New models of health and social care for people in later life: mapping of innovation in services in two regions of the United Kingdom using a mixed method approach.

BACKGROUND: Innovation for reforming health and social care is high on the policy agenda in the United Kingdom in response to the growing needs of an ageing population. However, information about new innovations of care being implemented is sparse. METHODS: We mapped innovations for people in later life in two regions, North East England and South East Scotland. Data collection included discussions with stakeholders (n = 51), semi-structured interviews (n = 14) and website searches that focused on technology, evaluation and health inequalities. We analysed qualitative data using framework and thematic analyses. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: One hundred eleven innovations were identified across the two regions. Interviewees reported a wide range of technologies that had been rapidly introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic and many remained in use. Digital exclusion of certain groups of older people was an ongoing concern. Innovations fell into two groups; system-level ones that aimed to alleviate systems pressures such as preventing hospital (re)admissions, and patient-level ones which sought to enhance health and wellbeing directly. Interviewees were aware of the importance of health inequalities but lacked data to monitor the impact of innovations on these, and evaluation was challenging due to lack of time, training, and support. Quantitative findings revealed that two thirds of innovations (n = 74, 67%) primarily focused on the system level, whilst a third (n = 37, 33%) primarily focused on the patient-level. Overall, over half (n = 65, 59%) of innovations involved technologies although relatively few (n = 12, 11%) utilised advanced technologies. Very few (n = 16, 14%) focused on reducing health inequalities, and only a minority of innovations (n = 43, 39%) had undergone evaluation (most of which were conducted by the service providers themselves). CONCLUSIONS: We found a wide range of innovative care services being developed for people in later life, yet alignment with key policy priorities, such as addressing health inequalities, was limited. There was a strong focus on technology, with little consideration for the potential to widen the health inequality gap. The absence of robust evaluation was also a concern as most innovations were implemented without support to monitor effectiveness and/or without plans for sustainability and spread.

Using Palliative Care Needs Rounds in the UK for care home staff and residents: an implementation science study.

Background: Care home residents often lack access to end-of-life care from specialist palliative care providers. Palliative Care Needs Rounds, developed and tested in Australia, is a novel approach to addressing this. Objective: To co-design and implement a scalable UK model of Needs Rounds. Design: A pragmatic implementation study using the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework. Setting: Implementation was conducted in six case study sites (England, n = 4, and Scotland, n = 2) encompassing specialist palliative care service working with three to six care homes each. Participants: Phase 1: interviews (n = 28 care home staff, specialist palliative care staff, relatives, primary care, acute care and allied health practitioners) and four workshops (n = 43 care home staff, clinicians and managers from specialist palliative care teams and patient and public involvement and engagement representatives). Phase 2: interviews (n = 58 care home and specialist palliative care staff); family questionnaire (n = 13 relatives); staff questionnaire (n = 171 care home staff); quality of death/dying questionnaire (n = 81); patient and public involvement and engagement evaluation interviews (n = 11); fidelity assessment (n = 14 Needs Rounds recordings). Interventions: (1) Monthly hour-long discussions of residents' physical, psychosocial and spiritual needs, alongside case-based learning, (2) clinical work and (3) relative/multidisciplinary team meetings. Main outcome measures: A programme theory describing what works for whom under what circumstances with UK Needs Rounds. Secondary outcomes focus on health service use and cost effectiveness, quality of death and dying, care home staff confidence and capability, and the use of patient and public involvement and engagement. Data sources: Semistructured interviews and workshops with key stakeholders from the six sites; capability of adopting a palliative approach, quality of death and dying index, and Canadian Health Care Evaluation Project Lite questionnaires; recordings of Needs Rounds; care home data on resident demographics/health service use; assessments and interventions triggered by Needs Rounds; semistructured interviews with academic and patient and public involvement and engagement members. Results: The programme theory: while care home staff experience workforce challenges such as high turnover, variable skills and confidence, Needs Rounds can provide care home and specialist palliative care staff the opportunity to collaborate during a protected time, to plan for residents' last months of life. Needs Rounds build care home staff confidence and can strengthen relationships and trust, while harnessing services' complementary expertise. Needs Rounds strengthen understandings of dying, symptom management, advance/anticipatory care planning and communication. This can improve resident care, enabling residents to be cared for and die in their preferred place, and may benefit relatives by increasing their confidence in care quality. Limitations: COVID-19 restricted intervention and data collection. Due to an insufficient sample size, it was not possible to conduct a cost-benefit analysis of Needs Rounds or calculate the treatment effect or family perceptions of care. Conclusions: Our work suggests that Needs Rounds can improve the quality of life and death for care home residents, by enhancing staff skills and confidence, including symptom management, communications with general practitioners and relatives, and strengthen relationships between care home and specialist palliative care staff. Future work: Conduct analysis of costs-benefits and treatment effects. Engagement with commissioners and policy-makers could examine integration of Needs Rounds into care homes and primary care across the UK to ensure equitable access to specialist care. Study registration: This study is registered as ISRCTN15863801. 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: NIHR128799) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 19. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Care home residents often lack access to end-of-life care from hospice teams and so may experience distressing symptoms at end of life if care home staff cannot fully meet their needs. We examined how an approach which worked well in Australia called 'Palliative Care Needs Rounds' (or 'Needs Rounds') could be used in the United Kingdom. We interviewed 28 people (care home staff, hospice staff and other National Health Service/social care professionals in the community) about their understanding of the United Kingdom setting, what might help trigger change and what results they would want. We discussed these interviews at online workshops with 43 people, where we started to develop a theory of 'what would work, for whom, under what circumstances' and determine what United Kingdom Needs Rounds would look like. Six specialist palliative care services, each partnered with three to six local care homes, used Needs Rounds for a year. We collected information on care home residents, staff experiences of using Needs Rounds, relatives' perceptions of care quality, staff views of residents' quality of death, and on their ability to provide a palliative approach to residents. We found that Needs Rounds can provide care home staff and specialist palliative care staff the opportunity to work together during a protected time, to plan for residents' last months of life. Needs Rounds build care home staff confidence and can strengthen relationships and trust, while using each services' expertise. Needs Rounds strengthen understandings of dying, symptom management, advance/anticipatory care planning and communication between care home staff, families, specialist palliative care staff and primary care. This improves the quality of resident care, enabling residents to be cared for and die in their preferred place, and also benefits relatives by increasing their confidence in care quality.

