Stephanie L Harrison1,2, Suzanne M Dyer1,2, Rachel Milte1,2,3, Enwu Liu2,4, Emmanuel S Gnanamanickam1,2,5, Maria Crotty1,2. 1. Rehabilitation, Aged and Extended Care, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 2. NHMRC Cognitive Decline Partnership Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 3. Institute for Choice, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 4. Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 5. Health Economics and Social Policy, Centre for Population Health Research, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A clustered domestic model of residential aged care has been associated with better consumer-rated quality of care. Our objective was to examine differences in staffing structures between clustered domestic and standard models. METHODS: A cross-sectional study involving 541 individuals living in 17 Australian not-for-profit residential aged care homes. RESULTS: Four of the homes offered dementia-specific clustered domestic models of care with higher personal care attendant (PCA) hours-per-resident-per-day (mean [SD] 2.43 [0.29] vs. 1.74 [0.46], P < 0.001), slightly higher direct care hours-per-resident-per-day (2.66 [0.35] vs. 2.58 [0.44], P = 0.006), higher staff training costs ($1492 [258] vs. $989 [928], P < 0.001) and lower registered/enrolled nurse hours-per-resident-per-day (0.23 [0.10] vs. 0.85 [0.17], P < 0.001) compared to standard models. CONCLUSIONS: An Australian clustered domestic model of care had higher PCA hours, more staff training and more direct care time compared to standard models. Further research to determine optimal staffing structures within alternative models of care is warranted.
OBJECTIVE: A clustered domestic model of residential aged care has been associated with better consumer-rated quality of care. Our objective was to examine differences in staffing structures between clustered domestic and standard models. METHODS: A cross-sectional study involving 541 individuals living in 17 Australian not-for-profit residential aged care homes. RESULTS: Four of the homes offered dementia-specific clustered domestic models of care with higher personal care attendant (PCA) hours-per-resident-per-day (mean [SD] 2.43 [0.29] vs. 1.74 [0.46], P < 0.001), slightly higher direct care hours-per-resident-per-day (2.66 [0.35] vs. 2.58 [0.44], P = 0.006), higher staff training costs ($1492 [258] vs. $989 [928], P < 0.001) and lower registered/enrolled nurse hours-per-resident-per-day (0.23 [0.10] vs. 0.85 [0.17], P < 0.001) compared to standard models. CONCLUSIONS: An Australian clustered domestic model of care had higher PCA hours, more staff training and more direct care time compared to standard models. Further research to determine optimal staffing structures within alternative models of care is warranted.