| Literature DB >> 34804463 |
Y P Tsang1, C H Wu2, Polly P L Leung1, W H Ip1,3, W K Ching4.
Abstract
Due to the global ageing population, the increasing demand for long-term care services for the elderly has directed considerable attention towards the renovation of nursing homes. Although nursing homes play an essential role within residential elderly care, professional shortages have created serious pressure on the elderly service sector. Effective workforce planning is vital for improving the efficacy and workload balance of existing nursing staff in today's complex and volatile long-term care service market. Currently, there is lack of an integrated solution to monitor care services and determine the optimal nursing staffing strategy in nursing homes. This study addresses the above challenge through the formulation of nursing staffing optimisation under the blockchain-internet of things (BIoT) environment. Embedding a blockchain into IoT establishes the long-term care platform for the elderly and care workers, thereby decentralising long-term care information in the nursing home network to achieve effective care service monitoring. Moreover, such information is further utilised to optimise nursing staffing by using a genetic algorithm. A case study of a Hong Kong nursing home was conducted to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed system. We found that the total monthly staffing cost after using the proposed model was significantly lower than the existing practice with a change of -13.48%, which considers the use of heterogeneous workforce and temporary staff. Besides, the care monitoring and staffing flexibility are further enhanced, in which the concept of skill substitution is integrated in nursing staffing optimisation.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34804463 PMCID: PMC8604611 DOI: 10.1155/2021/9974059
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
Figure 1Illustration of nursing home structure for staffing optimisation.
Figure 2Layered architecture of the BIoT-NWP.
Figure 3Graphical illustration of the blockchain mechanism in nursing homes.
Notations of the optimisation model of the NSOP.
| Set/variable | Description |
|---|---|
|
| Set of nursing staff categories, |
|
| Set of nursing staff in a particular category |
|
| Set of temporary nursing staff in a particular staff category |
|
| Set of potential nursing staff in a particular category |
|
| Set of potential temporary nursing staff in a particular staff category |
|
| Set of resident types, |
|
| Set of healthcare tasks that nursing staff of category |
|
| Set of weeks (in a planning horizon), |
|
| Set of month (in the planning horizon of 1 month), |
|
| The upper limit of working hours per shift for a temporary staff of category |
|
| The upper limit of working hours per week for temporary nursing staff of category |
|
| Monthly salary of the |
|
| Hourly wage of overtime for the |
|
| Cost of hiring a regular nursing staff member of category |
|
| Cost of having a regular nursing staff member of category |
|
| Hourly wage of temporary nursing staff of category |
|
| Number of type |
|
| Service time (in minutes) of the |
|
| 1 if the |
|
| The upper limit of shifts a nurse of category |
|
| The upper limit of overtime for a regular nurse of category |
|
| Standard working hour for all regular nursing staff per shift |
|
| Number of additional regular nursing staff of category |
|
| Number of existing regular nursing staff of category |
|
| Number of temporary nursing staff of category |
|
| 1 if the |
|
| 1 if |
|
| Overtime (in hours) for the |
|
| Total working hours of temporary nursing staff of category |
|
| 1 if the |
|
| 1 if the |
|
| Working hours of the |
|
| 1 if the |
|
| Total working hours of the |
Figure 4An example for illustrating the encoded chromosome.
Figure 5Deployment illustration of the long-term care platform.
Specification of the proposed blockchain mechanism.
| Aspects of blockchain | Detail(s) |
|---|---|
| Data in blocks | Hash value, previous hash value, data, timestamp, and nonce |
| Consensus algorithm | Istanbul Byzantine Fault Tolerance (IBFT) |
| Encryption method | SHA256 and asymmetric encryption |
| Validators | Nursing home manager |
| Nodes of data collection | Individual tablet of the residents |
| Expected network size | ≥3 |
Figure 6Graphical illustration of the block building process.
Model parameters of the case company for nursing staffing optimisation.
| Value | |
|---|---|
|
| |
|
| {1, 2, 3} |
|
| {1, 2, ..., 15} |
|
| {1, 2, ..., 6} |
|
| {0} |
|
| {1} |
|
| {16, 17,…, 30} |
|
| {7, 8,…, 12} |
|
| {1} |
|
| {1, 2,…, 90} |
|
| {1, 2,…, 28} |
|
| {1, 2, 3, 4} |
|
| 14 |
|
| $8,500 |
|
| $12,000 |
|
| {1, 2, ..., 15} |
|
| 12 |
|
| $20,000 |
|
| 130 |
|
| 180 |
|
| 230 |
|
| 130 |
|
| 180 |
|
| 230 |
|
| {1, 2, ..., 6} |
|
| 18 |
|
| 53 |
|
| 6 |
|
| 4 |
|
| 8 |
|
| |
|
| |
| Total service time (in minutes) required in shift 1, 4, 7,…, 82, 85, 88 | 1725 |
| Total service time (in minutes) required in shift 2, 5, 8,…, 83, 86, 89 | 2355 |
| Total service time (in minutes) required in shift 3, 6, 9,…, 84, 87, 90 | 1020 |
| Total monthly staffing cost | $319, 500 |
GA parameter settings and results from problem instances.
