand the care home population, guide resource allocation, monitor services delivery and for research. The aim of this realist review is to develop a theory-driven understanding of how care home staff implement and use MDS to plan and deliver care of individual residents.Methods and analysisA realist review will be conducted in three research stages.Stage 1 will scope the literature and develop candidate programme theories of what ensures effective uptake and sustained implementation of an MDS.Stage2 will test and refine these theories through further iterative searches of the evidence from the literature to establish how effective uptake of an MDS can be achieved.Stage 3 will consult with relevant stakeholders to test or refine the programme theory (theories) of how an MDS works at the resident level of care for different stakeholders and in what circumstances. Data synthesis will use realist logic to align data from each eligible article with possible context–mechanism–outcome configurations or specific elements that answer the research questions.Ethics and disseminationThe University of Hertfordshire Ethics Committee has approved this study (HSK/SF/UH/04169). Findings will be disseminated through briefings with stakeholders, conference presentations, a national consultation on the use of an MDS in UK long-term care settings, publications in peer-reviewed journals and in print and social media publications accessible to residents, relatives and care home staff.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020171323; this review protocol is registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews.


2006 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
C.A.M. McNulty ◽  
J. Bowen ◽  
C. Foy ◽  
K. Gunn ◽  
E. Freeman ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendy Andrusjak ◽  
Ana Barbosa ◽  
Gail Mountain

Abstract Background: Hearing and vision loss in older people has proven to affect physical and mental health and increase the speed of cognitive decline. Studies have proven certain practices and aspects of staff knowledge increase the effective care of residents’ ears and eyes, yet it is not known which of these are being implemented in care homes. This study aims to identify the gaps in staff knowledge and underused practices evident in long term care homes when identifying and managing hearing and vision difficulties in older residents. Methods: This study used a cross-sectional survey design. Survey questions were informed by the existing literature and were focused on practices, staff knowledge, and other aspects that have shown to affect residents’ hearing and vision care. The survey was sent to care homes across England between November 2018 and February 2019 both via Email and in paper format for care home staff to complete. Descriptive statistics and Chi-Square analysis was used to assess the factors particularly influencing the current care being provided to care home residents. Results: A total of 400 care home staff responded from 74 care homes. The results revealed that screening tools are rarely used by staff to identify hearing and vision impairments, care homes have limited access to other assistive devices, and audiology services do not regularly assess care home residents. A majority of staff were also not entirely confident in their knowledge of ear and eye care. Responses were also affected by the respondents’ job role, length of time working in care homes and also the care home type and care home capacity revealing a lack of standardised practice and shared communication. Conclusion: This study identifies which practices known to facilitate ear and eye care are currently under used in care homes across England and what particularly staff are not knowledgeable on when it comes to ear and eye care. This can now inform future research of the areas requiring improvement to as effectively address to acknowledged slow identification and poor management of hearing and vision loss in older people residing in care homes.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krystal Warmoth ◽  
Jo Day ◽  
Emma Cockcroft ◽  
Donald Nigel Reed ◽  
Lucy Pollock ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Older people with multimorbidity often experience polypharmacy. Taking multiple medicines can be beneficial; however, some older adults are prescribed multiple medicines when they are unlikely to improve clinical outcomes and may lead to harm. Deprescribing means reducing or stopping prescription medicines which may no longer be providing benefit. While appropriate deprescribing may usually be safely undertaken, there is a lack of guidance about how to implement it in practice settings such as care homes. Implementing deprescribing in care homes is often challenging, due to differing concerns of residents, staff, clinicians, friends/family members and carers along with differences in care home structures. The STOPPING study will support the development of better deprescribing practice in care homes, considering different views and environments. This paper aims to introduce the research protocol. Methods: We will use qualitative approaches informed by the widely accepted Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to aid analysis. To understand the barriers, facilitators and contextual factors influencing deprescribing in care homes, we will employ individual interviews with care home residents and family members, focus groups with care home staff and healthcare professionals, and observations from care homes. Then, we will examine acceptability, feasibility, and suitability of existing deprescribing approaches using cognitive interviews with care home staff and healthcare professionals. Lastly, we will use narrative synthesis to integrate findings and develop guidance for implementing a deprescribing approach for care homes.Discussion: This research will support the development of implementable approaches to deprescribing in care homes. The insights from this project will be shared with various stakeholders: care home residents, staff, pharmacists, general practitioners, nurses, and other health professionals, carers, researchers, and the public. This work will support deprescribing to be implemented effectively in care homes to benefit residents and the wider health economy.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendy Andrusjak ◽  
Ana Barbosa ◽  
Gail Mountain