Liver disease as new work in the context of protocolised primary care - do GPs have a role? A qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Liver disease is common, but not part of routine chronic disease management in primary care. AIM: The aim of this study was to explore the challenges of implementing pathways of care for liver disease within existing highly protocolised structures in primary care. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews with 20 health professionals working in primary care. Interviews were informed by normalisation process theory (NPT) and boundary theory. Data were subject to thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three themes were identified relating to chronic disease work; definitions; need and worth, and roles. Participants identified that understanding and value of roles within chronic disease management were pre-defined by targets imposed on them as part of national incentives schemes. Structural boundaries constrained professional autonomy and the potential to influence this area of primary care management, including taking on new work. CONCLUSION: The inability to influence care decisions blurs occupational boundaries and goes to the core of what it means to be a professional. Unless liver disease sits within this target-based system, it is unlikely to become part of routine work in primary care.

DECIDE (Diverse experiences of End-of-Life Care for Dementia) establishing consensus and capacity for future research through collaboration and co-production.

BACKGROUND: Dementia is a leading cause of death globally. However, end-of-life care is often poor or non-existent. People with dementia from ethnic minorities or socioeconomically deprived communities are even less likely to receive good palliative care. Despite this, research into end-of-life care often fails to include people from these populations. AIM: To find out what research is required to improve end-of-life care for everyone with dementia and how to facilitate inclusivity. METHOD: A scoping review of the academic literature (Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycInfo and Scopus databases) published between Jan 2000 and April 2023 was conducted. Findings were shared with diverse key stakeholders through a series of workshops. Conclusions were subsequently used to provide evidence-based recommendations for inclusive end-of-life care and future research. RESULTS: Themes from the literature were evident in the personal and professional experiences of key stakeholders. Palliative care providers are often ignorant of the needs of those dying in the margins. Support services are scarce and unequal geographically. There is a lack of personalised and culturally appropriate care for those with dementia and their families. Themes from the stakeholder groups included a need for better communication between services, and more investment into dementia as a palliative condition, with avenues created to increase trust and facilitate engagement with services. CONCLUSION: Future research should focus on educational strategies, including how optimal end-of-life care differs for those with dementia compared to other life-limiting conditions, with appropriate models of inclusive, appropriately funded care needed.