| # | CR | MR | PS |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 100 | 359167.5 |
| 2 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 300 | 342215 |
| 3 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 500 | 326090 |
| 4 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 100 | 349168 |
| 5 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 300 | 330458 |
| 6 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 500 | 331318 |
| 7 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 100 | 355022 |
| 8 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 300 | 322926 |
| 9 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 500 | 323452 |
| 10 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 100 | 349024 |
| 11 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 300 | 320508 |
| 12 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 500 | 314732.5 |
| 13 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 100 | 348692.5 |
| 14 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 300 | 330700 |
| 15 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 500 | 307064 |
| 16 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 100 | 336270 |
| 17 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 300 | 318356 |
| 18 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 500 | 306075.6 |
| 19 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 100 | 349052 |
| 20 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 300 | 316696 |
| 21 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 500 | 310492.5 |
| 22 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 100 | 355078 |
| 23 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 300 | 312770 |
| 24 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 500 | 303615 |
| 25 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 100 | 328502.5 |
| 26 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 300 | 305405 |
| 27 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 500 | 293784.4 |
| 28 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 100 | 333720 |
| 29 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 300 | 304138 |
| 30 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 500 | 297088 |
| 31 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 100 | 331968 |
| 32 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 300 | 309064 |
| 33 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 500 | 304075 |
| 34 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 100 | 337504 |
| 35 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 300 | 308486 |
| 36 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 500 | 302227.5 |
| 37 | 0.8 | 0.1 | 100 | 330810 |
| 38 | 0.8 | 0.1 | 300 | 302394 |
| 39 | 0.8 | 0.1 | 500 | 302164 |
| 40 | 0.8 | 0.2 | 100 | 318124 |
| 41 | 0.8 | 0.2 | 300 | 297856 |
| 42 | 0.8 | 0.2 | 500 | 297772 |
| 43 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 100 | 326342 |
| 44 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 300 | 296394 |
| 45 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 500 | 298035 |
| 46 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 100 | 333254 |
| 47 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 300 | 299238 |
| 48 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 500 | 299877.5 |
| 49 | 1.0 | 0.1 | 100 | 307922.5 |
| 50 | 1.0 | 0.1 | 300 | 300762 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 52 | 1.0 | 0.2 | 100 | 325412 |
| 53 | 1.0 | 0.2 | 300 | 294498 |
| 54 | 1.0 | 0.2 | 500 | 294476 |
| 55 | 1.0 | 0.4 | 100 | 315132 |
| 56 | 1.0 | 0.4 | 300 | 294194 |
| 57 | 1.0 | 0.4 | 500 | 290332.5 |
| 58 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 100 | 314700 |
| 59 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 300 | 310074 |
| 60 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 500 | 289978.8 |
Note. The bold parameter settings represent that the minimal fitness value was obtained.
Figure 7Percentage of care demands of satisfied residents.
Figure 8Total monthly staffing costs of using heterogeneous and homogeneous workforces.
Figure 9Total monthly staffing costs with/without temporary nursing staff.
Details of the obtained optimal solutions
| Run | No. of Category 1 regular nursing staff required | No. of Category 2 regular nursing staff required | No. of Category 3 regular nursing staff required | Level change∗ for Category 1 regular nursing staff | Level change∗ for Category 2 regular nursing staff | Level change∗ for Category 3 regular nursing staff | No. of Category 1 temporary nursing staff required | No. of Category 2 temporary nursing staff required | No. of Category 3 temporary nursing staff required | Total monthly staffing cost (HK$) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 6 | 5 | −13 | 0 | −1 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 275,000 |
| 2 | 3 | 6 | 6 | −12 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 277,480 |
| 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | −11 | −1 | 0 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 270,340 |
| 4 | 6 | 5 | 4 | −9 | −1 | −2 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 274,080 |
| 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | −10 | −2 | −1 | 5 | 6 | 1 | 284,260 |
| 6 | 4 | 5 | 6 | −11 | −1 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 273,980 |
| 7 | 5 | 5 | 5 | −10 | −1 | −1 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 284,540 |
| 8 | 6 | 4 | 5 | −9 | −2 | −1 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 274,200 |
| 9 | 5 | 4 | 6 | −10 | −2 | 0 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 271,640 |
| 10 | 5 | 6 | 6 | −10 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 273,140 |
| 11 | 6 | 5 | 5 | −9 | −1 | −1 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 272,580 |
| 12 | 5 | 6 | 4 | −10 | 0 | −2 | 6 | 3 | 2 | 280,520 |
| 13 | 4 | 4 | 6 | −11 | −2 | 0 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 274,800 |
| 14 | 5 | 4 | 5 | −10 | −2 | −1 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 281,860 |
| 15 | 6 | 5 | 4 | −9 | −1 | −2 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 280,820 |
| 16 | 4 | 5 | 6 | −11 | −1 | 0 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 274,780 |
| 17 | 5 | 5 | 5 | −10 | −1 | −1 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 279,080 |
| 18 | 4 | 4 | 6 | −11 | −2 | 0 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 272,400 |
| 19 | 6 | 5 | 4 | −9 | −1 | −2 | 6 | 5 | 0 | 276,860 |
| 20 | 6 | 4 | 5 | −9 | −2 | −1 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 276,480 |
| Average | 276,442 (−13.48%) |
∗For level change, a positive number refers to the additional regular nursing staff to be hired, while a negative number refers to the amount of existing regular nursing staff left the workforce.