Literature DB >> 22497666

Discharge-planning for long-term care needs: the values and priorities of older people, their younger relatives and health professionals.

Linley A Denson1, Helen R Winefield, Justin J Beilby.   

Abstract

Discharge-planning decisions about long-term care (LTC) can be difficult and distressing for older people, families and discharge-planning health professionals. Retrospective research suggests that despite good intentions and a shared focus on the best interests of the older person, stakeholders may hold very different values about good outcomes and how to decide them. We aimed to compare the opinions and values of frail elders living at home, younger relatives and health professionals experienced in discharge-planning, prospectively: before, not after, a LTC decision. We interviewed three types of stakeholders (10 older people, 8 relatives and 18 health professionals) using a hypothetical vignette about a frail elder leaving hospital. In a mixed methods design, we quantitatively compared the discharge plans and decision-makers that stakeholders suggested, and qualitatively analysed the 36 interview transcripts for participants' articulation of underlying values during these discussions. Older participants often suggested safe restrictive options (residential care, proxy decision-making) for the hypothetical frail elder, while advocating autonomy for themselves. Younger people generally endorsed autonomous decision-making and less restrictive discharge options especially if the elder was mentally competent, but reported difficult ethical tensions between safety and autonomy. Individual personality and preferences, mental capacity, and the importance of personal care in supporting autonomy were central themes consistent with the Ecological Theory of Aging. Accordingly, discharge planners can usefully articulate the balance of safety and autonomy, conceptualizing home care as maintaining independence rather than accepting dependence. Ethical training should incorporate sophisticated models of practice specifying both psychological and physical safety as components of beneficence. Few elders adopt a consumer approach to LTC: health professionals can encourage mid-life adults to consider later care needs when planning for retirement.
© 2012 The Authors. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences © 2012 Nordic College of Caring Science.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22497666     DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-6712.2012.00987.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Scand J Caring Sci        ISSN: 0283-9318


  7 in total

1.  VA staff perceptions of the role of the extended care referral process in home and community-based services versus nursing home use posthospital discharge.

Authors:  Edward Alan Miller; Orna Intrator; Emily Gadbois; Stefanie Gidmark; James L Rudolph
Journal:  Home Health Care Serv Q       Date:  2017-06-12

Review 2.  The needs of older people receiving home care: a scoping review.

Authors:  Vladimíra Dostálová; Alžběta Bártová; Hana Bláhová; Iva Holmerová
Journal:  Aging Clin Exp Res       Date:  2020-02-21       Impact factor: 3.636

3.  Who should take care of me? Preferences of old age individuals for characteristics of professional long-term caregivers: an observational cross-sectional study.

Authors:  André Hajek; Thomas Lehnert; Annemarie Wegener; Steffi G Riedel-Heller; Hans-Helmut König
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2017-08-10

4.  Needs and preferences of informal caregivers regarding outpatient care for the elderly: a systematic literature review.

Authors:  M Plöthner; K Schmidt; L de Jong; J Zeidler; K Damm
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2019-03-13       Impact factor: 3.921

5.  The making of local hospital discharge arrangements: specifying the role of professional groups.

Authors:  Viola Burau; Flemming Bro
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-08-04       Impact factor: 2.655

6.  Decision-making factors affecting different family members regarding the placement of relatives in long-term care facilities.

Authors:  Ying-Chia Huang; Chiao-Lee Chu; Ching-Sung Ho; Shou-Jen Lan; Chen-Hsi Hsieh; Yen-Ping Hsieh
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-01-17       Impact factor: 2.655

7.  Stakeholders' views and experiences of care and interventions for addressing frailty and pre-frailty: A meta-synthesis of qualitative evidence.

Authors:  Barbara D'Avanzo; Rachel Shaw; Silvia Riva; Joao Apostolo; Elzbieta Bobrowicz-Campos; Donata Kurpas; Maria Bujnowska-Fedak; Carol Holland
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.