Understanding health service utilisation patterns for care home residents during the COVID-19 pandemic using routinely collected healthcare data.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare in care homes during the COVID-19 pandemic required a balance, providing treatment while minimising exposure risk. Policy for how residents should receive care changed rapidly throughout the pandemic. A lack of accessible data on care home residents over this time meant policy decisions were difficult to make and verify. This study investigates common patterns of healthcare utilisation for care home residents in relation to COVID-19 testing events, and associations between utilisation patterns and resident characteristics. METHODS: Datasets from County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust including secondary care, community care and a care home telehealth app are linked by NHS number used to define daily healthcare utilisation sequences for care home residents. We derive four 10-day sets of sequences related to Pillar 1 COVID-19 testing; before [1] and after [2] a resident's first positive test and before [3] and after [4] a resident's first test. These sequences are clustered, grouping residents with similar healthcare patterns in each set. Association of individual characteristics (e.g. health conditions such as diabetes and dementia) with healthcare patterns are investigated. RESULTS: We demonstrate how routinely collected health data can be used to produce longitudinal descriptions of patient care. Clustered sequences [1,2,3,4] are produced for 3,471 care home residents tested between 01/03/2020-01/09/2021. Clusters characterised by higher levels of utilisation were significantly associated with higher prevalence of diabetes. Dementia is associated with higher levels of care after a testing event and appears to be correlated with a hospital discharge after a first test. Residents discharged from inpatient care within 10 days of their first test had the same mortality rate as those who stayed in hospital. CONCLUSION: We provide longitudinal, resident-level data on care home resident healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic. We find that vulnerable residents were associated with higher levels of healthcare usage despite the additional risks. Implications of findings are limited by the challenges of routinely collected data. However, this study demonstrates the potential for further research into healthcare pathways using linked, routinely collected datasets.

Negotiating pace, focus and identities: Patient/public involvement/engagement in a palliative care study.

Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) is an increasingly important component of research conduct to enhance processes and potential for impact, yet is rarely critically interrogated. This paper draws on Foucauldian analysis to highlight the disciplinary powers and tensions arising in PPIE. The paper draws on a nested evaluation interview study with three PPIE members and eight academics, who had been involved in an implementation science study focused on palliative care. PPIE members were involved in the whole study and are co-authors of this article. Through shared values and commitments to the study, a team culture of equality was developed. Yet while power was dispersed and taken-up by all team members, in so doing a self-governance approach within the team was developed. The pace and focus of discussions was at times more subjugating than co-production. Identities and positions were porous; the simplistic division of 'academic' and 'PPIE' did not stand up to scrutiny, with an increasing blurring of boundaries as people's experiences and insights changed over time. Continual, subtle, negotiations of roles, inputs and identities were manifest throughout the project. PPIE in research involves subtle, complex and ongoing disciplinary practices enacted by all members of the team.

UK homecare providers' views about, and experiences of, digitalisation: A national survey.

Objective: Using digital systems to support the management and delivery of social care is a priority for UK governments. This study explored progress towards, and experiences of, digitalisation in the homecare sector and providers' views on contributing client data to a national policy/research dataset. Methods: Over 150 UK homecare providers completed an on-line survey (October-December 2022). The survey was hosted on Qualtrics and comprised fixed- and free-text response questions. The recruited sample aligned with the profile of UK homecare providers in terms of use of digital systems, organisation type and size. Results: Almost all respondents (95.5%) were using digital systems, in part or exclusively, to support care delivery. However, many (42.7%) reported a desire to further digitalise or a dissatisfaction with existing systems. Findings highlight the time and work involved in choosing a a software system, with the decision regarded as relatively high risk. Over 50 different software systems were being used across the sample. Most respondents (72.5%) supported the creation of a national dataset on homecare users. However, support and recompense are likely to needed to secure buy-in from what is a predominantly private sector context. Conclusions: Findings suggest a complex and changing situation, with numerous different digital systems being used and the sector at different stages of digitalisation. The high-pressure, low margin context of UK homecare appeared to be exerting an influence on progress towards digitalisation. Evaluations of government strategies to stimulate and support digitalisation in this diverse and predominantly private sector context will be valuable.

Interventions to Prevent Hospital Admissions in Long-Term Care Facilities: A Rapid Review of Economic Evidence.

