scholarly journals Old age psychiatry services: long-stay care facilities in Australia and the UK

2002 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Snowdon ◽  
Tom Arie
Keyword(s):  
Old Age ◽  
Long Term Care ◽  
Focus Attention ◽  
Old People ◽  
Term Care ◽  
What Works ◽  
Care Facilities ◽  
Old Age Psychiatry ◽  
The Uk

We are old age psychiatrists; T.A. based in Britain, J.S. in Australia. A return visit by T.A. to Australia allowed us to focus attention on differences between the two countries in their provision of long-term care for old people with mental disabilities. What works well? What constrains development?

scholarly journals Practice Change Interventions in Long-Term Care Facilities: What Works, and Why?

2016 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 372-384 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sienna Caspar ◽  
Heather A. Cooke ◽  
Alison Phinney ◽  
Pamela A. Ratner
Keyword(s):  
Nous Avons ◽  
Long Term Care ◽  
Practice Change ◽  
Term Care ◽  
What Works ◽  
Care Facilities ◽  
Il Y A ◽  
Longue Duree ◽  
Personnel Soignant

RÉSUMÉAu cours des trois dernières décennies, il y a eu une augmentation notable dans les études de pratique concernant changements dans les interventions en soins de longue durée (SLD). Cette critique, basé sur une approche réaliste modifiée, répond aux questions suivantes: Quelles caractéristiques de changement d’intervention fonctionnent bien? Et, dans quelles circonstances, fonctionnent-elles, et pourquoi? Une approche réaliste modifiée a été appliquée pour identifier et expliquer les interactions parmi le contexte, le mécanisme, et les résultats. Nous avons cherché des bases de données électroniques et la littérature publiée pour les études empiriques des interventions pratiques modifiées qui (a) ont été menées dans les établissements de SLD, (b) ont impliqué le personnel soignant formel, et (c) ont fait état d’une évaluation formelle. Quatre-vingt-quatre articles répondaient à nos critères d’inclusion. Les interventions qui ne comprenaient que des facteurs prédisposants étaient moins susceptibles d’être efficaces, tandis que les interventions qui comprenaient des facteurs renforçants étaient les plus susceptibles de produire des résultats durables. Nous avons conclu que les interventions visant à changer les pratiques dans les milieux de SLD devraient inclure les facteurs habilitants et renforçants qui sont à la fois réalisables et efficaces.

scholarly journals Understanding and Explaining How Staff Promote Quality for Older People Living in Long-Term Care Facilities

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 145-146
Author(s):  
Julienne Meyer ◽  
Kirsty Haunch ◽  
Carl Thompson ◽  
Karen Spilsbury
Keyword(s):  
Older People ◽  
Long Term Care ◽  
Valuable Resource ◽  
Social Psychological ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Care Facilities ◽  
Emotional Dimensions ◽  
The Uk

Abstract Little is known about how the workforce influences quality in long term care facilities for older people. Conceptually, quality is complex, often contested, and dynamic, has overlapping physical, social, psychological and emotional dimensions and can refer to both quality of life and quality of care. Assuming ‘more staff equates to better quality’ is intuitively appealing but research suggests that a more nuanced, non-linear, relationship exists. A programme of research in the UK is developing theoretical and empirical explanations of how staff promote quality for older people living in long-term care facilities. It shifts the debate from numbers of staff and their relationship to quality indicators toward recognising the ways in which staff more broadly influence quality. Our work will be useful for people and organisations making policy and delivering services on the best ways to deploy and support quality in long term care through the most valuable resource: its staff.

Loneliness in Old Age: Interventions to Curb Loneliness in Long-Term Care Facilities

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 301-315 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel E. Brimelow ◽  
Judy A. Wollin
Keyword(s):  
Old Age ◽  
Long Term Care ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Care Facilities

scholarly journals SEeking AnsweRs for Care Homes during the COVID-19 pandemic (COVID SEARCH)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Spilsbury ◽  
Reena Devi ◽  
Alys Griffiths ◽  
Cyd Akrill ◽  
Anita Astle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Agenda ◽  
Long Term Care ◽  
Care Home ◽  
Discussion Group ◽  
Short Report ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Care And Support ◽  
Care Facilities ◽  
The Uk

Abstract The care and support of older people residing in long-term care facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic has created new and unanticipated uncertainties for staff. In this short report, we present our analyses of the uncertainties of care home managers and staff expressed in a self-formed closed WhatsApp™ discussion group during the first stages of the pandemic in the UK. We categorised their wide-ranging questions to understand what information would address these uncertainties and provide support. We have been able to demonstrate that almost one-third of these uncertainties could have been tackled immediately through timely, responsive and unambiguous fact-based guidance. The other uncertainties require appraisal, synthesis and summary of existing evidence, commissioning or provision of a sector- informed research agenda for medium to long term. The questions represent wider internationally relevant care home pandemic-related uncertainties.

scholarly journals The need for improved discharge criteria for hospitalised patients with COVID-19—implications for patients in long-term care facilities

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shirley Sze ◽  
Daniel Pan ◽  
Caroline M L Williams ◽  
Joseph Barker ◽  
Jatinder S Minhas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Symptom Onset ◽  
Long Term Care ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Hospitalised Patients ◽  
Care Facilities ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Discharge Criteria

Abstract In the COVID-19 pandemic, patients who are older and residents of long-term care facilities (LTCF) are at greatest risk of worse clinical outcomes. We reviewed discharge criteria for hospitalised COVID-19 patients from 10 countries with the highest incidence of COVID-19 cases as of 26 July 2020. Five countries (Brazil, Mexico, Peru, Chile and Iran) had no discharge criteria; the remaining five (USA, India, Russia, South Africa and the UK) had discharge guidelines with large inter-country variability. India and Russia recommend discharge for a clinically recovered patient with two negative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests 24 h apart; the USA offers either a symptom based strategy—clinical recovery and 10 days after symptom onset, or the same test-based strategy. The UK suggests that patients can be discharged when patients have clinically recovered; South Africa recommends discharge 14 days after symptom onset if clinically stable. We recommend a unified, simpler discharge criteria, based on current studies which suggest that most SARS-CoV-2 loses its infectivity by 10 days post-symptom onset. In asymptomatic cases, this can be taken as 10 days after the first positive PCR result. Additional days of isolation beyond this should be left to the discretion of individual clinician. This represents a practical compromise between unnecessarily prolonged admissions and returning highly infectious patients back to their care facilities, and is of particular importance in older patients discharged to LTCFs, residents of which may be at greatest risk of transmission and worse clinical outcomes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document