Experience of Choice and Control for Service Users and Families of Direct Payments in Residential Care Trailblazers

Q2 Health Professions Journal of long-term care Pub Date : 2020-04-17 DOI:10.31389/JLTC.27
J. Damant, Lorrainea Williams, R. Wittenberg, Stefanie Ettelt, M. Perkins, D. Lombard, N. Mays
{"title":"Experience of Choice and Control for Service Users and Families of Direct\n Payments in Residential Care Trailblazers","authors":"J. Damant, Lorrainea Williams, R. Wittenberg, Stefanie Ettelt, M. Perkins, D. Lombard, N. Mays","doi":"10.31389/JLTC.27","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: Direct payments (DP) – cash for care – have been promoted in England as a mechanism to enhance the choice and control of service users living in community settings who are eligible for state-funded care. In 2011, the government decided to pilot DPs in residential care in a few areas and to commission an evaluation of the pilot programme. Objective: To explore the experiences of care home residents and their families offered a DP, in terms of choice of and control over their care and of their consumer power in local care home markets. Methods: We held 34 semi-structured interviews with care home residents and family members as part of the evaluation. Interviews were analysed using the “Antagonisms of Choice” framework to study the frictions caused by promoting self-directed care via private market mechanisms within publicly funded systems. Findings: Findings suggest unequal access to DPs according to residents’ access to family networks, level of cognitive function and underlying physical health. Some participants expressed concern about the effects of DPs on quality of care home services. Several family members using DPs perceived enhanced power in relation to the care providers; others saw no benefit from DPs. Limitations: Uptake of DPs was lower than expected, potentially limiting the generalisability of these findings.","PeriodicalId":73807,"journal":{"name":"Journal of long-term care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of long-term care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31389/JLTC.27","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Context: Direct payments (DP) – cash for care – have been promoted in England as a mechanism to enhance the choice and control of service users living in community settings who are eligible for state-funded care. In 2011, the government decided to pilot DPs in residential care in a few areas and to commission an evaluation of the pilot programme. Objective: To explore the experiences of care home residents and their families offered a DP, in terms of choice of and control over their care and of their consumer power in local care home markets. Methods: We held 34 semi-structured interviews with care home residents and family members as part of the evaluation. Interviews were analysed using the “Antagonisms of Choice” framework to study the frictions caused by promoting self-directed care via private market mechanisms within publicly funded systems. Findings: Findings suggest unequal access to DPs according to residents’ access to family networks, level of cognitive function and underlying physical health. Some participants expressed concern about the effects of DPs on quality of care home services. Several family members using DPs perceived enhanced power in relation to the care providers; others saw no benefit from DPs. Limitations: Uptake of DPs was lower than expected, potentially limiting the generalisability of these findings.
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
住宅护理开拓者直接支付服务用户和家庭的选择和控制经验
背景:直接支付(DP)——现金换护理——在英格兰得到了推广,作为一种机制,可以加强对生活在社区环境中的有资格获得国家资助护理的服务用户的选择和控制。2011年,政府决定在一些地区进行住院护理DP试点,并委托对试点方案进行评估。目的:探讨提供DP的养老院居民及其家人在选择和控制他们的护理以及他们在当地养老院市场的消费能力方面的经验。方法:作为评估的一部分,我们对养老院居民和家庭成员进行了34次半结构化访谈。使用“选择的对抗”框架对访谈进行了分析,以研究在公共资助系统内通过私人市场机制促进自主护理所造成的摩擦。研究结果:研究结果表明,根据居民进入家庭网络的机会、认知功能水平和潜在的身体健康状况,获得DP的机会不平等。一些与会者对DP对护理院服务质量的影响表示担忧。一些使用DP的家庭成员认为,与护理提供者相比,他们的权力有所增强;其他人认为民主党没有任何好处。局限性:DPs的摄取量低于预期,这可能限制了这些发现的普遍性。
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
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
33 weeks
期刊最新文献
Music in Care Home Settings: Guidelines for Implementation and Evaluation Based on the Music Interventions for Depression and Dementia in ELderly Care (MIDDEL) Study in the UK Staff-Family Communication Methods in Long-Term Care Homes: An Integrative Review Care Relationships Between Support Staff and Adults With a Learning Disability in Long-Term Social Care Residential Settings in the United Kingdom: A Systematic Literature Review Nursing Home Characteristics and Resident Quality of Care Outcomes: A Scoping Review Developing the Principles of Falls Management in Care Homes: An expert Consensus Process
×
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