Exploring the impact of care home environments and culture on supporting residents to 'wander' safely.

OBJECTIVES: Up to 60% of people with dementia living in care homes will 'wander' at some point, which has typically been seen by staff as a problematic behaviour. A range of non-pharmacological interventions have been tested to either support or prevent wandering. However, even recent innovative practice continues to maintain a focus on reducing or preventing wandering. This study aimed to identify, for the first time, care home staff perspectives on home level factors that facilitate or hinder them supporting residents to wander safely. METHOD: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 19 care home staff, working in the North of England. Framework analysis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: A range of environmental considerations were identified by staff. Care home design influenced how residents were able to move safely around, and inclusion of points of interest encouraged walking to different locations, such as a garden. Staff worried about managing access to other residents' rooms by people who wander. Within the care home culture, prioritising safe staffing levels, training and awareness, involving external healthcare professionals where required and mentorship from experienced staff members, all contributed towards safe wandering. Staff support for positive risk-taking within the care home was key to promote person-centred care, alongside careful oversight and management of relationships between residents. CONCLUSION: We identified a range of cultural and environmental factors that contribute towards safe wandering. A positive approach to risk-taking by staff is required to support residents to engage in wandering as an enjoyable activity, whilst acknowledging that there are inherent risks associated with this.

Relationship between staff and quality of care in care homes: StaRQ mixed methods study.

Background: Quality of life and care varies between and within the care homes in which almost half a million older people live and over half a million direct care staff (registered nurses and care assistants) work. The reasons are complex, understudied and sometimes oversimplified, but staff and their work are a significant influence. Objective(s): To explore variations in the care home nursing and support workforce; how resident and relatives' needs in care homes are linked to care home staffing; how different staffing models impact on care quality, outcomes and costs; how workforce numbers, skill mix and stability meet residents' needs; the contributions of the care home workforce to enhancing quality of care; staff relationships as a platform for implementation by providers. Design: Mixed-method (QUAL-QUANT) parallel design with five work packages. WP1 - two evidence syntheses (one realist); WP2 - cross-sectional survey of routine staffing and rated quality from care home regulator; WP3 - analysis of longitudinal data from a corporate provider of staffing characteristics and quality indicators, including safety; WP4 - secondary analysis of care home regulator reports; WP5 - social network analysis of networks likely to influence quality innovation. We expressed our synthesised findings as a logic model. Setting: English care homes, with and without nursing, with various ownership structures, size and location, with varying quality ratings. Participants: Managers, residents, families and care home staff. Findings: Staffing's contribution to quality and personalised care requires: managerial and staff stability and consistency; sufficient staff to develop 'familial' relationships between staff and residents, and staff-staff reciprocity, 'knowing' residents, and skills and competence training beyond induction; supported, well-led staff seeing modelled behaviours from supervisors; autonomy to act. Outcome measures that capture the relationship between staffing and quality include: the extent to which resident needs and preferences are met and culturally appropriate; resident and family satisfaction; extent of residents living with purpose; safe care (including clinical outcomes); staff well-being and job satisfaction were important, but underacknowledged. Limitations: Many of our findings stem from self-reported and routine data with known biases - such as under reporting of adverse incidents; our analysis may reflect these biases. COVID-19 required adapting our original protocol to make it feasible. Consequently, the effects of the pandemic are reflected in our research methods and findings. Our findings are based on data from a single care home operator and so may not be generalised to the wider population of care homes. Conclusions: Innovative and multiple methods and theory can successfully highlight the nuanced relationship between staffing and quality in care homes. Modifiable characteristics such as visible philosophies of care and high-quality training, reinforced by behavioural and relational role modelling by leaders can make the difference when sufficient amounts of consistent staff are employed. Greater staffing capacity alone is unlikely to enhance quality in a cost-effective manner. Social network analysis can help identify the right people to aid adoption and spread of quality and innovation. Future research should focus on richer, iterative, evaluative testing and development of our logic model using theoretically and empirically defensible - rather than available - inputs and outcomes. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42021241066 and Research Registry registration: 1062. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: 15/144/29) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 8. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

