BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Current nursing home policy emphasizes the need for collaborative, team-based care planning in which families and/or residents are actively involved. Resident care conferences are common where care providers, families, and/or residents discuss and coordinate resident care needs and evaluate care goals. This study critically examines the process, structure, and content of care conferences to expand our understanding of how resident care is negotiated among care providers and families in this context. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This study was part of a larger critical ethnography examining the negotiation of care work among care providers, families, and residents in three purposively selected nursing homes in British Columbia, Canada. Thirty-seven care conferences were observed. Field notes and interview data were thematically analyzed with a focus on what was said, who said what and to whom, whose voice was privileged, and how power manifested between care providers, families, and/or residents. RESULTS: As illustrated by three key themes, Exclusion by Process-Following Script, Exclusion by Content-Scripted Reports, and Exclusion through Devalued Knowledge, families were overtly and covertly excluded from contributing to the care conferences. As such, families' presence did not guarantee open communication or active solicitation of their perspectives. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: The use of predetermined agendas and processes, clinically generic reporting, and technical jargon reproduced the structural inequality between care providers and families making collaboration difficult to effectively negotiate. For care conferences to meaningfully contribute to person-centered care, it is imperative that mutual exchange be promoted and families empowered to participate as equals.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Current nursing home policy emphasizes the need for collaborative, team-based care planning in which families and/or residents are actively involved. Resident care conferences are common where care providers, families, and/or residents discuss and coordinate resident care needs and evaluate care goals. This study critically examines the process, structure, and content of care conferences to expand our understanding of how resident care is negotiated among care providers and families in this context. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This study was part of a larger critical ethnography examining the negotiation of care work among care providers, families, and residents in three purposively selected nursing homes in British Columbia, Canada. Thirty-seven care conferences were observed. Field notes and interview data were thematically analyzed with a focus on what was said, who said what and to whom, whose voice was privileged, and how power manifested between care providers, families, and/or residents. RESULTS: As illustrated by three key themes, Exclusion by Process-Following Script, Exclusion by Content-Scripted Reports, and Exclusion through Devalued Knowledge, families were overtly and covertly excluded from contributing to the care conferences. As such, families' presence did not guarantee open communication or active solicitation of their perspectives. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: The use of predetermined agendas and processes, clinically generic reporting, and technical jargon reproduced the structural inequality between care providers and families making collaboration difficult to effectively negotiate. For care conferences to meaningfully contribute to person-centered care, it is imperative that mutual exchange be promoted and families empowered to participate as equals.
Authors: Deborah Parker; Karen Clifton; Anthony Tuckett; Helen Walker; Elizabeth Reymond; Teresa Prior; Kristien McAnelly; Peter Jenkin; Fiona Israel; Kim Greeve; Karen Glaetzer Journal: Int J Older People Nurs Date: 2015-12-17 Impact factor: 2.115
Authors: Tim Luckett; Lynnette Chenoweth; Jane Phillips; Deborah Brooks; Janet Cook; Geoffrey Mitchell; Dimity Pond; Patricia M Davidson; Elizabeth Beattie; Georgina Luscombe; Stephen Goodall; Thomas Fischer; Meera Agar Journal: Int Psychogeriatr Date: 2017-06-27 Impact factor: 3.878
Authors: Rebecca Palm; Diana Trutschel; Michael Simon; Sabine Bartholomeyczik; Bernhard Holle Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2015-10-01 Impact factor: 4.669
Authors: Lisa A Cranley; Susan E Slaughter; Sienna Caspar; Melissa Heisey; Mei Huang; Tieghan Killackey; Katherine S McGilton Journal: Int J Older People Nurs Date: 2020-03-20 Impact factor: 2.115
Authors: Ramona Backhaus; Linda J M Hoek; Erica de Vries; Jolanda C M van Haastregt; Jan P H Hamers; Hilde Verbeek Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2020-10-30 Impact factor: 3.921