护理质量工具是否包括老年痴呆症患者?对长期护理机构的范围审查。

Dementia (London, England) Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-09 DOI:10.1177/14713012241270758
Digisie M Jemere, Julie Ratcliffe, Jyoti Khadka, Kiri Lay, Rachel Milte
{"title":"护理质量工具是否包括老年痴呆症患者?对长期护理机构的范围审查。","authors":"Digisie M Jemere, Julie Ratcliffe, Jyoti Khadka, Kiri Lay, Rachel Milte","doi":"10.1177/14713012241270758","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>More than half of older people in long-term care facilities have dementia. Little is currently known about the methods and instruments which can be used to capture the perspectives of older people, including those with dementia, regarding the quality of care provided in such facilities. The main aims of this scoping review were two-fold. Firstly, to identify quality of care instruments that have been applied in long-term care settings. Secondly, to evaluate how these instruments have been developed and validated, particularly in terms of their applicability among older people with dementia. Seven databases (Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, Ageline, CINHAL and google scholar) were searched for relevant literature without any date limit. We used quality criteria adapted from COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments) guidelines to assess the psychometric properties of the instruments. The search identified 16 quality of care instruments which had been used in long-term care settings. Of which, two (12.5%) were specifically designed for older people with dementia, and three instruments (18.7%) were modified for use with older people with mild to moderate dementia. A variety of methods were used to develop the identified instruments including literature reviews, qualitative interviews, expert panel reviews, pre-testing and piloting with older people. None of the identified instruments had been subjected to comprehensive psychometric assessment. Most instruments for assessing quality of care in long term care settings lack alternative communication techniques tailored to people with dementia. This review highlights the need for more rigorous psychometric testing of existing instruments for assessing quality of care in long-term care settings. Several existing measures show promise and may be taken forward for further testing and development for widespread application with older people, including those living with dementia, in long term care settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":72778,"journal":{"name":"Dementia (London, England)","volume":" ","pages":"1212-1237"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11440791/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are quality of care instruments inclusive of older people living with dementia? A scoping review in long-term care settings.\",\"authors\":\"Digisie M Jemere, Julie Ratcliffe, Jyoti Khadka, Kiri Lay, Rachel Milte\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14713012241270758\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>More than half of older people in long-term care facilities have dementia. Little is currently known about the methods and instruments which can be used to capture the perspectives of older people, including those with dementia, regarding the quality of care provided in such facilities. The main aims of this scoping review were two-fold. Firstly, to identify quality of care instruments that have been applied in long-term care settings. Secondly, to evaluate how these instruments have been developed and validated, particularly in terms of their applicability among older people with dementia. Seven databases (Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, Ageline, CINHAL and google scholar) were searched for relevant literature without any date limit. We used quality criteria adapted from COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments) guidelines to assess the psychometric properties of the instruments. The search identified 16 quality of care instruments which had been used in long-term care settings. Of which, two (12.5%) were specifically designed for older people with dementia, and three instruments (18.7%) were modified for use with older people with mild to moderate dementia. A variety of methods were used to develop the identified instruments including literature reviews, qualitative interviews, expert panel reviews, pre-testing and piloting with older people. None of the identified instruments had been subjected to comprehensive psychometric assessment. Most instruments for assessing quality of care in long term care settings lack alternative communication techniques tailored to people with dementia. This review highlights the need for more rigorous psychometric testing of existing instruments for assessing quality of care in long-term care settings. Several existing measures show promise and may be taken forward for further testing and development for widespread application with older people, including those living with dementia, in long term care settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72778,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dementia (London, England)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1212-1237\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11440791/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dementia (London, England)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14713012241270758\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dementia (London, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14713012241270758","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

长期护理机构中一半以上的老年人患有痴呆症。目前,人们对可用于了解老年人(包括痴呆症患者)对此类机构所提供护理质量的看法的方法和工具知之甚少。本次范围界定研究的主要目的有两个。首先,确定已应用于长期护理机构的护理质量工具。其次,评估这些工具是如何开发和验证的,尤其是在老年痴呆症患者中的适用性。我们在七个数据库(Medline、Web of Science、Scopus、ProQuest、Ageline、CINHAL 和 google scholar)中搜索了相关文献,没有任何日期限制。我们使用改编自 COSMIN(基于共识的健康状况测量工具选择标准)指南的质量标准来评估工具的心理测量特性。搜索发现了 16 种用于长期护理环境的护理质量工具。其中,有两份(12.5%)是专门为老年痴呆症患者设计的,有三份(18.7%)是为轻度至中度痴呆症患者设计的。在开发所确定的工具时使用了多种方法,包括文献综述、定性访谈、专家小组审查、预先测试以及在老年人中试用。所有确定的工具都没有经过全面的心理测量评估。大多数用于评估长期护理环境中护理质量的工具都缺乏针对痴呆症患者的替代性沟通技巧。本综述强调了对现有长期护理环境中护理质量评估工具进行更严格心理测试的必要性。一些现有的测量方法显示出了良好的前景,可以进行进一步的测试和开发,以便在长期护理环境中广泛应用于老年人,包括痴呆症患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Are quality of care instruments inclusive of older people living with dementia? A scoping review in long-term care settings.

More than half of older people in long-term care facilities have dementia. Little is currently known about the methods and instruments which can be used to capture the perspectives of older people, including those with dementia, regarding the quality of care provided in such facilities. The main aims of this scoping review were two-fold. Firstly, to identify quality of care instruments that have been applied in long-term care settings. Secondly, to evaluate how these instruments have been developed and validated, particularly in terms of their applicability among older people with dementia. Seven databases (Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, Ageline, CINHAL and google scholar) were searched for relevant literature without any date limit. We used quality criteria adapted from COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments) guidelines to assess the psychometric properties of the instruments. The search identified 16 quality of care instruments which had been used in long-term care settings. Of which, two (12.5%) were specifically designed for older people with dementia, and three instruments (18.7%) were modified for use with older people with mild to moderate dementia. A variety of methods were used to develop the identified instruments including literature reviews, qualitative interviews, expert panel reviews, pre-testing and piloting with older people. None of the identified instruments had been subjected to comprehensive psychometric assessment. Most instruments for assessing quality of care in long term care settings lack alternative communication techniques tailored to people with dementia. This review highlights the need for more rigorous psychometric testing of existing instruments for assessing quality of care in long-term care settings. Several existing measures show promise and may be taken forward for further testing and development for widespread application with older people, including those living with dementia, in long term care settings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Exploring the effectiveness and experiences of people living with dementia interacting with digital interventions: A mixed methods systematic review. A scoping review of dementia education programs to assess for the inclusion of culture. Evolving dementia care: An explorative study on the lived experience of older adults living with dementia in nursing homes using observational and biometric sensor data. Community health workers supporting diverse family caregivers of persons with dementia: Preliminary qualitative results from a randomized home-based study. Participation of persons living with dementia in research: A means to address epistemic injustice.
×
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