OBJECTIVES: Hospital admissions can be hazardous for older adults, particularly those living in long-term care facilities. Preventing nonessential admissions can be beneficial for this population, as well as reducing demand on health services. This review summarizes the economic evidence surrounding effective interventions to reduce hospital attendances and admissions for people living in long-term care facilities. DESIGN: Rapid review of economic evidence. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: People living in long-term facilities. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed, and Web of Science on September 20, 2022, and again on January 10, 2023. Full economic evaluations and cost analyses reporting on advanced care planning, goals of care setting, nurse practitioner input, palliative care, influenza vaccinations, and enhancing access to intravenous therapies were eligible. Data were extracted using a prepiloted data extraction form and critically appraised using either the Drummond-Jefferson checklist or an amended NIH Critical Appraisal Tool appended with questions from a critical appraisal checklist for cost analyses. Data were synthesized narratively. RESULTS: We included 7 studies: 3 full economic evaluations and 4 cost analyses. Because of lack of clarity on the underlying study design, we did not include one of the cost analyses in our synthesis. Advanced care planning, a palliative care program, and a high-dose influenza vaccination reported potential cost savings. Economic evidence for a multicomponent intervention and a nurse practitioner model was inconclusive. The overall quality of the evidence varied between studies. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: A number of potentially cost-effective approaches to reduce demand on hospital services from long-term care facilities were identified. However, further economic evaluations are needed to overcome limitations of the current evidence base and offer more confident conclusions.

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.

Interventions for cold homes: a rapid review of the health impacts.

BACKGROUND: Cold homes are associated with an increased risk of adverse health outcomes for older people. To mitigate this risk, homes need to be heated to an appropriate temperature. This review aims to identify interventions designed to improve heating and temperatures within homes and summarize its impact on health, health service utilization and cost effectiveness. METHODS: A rapid review was conducted. Studies assessing the effects of structural, financial, or behavioural interventions designed to improve home temperatures of residents aged 18+ years were eligible. Searches were carried out in four databases. A search for grey literature, and backward and forward citation searching were performed. Data were summarized in a narrative synthesis and mapped using EPPI-Reviewer and EPPI-Mapper software. RESULTS: Eighteen studies reported across 19 publications were included. Structural interventions were associated with better mental health and quality of life, a reduction in health service utilization, and improvements in satisfaction with internal home temperature, social interactions and financial difficulties. The impact on physical health outcomes varied by age, gender and long-term conditions. Evidence about the impact of behavioural interventions was inconsistent. CONCLUSION: Structural improvements to increase home temperatures may offer the potential to improve some aspects of health. However, the impact on physical health, including which groups are most likely to benefit, is unclear. Key gaps include the lack of evidence about the impact of financial interventions, and the impact of all types of interventions, on quality of life, mortality and costs.

'In the shower crying but we came back in the following day and did it all again'. Distress and resilience in care home staff during the COVID-19 pandemic- A qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Care homes (long-term care facilities) were profoundly impacted early in the COVID-19 pandemic, both in terms of resident mortality and restrictions for infection control. This study investigated the impact on the emotional well-being of care home staff of challenges faced at this time, and the strategies used to manage them. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews conducted October 2020-June 2021 with care home staff and health service staff working with them explored the impact of the early waves of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020-June 2021). Interview data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Interview participants were 16 care home staff and 10 health service staff. Analysis generated four key themes: 1)Anxiety and distress, 2)Overwhelming workload, 3)Pulling through; and 4)Resilience in a time of crisis. Care home staff experienced Anxiety and distress due to uncertainty of what to expect; witnessing illness and deaths of residents; concerns regarding their own health, and sometimes feeling their work was under-recognised. They also experienced an Overwhelming workload due to infection control measures, caring for sick residents and reduction in external healthcare support. Our theme of Pulling through reflects the peer support and problem-solving strategies with which care home staff managed the impact of the pandemic, along with a sense of responsibility and meaning towards their work. An overarching theme of Resilience in a time of crisis drew on the other three themes and describes how many staff managed, maintained, and often increased their work despite the challenges of the pandemic. Participants also described increasing emotional fatigue as the pandemic continued. CONCLUSIONS: This paper builds on literature on the emotional impact of the pandemic on care home staff, also exploring ways that staff responded to this impact. These findings can help inform planning for future crises including disease outbreaks, and raise important questions for further work to develop pandemic preparedness in care homes and beyond. They also raise wider questions about the current cultural status of care work, which may have exposed care home staff to greater risk of distress, and which contrasts with the professionalism and responsibility shown by staff in response to pandemic challenges.

Characteristics of older unpaid carers in England: a study of social patterning from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing.

