Using pulse oximeters in care homes for residents with COVID-19 and other conditions: a rapid mixed-methods evaluation

M. Sidhu, I. Litchfield, Robin Miller, Naomi J. Fulop, B. Janta, J. Tanner, Giulia Maistrello, Jenny Bousfield, C. Vindrola‐Padros, J. Sussex
{"title":"Using pulse oximeters in care homes for residents with COVID-19 and other conditions: a rapid mixed-methods evaluation","authors":"M. Sidhu, I. Litchfield, Robin Miller, Naomi J. Fulop, B. Janta, J. Tanner, Giulia Maistrello, Jenny Bousfield, C. Vindrola‐Padros, J. Sussex","doi":"10.3310/pqwc3425","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n There are over 15,000 care homes in England, with a total of approximately 450,000 beds. Most residents are older adults, some with dementia, and other residents are people of any age with physical or learning disabilities. Using pulse oximetry in care homes can help the monitoring and care of residents with COVID-19 and other conditions.\n \n \n \n To explore the views of care home staff, and the NHS staff they interact with, with regard to using pulse oximetry with residents, as well as the NHS support provided for using pulse oximetry.\n \n \n \n We carried out a rapid mixed-methods evaluation of care homes in England, comprising (1) scoping interviews with NHS leaders, care association directors and care home managers, engaging with relevant literature and co-designing the evaluation with a User Involvement Group; (2) an online survey of care homes; (3) interviews with care home managers and staff, and with NHS staff who support care homes, at six purposively selected sites; and (4) synthesis, reporting and dissemination. The study team undertook online meetings and a workshop to thematically synthesise findings, guided by a theoretical framework.\n \n \n \n We obtained 232 survey responses from 15,362 care homes. Although this was a low (1.5%) response rate, it was expected given exceptional pressures on care home managers and staff at the time of the survey. We conducted 31 interviews at six case study sites. Pulse oximeters were used in many responding care homes before the pandemic and use of pulse oximeters widened during the pandemic. Pulse oximeters are reported by care home managers and staff to provide reassurance to residents and their families, as well as to staff. Using pulse oximeters was usually not challenging for staff and did not add to staff workload or stress levels. Additional support provided through the NHS COVID Oximetry @home programme was welcomed at the care homes receiving it; however, over half of survey respondents were unaware of the programme. In some cases, support from the NHS, including training, was sought but was not always available.\n \n \n \n The survey response rate was low (1.5%) and so findings must be treated with caution. Fewer than the intended number of interviews were completed because of participant unavailability. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, care homes may have been asked to complete numerous other surveys etc., which may have contributed to these limitations. Owing to anonymity, the research team was unable to determine the range of survey respondents across location, financial budget or quality of care.\n \n \n \n Using pulse oximeters in care homes is considered by managers and staff to have been beneficial to care home residents. Ongoing training opportunities for care home staff in use of pulse oximeters would be beneficial. Escalation processes to and responses from NHS services could be more consistent, alongside promoting the NHS COVID Oximetry @home programme to care homes.\n \n \n \n Further research should include the experiences of care home residents and their families, as well as finding out more from an NHS perspective about interactions with care home staff. Research to investigate the cost-effectiveness of pulse oximetry in care homes, and of the NHS COVID Oximetry @home programme of support, would be desirable.\n \n \n \n This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 10, No. 35. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.\n","PeriodicalId":73204,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and social care delivery research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/pqwc3425","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

