Psychometric Evaluation of the Team Member Perspectives of Person-Centered Care (TM-PCC) Survey for Long-Term Care Homes

Person-centered care (PCC) is fundamental for providing high-quality care in long-term care homes. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of an 11-item Team Member Perspectives of Person-Centered Care (TM-PCC) survey, adapted from White and colleagues (2008). In a cross-sectional study, 461 staff from four long-term care homes in Ontario, Canada, completed the TM-PCC. Construct validity and internal consistency of the TM-PCC were examined with a principal component analysis and Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. Findings revealed a three-component structure with factor 1, Supporting Social Relationships; factor 2, Familiarity with Residents’ Preferences; and factor 3, Meaningful Resident–Staff Relationships. The TM-PCC, as compared to the original survey, presented with less components (i.e., did not address Resident Autonomy, Personhood, Comfort, Work with Residents, Personal Environment, and Management Structure), yet included one new component (Meaningful Resident–Staff Relationships). The TM-PCC has a similar internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient 0.82 vs. White et al. 0.74–0.91). The TM-PCC can be used to assess PCC from the staff’s perspective in long-term care homes.

Psychometric Evaluation of the Team Member Perspectives of Person-Centered Care (TM-PCC) Survey for Long-Term Care Homes

Person-centered care (PCC) is fundamental for providing high-quality care in long-term care homes. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of an 11-item Team Member Perspectives of Person-Centered Care (TM-PCC) survey, adapted from White and colleagues (2008). In a cross-sectional study, 461 staff from four long-term care homes in Ontario, Canada, completed the TM-PCC. Construct validity and internal consistency of the TM-PCC were examined with a principal component analysis and Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. Findings revealed a three-component structure with factor 1, Supporting Social Relationships; factor 2, Familiarity with Residents’ Preferences; and factor 3, Meaningful Resident–Staff Relationships. The TM-PCC, as compared to the original survey, presented with less components (i.e., did not address Resident Autonomy, Personhood, Comfort, Work with Residents, Personal Environment, and Management Structure), yet included one new component (Meaningful Resident–Staff Relationships). The TM-PCC has a similar internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient 0.82 vs. White et al. 0.74–0.91). The TM-PCC can be used to assess PCC from the staff’s perspective in long-term care homes.

Making working from home work: reflections on adapting to change

Objectives: During the COVID-19 pandemic, our mental health service experimented with working from home. The flexibility of this practice can enable improved efficiency, staff well-being and expanded operating hours in the longer term. This paper shares our experiences and makes recommendations for being a part of and leading distributed clinical teams. Conclusions: We saw a 3% increase in total appointment bookings and a 7% reduction in cancellations/non-attendance compared to the same period in 2019. Based on our experience and the literature, effective distributed teams have leaders that connect via video at least weekly; focus on transparency and output over micromanagement; prioritise staff relationships and err towards overcommunication.

Students as Partners—Good for Students, Good for Staff: A Study on the Impact of Partnership Working and How This Translates to Improved Student-Staff Engagement

This paper situates Students as Partners (SaP) within the broader construct of student engagement so that we can examine the influence of partnership on student and staff participants and how this impacts on student and staff relationships. The findings of interviews carried out with students and staff (n=14), which aimed to capture rich descriptions of the lived experience of individuals, reveal that there was a high level of consensus between students and staff on how they described their lived experiences and the impact that partnership was having on them—particularly in relation to their personal development. Whilst it became apparent that the participants’ thinking and behaviours had changed as a result of their involvement in partnership, quite often the catalyst for this change was in relation to how the participants were feeling. Considerations for relevant stakeholders are highlighted to support the scaling up of a SaP approach.