This study was about the relationship between staffing and quality in care homes. Almost half a million older people live in care homes in England. Why quality of care and quality of life for residents vary so much between and within homes is unknown, but staff and the ways they work are likely to be important. Researching staffing and quality is difficult: quality means different things to different people and a lot of things shape how quality feels to residents, families and staff. In the past, researchers have oversimplified the problem to study it and may have missed important influences. We took a more complex view. In five interlinked work packages, we collected and analysed: (1) research journal articles; (2) national data from different care homes; (3) data from a large care organisation to look at what it is about staffing that influences quality; (4) reports and ratings of homes from the Care Quality Commission; and (5) we looked at the networks between staff in homes that shape how quality improvement techniques might spread. We used theories about how our findings might be linked to plan for this data collection and analysis. The results were combined into something called a 'logic model' ­ a diagram and explanation that make it easier for managers, researchers and people interested in care homes to see how staffing influences quality. Staffing considerations that might improve quality include: not swapping managers too much; having sufficient and consistent staff for family-like relationships in homes and putting residents' needs first; supporting staff and giving them freedom to act; and key staff leading by example. Research examining care home quality should capture those aspects that mean the most to residents, their families and staff.

Percepções de pacientes sobre infecções relacionadas à assistência à saúde e medidas de segurança / Patients' perceptions of health care-related infections and safety measures / Percepciones de los pacientes sobre infecciones relacionadas con la atención de la salud y medidas de seguridad

Objetivo: analisar estudos qualitativos sobre percepções de pacientes relativos às medidas para prevenção e controle das infecções relacionadas à assistência à saúde e fatores que contribuem para a própria segurança. Método: revisão sistemática de publicações do período entre 2006 e 2016, seguida por síntese temática por meio da codificação dos relatos de pacientes encontrados nos manuscritos e das interpretações dos achados. Resultados: seis temas evidenciaram barreiras para a participação ativa do paciente na promoção de sua segurança, oferta insuficiente de informações; dificuldade de compreensão; sentimentos negativos; vivências negativas; comportamento dos profissionais; e elementos que influenciam o envolvimento do paciente. Conclusão: a lacuna existente entre o entendimento das medidas de prevenção e controle de infecções pelos pacientes e seu envolvimento no processo indica a necessidade de ações que favoreçam comunicação eficaz, melhores relações profissionais-pacientes, e acesso a informações que incentivem a interação e contribuição para uma assistência segura.

Objectives: to analyze data from qualitative studies of patient perceptions of measures to prevent and control healthcare-related infections and factors that contribute to their own safety. Method: systematic review of publications from 2006 to 2016, followed by thematic synthesis by coding patients' accounts and interpretations of findings given. Results: six themes highlighted barriers to patients' participating actively in promoting their own safety: insufficient information supply; poor comprehension; negative feelings; negative experiences; behavior of health care personnel; and factors that influence patient involvement. Conclusion: the gap between patients' understanding infection prevention and control measures and their becoming involved in the process point to a need for measures to foster effective communication, better care personnel-patient relations, and access to information that encourages patients to interact and contribute to health care.

Objetivos: analizar estudios cualitativos sobre percepciones de los pacientes sobre las medidas de prevención y control de infecciones relacionadas al cuidado de la salud y factores que contribuyen a la propia seguridad. Método: revisión sistemática de publicaciones, en el período entre 2006 y 2016, seguida de síntesis temática mediante la codificación de las declaraciones de pacientes que se encuentran en los manuscritos y las interpretaciones de los hallazgos. Resultados: seis temas resaltaron las barreras a la participación activa del paciente en la promoción de su seguridad: información insuficiente; dificultad de comprensión; sentimientos negativos; experiencias negativas; comportamiento de los profesionales; y elementos que influyen a que el paciente se involucre. Conclusión: La brecha entre la comprensión de las medidas de prevención y el control de infecciones por parte de los pacientes y su implicación en el proceso indica la necesidad de acciones que favorezcan una comunicación efectiva, mejores relaciones profesionales-paciente y acceso a la información que fomenten la interacción y la contribución a la atención segura.