There are over 15,000 care homes in England, with a total of approximately 450,000 beds. Most residents are older adults, some with dementia, and other residents are people of any age with physical or learning disabilities. Using pulse oximetry in care homes can help the monitoring and care of residents with COVID-19 and other conditions. To explore the views of care home staff, and the NHS staff they interact with, with regard to using pulse oximetry with residents, as well as the NHS support provided for using pulse oximetry. We carried out a rapid mixed-methods evaluation of care homes in England, comprising (1) scoping interviews with NHS leaders, care association directors and care home managers, engaging with relevant literature and co-designing the evaluation with a User Involvement Group; (2) an online survey of care homes; (3) interviews with care home managers and staff, and with NHS staff who support care homes, at six purposively selected sites; and (4) synthesis, reporting and dissemination. The study team undertook online meetings and a workshop to thematically synthesise findings, guided by a theoretical framework. We obtained 232 survey responses from 15,362 care homes. Although this was a low (1.5%) response rate, it was expected given exceptional pressures on care home managers and staff at the time of the survey. We conducted 31 interviews at six case study sites. Pulse oximeters were used in many responding care homes before the pandemic and use of pulse oximeters widened during the pandemic. Pulse oximeters are reported by care home managers and staff to provide reassurance to residents and their families, as well as to staff. Using pulse oximeters was usually not challenging for staff and did not add to staff workload or stress levels. Additional support provided through the NHS COVID Oximetry @home programme was welcomed at the care homes receiving it; however, over half of survey respondents were unaware of the programme. In some cases, support from the NHS, including training, was sought but was not always available. The survey response rate was low (1.5%) and so findings must be treated with caution. Fewer than the intended number of interviews were completed because of participant unavailability. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, care homes may have been asked to complete numerous other surveys etc., which may have contributed to these limitations. Owing to anonymity, the research team was unable to determine the range of survey respondents across location, financial budget or quality of care. Using pulse oximeters in care homes is considered by managers and staff to have been beneficial to care home residents. Ongoing training opportunities for care home staff in use of pulse oximeters would be beneficial. Escalation processes to and responses from NHS services could be more consistent, alongside promoting the NHS COVID Oximetry @home programme to care homes. Further research should include the experiences of care home residents and their families, as well as finding out more from an NHS perspective about interactions with care home staff. Research to investigate the cost-effectiveness of pulse oximetry in care homes, and of the NHS COVID Oximetry @home programme of support, would be desirable. This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 10, No. 35. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在新冠肺炎和其他疾病患者的护理院使用脉搏血氧计:快速混合方法评估
英格兰有15000多家养老院,总床位约为450000张。大多数居民是老年人,有些人患有痴呆症,其他居民是任何年龄段的身体或学习障碍者。在养老院使用脉搏血氧计可以帮助监测和护理患有新冠肺炎和其他疾病的居民。探讨护理院工作人员及其互动的NHS工作人员对与居民一起使用脉搏血氧计的看法,以及NHS对使用脉搏血氧仪的支持。我们对英格兰的养老院进行了快速混合方法评估,包括(1)对NHS领导人、护理协会负责人和养老院管理人员进行范围界定访谈,查阅相关文献,并与用户参与小组共同设计评估;(2) 对养老院的在线调查;(3) 在六个有意选择的地点采访养老院管理人员和工作人员,以及支持养老院的NHS工作人员;(4)综合、报告和传播。研究小组举行了在线会议和研讨会,在理论框架的指导下,对研究结果进行主题综合。我们从15362家养老院获得了232份调查回复。尽管这是一个低(1.5%)的响应率,但考虑到调查时护理院管理人员和工作人员面临的特殊压力,这是意料之中的事。我们在六个案例研究地点进行了31次访谈。在大流行之前,许多有反应的养老院都使用了脉搏血氧计,在大流行期间,脉搏血氧计的使用范围扩大了。养老院管理人员和工作人员报告了脉搏血氧计,以向居民及其家人以及工作人员提供保证。使用脉搏血氧计通常对员工来说并不具有挑战性,也不会增加员工的工作量或压力水平。通过NHS COVID Oximetry@home计划提供的额外支持在接受支持的养老院受到欢迎;然而,超过一半的受访者并不知道该计划。在某些情况下,英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)寻求支持,包括培训,但并不总是可用的。调查回复率较低(1.5%),因此必须谨慎对待调查结果。由于参与者不在,完成的访谈数量少于预期数量。在整个新冠肺炎大流行期间,养老院可能被要求完成许多其他调查等,这可能导致了这些限制。由于匿名,研究团队无法确定调查对象在地点、财务预算或护理质量方面的范围。管理人员和工作人员认为,在养老院使用脉搏血氧计对养老院居民有益。为护理院工作人员提供使用脉搏血氧计的持续培训机会将是有益的。NHS服务的升级过程和反应可能会更加一致,同时向养老院推广NHS COVID Oximetry@home计划。进一步的研究应该包括养老院居民及其家人的经历,以及从NHS的角度了解更多关于与养老院工作人员互动的信息。研究养老院脉搏血氧仪的成本效益,以及NHS新冠肺炎血氧仪在家支持计划的成本效益是可取的。该项目由国家卫生与护理研究所(NIHR)卫生与社会护理提供研究计划资助,并将在《卫生与社会保健提供研究》上全文发表;第10卷第35期。有关更多项目信息,请访问NIHR期刊图书馆网站。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Causes and solutions to workplace psychological ill-health for nurses, midwives and paramedics: the Care Under Pressure 2 realist review. Relationship between staff and quality of care in care homes: StaRQ mixed methods study. Practices of falls risk assessment and prevention in acute hospital settings: a realist investigation. Safer and more efficient vital signs monitoring protocols to identify the deteriorating patients in the general hospital ward: an observational study. Reducing health inequalities through general practice: a realist review and action framework.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1