Ju Young Yoon1, Roger L Brown2, Barbara J Bowers3, Siobhan S Sharkey4, Susan D Horn5. 1. School of Nursing, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Signe Skott Cooper Hall 3117, 701 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI 534792-2455, USA. Electronic address: yoon26@wisc.edu. 2. School of Nursing, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Signe Skott Cooper Hall 4187, 701 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI 534792-2455, USA. Electronic address: rlbrown3@wisc.edu. 3. School of Nursing, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Signe Skott Cooper Hall 5113, 701 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI 534792-2455, USA. Electronic address: bjbowers@wisc.edu. 4. Health Management Strategies, 9600 Escarpment Blvd, Suite 745-21, Austin, TX 78749, USA. Electronic address: ssharkey@hmstrat.com. 5. International Severity Information Systems/Institute for Clinical Outcomes Research, 699 East South Temple, Suite 300, Salt Lake City, UT 84102-1282, USA. Electronic address: shorn@isisicor.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Growing attention in the past few decades has focused on improving care quality and quality of life for nursing home residents. Many traditional nursing homes have attempted to transform themselves to become more homelike emphasizing individualized care. This trend is referred to as nursing home culture change in the U.S. A promising culture change nursing home model, the Green House nursing home model, has shown positive psychological outcomes. However, little is known about whether the Green House nursing home model has positive effects on physical function compared to traditional nursing homes. OBJECTIVES: To examine the longitudinal effects of the Green House nursing home model by comparing change patterns of activities of daily living function over time between Green House home residents and traditional nursing home residents. DESIGN: A retrospective longitudinal study. SETTINGS: Four Green House organizations (nine Green House units and four traditional units). PARTICIPANTS: A total of 242 residents (93 Green House residents and 149 traditional home residents) who had stayed in the nursing home at least 6 months from admission. METHODS: The outcome was activities of daily living function, and the main independent variable was the facility type in which the resident stayed: a Green House or traditional unit. Age, gender, comorbidity score, cognitive function, and depressive symptoms at baseline were controlled. All of these measures were from a minimum dataset. Growth curve modeling and growth mixture modeling were employed in this study for longitudinal analyses. RESULTS: The mean activities of daily living function showed deterioration over time, and the rates of deterioration between Green House and traditional home residents were not different over time. Four different activities of daily living function trajectories were identified for 18 months, but there was no statistical difference in the likelihood of being in one of the four trajectory classes between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although Green House nursing homes are considered to represent an innovative model changing the nursing home environment into more person-centered, this study did not demonstrate significant differences in activities of daily living function changes for residents in the Green House nursing homes compared to traditional nursing homes. Given that the Green House model continues to evolve as it is being implemented and variations within and across Green House homes are identified, large-scale longitudinal studies are needed to provide further relevant information on the effects of the Green House model.
BACKGROUND: Growing attention in the past few decades has focused on improving care quality and quality of life for nursing home residents. Many traditional nursing homes have attempted to transform themselves to become more homelike emphasizing individualized care. This trend is referred to as nursing home culture change in the U.S. A promising culture change nursing home model, the Green House nursing home model, has shown positive psychological outcomes. However, little is known about whether the Green House nursing home model has positive effects on physical function compared to traditional nursing homes. OBJECTIVES: To examine the longitudinal effects of the Green House nursing home model by comparing change patterns of activities of daily living function over time between Green House home residents and traditional nursing home residents. DESIGN: A retrospective longitudinal study. SETTINGS: Four Green House organizations (nine Green House units and four traditional units). PARTICIPANTS: A total of 242 residents (93 Green House residents and 149 traditional home residents) who had stayed in the nursing home at least 6 months from admission. METHODS: The outcome was activities of daily living function, and the main independent variable was the facility type in which the resident stayed: a Green House or traditional unit. Age, gender, comorbidity score, cognitive function, and depressive symptoms at baseline were controlled. All of these measures were from a minimum dataset. Growth curve modeling and growth mixture modeling were employed in this study for longitudinal analyses. RESULTS: The mean activities of daily living function showed deterioration over time, and the rates of deterioration between Green House and traditional home residents were not different over time. Four different activities of daily living function trajectories were identified for 18 months, but there was no statistical difference in the likelihood of being in one of the four trajectory classes between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although Green House nursing homes are considered to represent an innovative model changing the nursing home environment into more person-centered, this study did not demonstrate significant differences in activities of daily living function changes for residents in the Green House nursing homes compared to traditional nursing homes. Given that the Green House model continues to evolve as it is being implemented and variations within and across Green House homes are identified, large-scale longitudinal studies are needed to provide further relevant information on the effects of the Green House model.
Authors: Ju Young Yoon; Roger L Brown; Barbara J Bowers; Siobhan S Sharkey; Susan D Horn Journal: Int Psychogeriatr Date: 2015-01-13 Impact factor: 3.878
Authors: S L Hartmaier; P D Sloane; H A Guess; G G Koch; C M Mitchell; C D Phillips Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 1995-03 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Stephanie L Harrison; Suzanne M Dyer; Kate E Laver; Rachel K Milte; Richard Fleming; Maria Crotty Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2022-03-07