Abstract Background: Hearing and vision loss in older people has been proven to affect physical and mental health and increase the speed of cognitive decline. Studies have demonstrated that certain practices and improved staff knowledge increase the effective care of residents’ ears and eyes, yet it is not known which practices are being implemented in care homes. This study aimed to identify the gaps in staff knowledge regarding hearing and vision difficulties in older residents, and which practices known to improve ear and eye care in older care home residents are not commonly implemented in care homes in England.Methods: This study used a cross-sectional survey design. Survey questions were informed by the existing literature and were focused on practices, staff knowledge, and other aspects that have shown to affect residents’ hearing and vision care. A convenience sample of care home staff were recruited from care homes across England between November 2018 and February 2019 via email and in paper format. Descriptive statistics and Chi-Square analysis were applied to identify the factors influencing the care being provided to care home residents. Results: A total of 400 care home staff responded from 74 care homes. The results revealed that less than half of staff respondents reported to use screening tools to identify hearing (46%) and vision impairments (43.8%); that care homes rarely have limited access to other assistive devices for hearing (16%) and vision loss (23.8%), and that audiology services do not regularly assess care home residents (46.8%). A majority of staff who responded were not confident in ear and eye care. Responses were found to be influenced by the respondents’ job role, length of time working in care homes and also the care home type and care home size. Findings confirmed a lack of standardised practice and the importance of shared communication for promulgation of best practice.Conclusion: This study has identified that some practices known to facilitate ear and eye care are not commonly applied in a sample of English care homes. It has also shown that care home staff knowledge of ear and eye care is inconsistent. The information derived from this survey can be used to inform guidelines for best practice and inform needs for future research.


2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 118-125
Author(s):  
Liang-Yu Chen ◽  
Ming-Hsien Lin ◽  
Li-Ning Peng ◽  
Liang-Kung Chen

2021 ◽  
pp. 026921552110604
Author(s):  
Joshua R Lowe ◽  
Sarah J Wallace ◽  
Sonia Sam ◽  
Adrienne Young

Objective In clinical practice and research, standardised sets of data and outcomes are routinely collected to facilitate data comparison, benchmarking and quality improvement. Most existing data sets are condition-specific and cannot be applied to all patients in a given clinical setting. This review aimed to determine whether the development of a minimum data set for subacute rehabilitation is feasible by collating and comparing existing rehabilitation minimum data sets and core outcome sets. Data sources Published literature was identified through database searches (Scopus, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and the COMET Initiative) in September 2021. Additional data sets were identified through a grey literature search. Review methods This review was conducted in alignment with the PRISMA-ScR recommendations. Datasets were included if they were published in English, designed for adults, and intended for use in subacute rehabilitation. Data were extracted and taxonomically organised to identify commonalities. Items present in ≥50% of data sets were considered common. Results Twenty minimum data sets and seven core outcome sets were included. There were 29 common minimum data set domains, with 19 relating to Patient Information, seven relating to Outcomes, two relating to Service Delivery and one relating to Provider Demographics. Four common domains were identified within the Core Outcome Set analysis, which all related to Life Impact, specifically Physical Functioning (86%) , Emotional Functioning/Wellbeing (57%) , Social Functioning (86%) and Global Quality of Life (100%). Conclusion Common item domains in conditions requiring subacute rehabilitation have been identified, suggesting that development of a dataset for subacute rehabilitation may be feasible.


2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (9) ◽  
pp. 1146-1155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Penny L. Brennan ◽  
Mark A. Greenbaum ◽  
Sonne Lemke ◽  
Kathleen K. Schutte

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document