Sue Tucker1, Christian Brand2, Caroline Sutcliffe2, David Challis2, Kai Saks3, Hilde Verbeek4, Esther Cabrera5, Staffan Karlsson6, Helena Leino-Kilpi7, Astrid Stephan8, Maria E Soto9. 1. Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom. Electronic address: sue.tucker@manchester.ac.uk. 2. Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. 4. Department of Health Services Research, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 5. School of Health Sciences TecnoCampus, University Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain. 6. Department of Health Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. 7. Department of Nursing Science, University of Turku, and Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland. 8. Faculty of Health, School of Nursing Science, University of Witten/Herdecke, Witten, Germany. 9. Geriatrics Department, Gerontôpole, Toulouse University Hospital, INSERM UMR 1027, Toulouse, France.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To explore the extent to which client characteristics, decision-maker attributes, and country influence judgments of institutional long-term care (ILTC) appropriateness for people with dementia. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 161 experts in dementia care from 8 European countries reviewed a series of 14 vignettes representing people with dementia on the cusp of ILTC admission and indicated the most appropriate setting in which to support each case in a simple discrete choice exercise: own home, very sheltered housing, residential home, or nursing home. At least 16 experts participated in each country (Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom). MEASUREMENTS: Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the experts and their placement preferences. Logistic regression modeling was used to explore the extent to which the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of people with dementia, and the profession, workplace, and country of decision-makers were associated with ILTC recommendation. RESULTS: Client characteristics, decision-maker attributes, and country all seemed to play a part in influencing professionals' perceptions of the appropriateness of ILTC for people with dementia. Expert decision-makers were more likely to recommend ILTC for individuals who required help with mobility or had multiple care needs, and appeared to give more weight to carers' than clients' wishes. Community-based social workers were less likely than other professional groups to favor ILTC placement. Experts in Finland, Germany, and the United Kingdom were less likely to recommend ILTC than experts in France, the Netherlands, and Estonia; experts in Sweden and Spain took an intermediate position. CONCLUSION: This study provides new understanding of the factors that shape professionals' perceptions of ILTC appropriateness and highlights the need to construct multifaceted models of institutionalization when planning services for people with dementia. It also has several important clinical implications (including flagging interventions that could decrease the need for ILTC), and provides a basis for enhancing professionals' decision-making capabilities (including the greater involvement of clients themselves).
OBJECTIVES: To explore the extent to which client characteristics, decision-maker attributes, and country influence judgments of institutional long-term care (ILTC) appropriateness for people with dementia. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 161 experts in dementia care from 8 European countries reviewed a series of 14 vignettes representing people with dementia on the cusp of ILTC admission and indicated the most appropriate setting in which to support each case in a simple discrete choice exercise: own home, very sheltered housing, residential home, or nursing home. At least 16 experts participated in each country (Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom). MEASUREMENTS: Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the experts and their placement preferences. Logistic regression modeling was used to explore the extent to which the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of people with dementia, and the profession, workplace, and country of decision-makers were associated with ILTC recommendation. RESULTS: Client characteristics, decision-maker attributes, and country all seemed to play a part in influencing professionals' perceptions of the appropriateness of ILTC for people with dementia. Expert decision-makers were more likely to recommend ILTC for individuals who required help with mobility or had multiple care needs, and appeared to give more weight to carers' than clients' wishes. Community-based social workers were less likely than other professional groups to favor ILTC placement. Experts in Finland, Germany, and the United Kingdom were less likely to recommend ILTC than experts in France, the Netherlands, and Estonia; experts in Sweden and Spain took an intermediate position. CONCLUSION: This study provides new understanding of the factors that shape professionals' perceptions of ILTC appropriateness and highlights the need to construct multifaceted models of institutionalization when planning services for people with dementia. It also has several important clinical implications (including flagging interventions that could decrease the need for ILTC), and provides a basis for enhancing professionals' decision-making capabilities (including the greater involvement of clients themselves).
Authors: Maria Dos Anjos Coelho Rodrigues Dixe; Liliana Fernanda da Conceição Teixeira; Timóteo João Teixeira Camacho Coelho Areosa; Roberta Caçador Frontini; Teresa de Jesus Almeida Peralta; Ana Isabel Fernandes Querido Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2019-09-18 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: Clarissa Giebel; Joe Hollinghurst; Ashley Akbari; Christian Schnier; Tim Wilkinson; Laura North; Mark Gabbay; Sarah Rodgers Journal: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2020-10-19 Impact factor: 3.850