BACKGROUND: A growing number of older people provide unpaid care, but contemporary research evidence on this group is limited. AIM: This study aims to describe the characteristics of older people who provide unpaid care and how these vary by socioeconomic position. METHODS: Using recent information from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA wave 9, 2019), we analysed cross-sectional data on 1,282 unpaid carers aged ≥50. Data on sociodemographics, health, social wellbeing, care intensity and caregiver-recipient relationships were extracted. Total net non-pension wealth quintiles were used as a relative measure of socioeconomic position. Differences between the poorest and richest wealth quintiles were examined through logistic regression. FINDINGS: Most older carers in ELSA were female and looking after another older person. Poor mental and physical health and social isolation were common, and socially patterned. Compared with carers in the middle wealth group, the poorest group were more likely to be living with the person they cared for (odds ratio (OR) 1.56 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03-2.36]) and more likely to experience loneliness (OR 2.29 [95% CI 1.42-3.69]), dependency (i.e. the need for help with activities of daily living) (OR 1.62 [95% CI 1.05-2.51]), chronic pain (OR 1.81 [95% CI 1.23-2.67]), a higher number of diseases (OR 1.75 [95% CI 1.15-2.65]) and fair/poor self-rated health (OR 2.59 [95% CI 1.79-3.76]). The poorest carers were also less likely to have a high quality of life (OR 0.51 [95% CI 0.33-0.80]) or be in work (OR 0.33 [95% CI 0.19-0.59]). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that financially disadvantaged unpaid carers (and their households) may have the greatest needs for intervention and support. Focussing resources on this group has potential to address social inequalities.

What works to support carers of older people and older carers? an international evidence map of interventions and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Unpaid carers of older people, and older unpaid carers, experience a range of adverse outcomes. Supporting carers should therefore be a public health priority. Our understanding of what works to support carers could be enhanced if future evaluations prioritise under-researched interventions and outcomes. To support this, we aimed to: map evidence about interventions to support carers, and the outcomes evaluated; and identify key gaps in current evidence. METHODS: Evidence gap map review methods were used. Searches were carried out in three bibliographic databases for quantitative evaluations of carer interventions published in OECD high-income countries between 2013 and 2023. Interventions were eligible if they supported older carers (50 + years) of any aged recipient, or any aged carers of older people (50 + years). FINDINGS: 205 studies reported across 208 publications were included in the evidence map. The majority evaluated the impact of therapeutic and educational interventions on carer burden and carers' mental health. Some studies reported evidence about physical exercise interventions and befriending and peer support for carers, but these considered a limited range of outcomes. Few studies evaluated interventions that focused on delivering financial information and advice, pain management, and physical skills training for carers. Evaluations rarely considered the impact of interventions on carers' physical health, quality of life, and social and financial wellbeing. Very few studies considered whether interventions delivered equitable outcomes. CONCLUSION: Evidence on what works best to support carers is extensive but limited in scope. A disproportionate focus on mental health and burden outcomes neglects other important areas where carers may need support. Given the impact of caring on carers' physical health, financial and social wellbeing, future research could evaluate interventions that aim to support these outcomes. Appraisal of whether interventions deliver equitable outcomes across diverse carer populations is critical.

The impact of digital technology in care homes on unplanned secondary care usage and associated costs.

BACKGROUND: A substantial number of Emergency Department (ED) attendances by care home residents are potentially avoidable. Health Call Digital Care Homes is an app-based technology that aims to streamline residents' care by recording their observations such as vital parameters electronically. Observations are triaged by remote clinical staff. This study assessed the effectiveness of the Health Call technology to reduce unplanned secondary care usage and associated costs. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of health outcomes and economic impact based on an intervention. The study involved 118 care homes across the North East of UK from 2018 to 2021. Routinely collected NHS secondary care data from County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust was linked with data from the Health Call app. Three outcomes were modelled monthly using Generalised Linear Mixed Models: counts of emergency attendances, emergency admissions and length of stay of emergency admissions. A similar approach was taken for costs. The impact of Health Call was tested on each outcome using the models. FINDINGS: Data from 8,702 residents were used in the analysis. Results show Health Call reduces the number of emergency attendances by 11% [6-15%], emergency admissions by 25% [20-39%] and length of stay by 11% [3-18%] (with an additional month-by-month decrease of 28% [24-34%]). The cost analysis found a cost reduction of £57 per resident in 2018, increasing to £113 in 2021. INTERPRETATION: The introduction of a digital technology, such as Health Call, could significantly reduce contacts with and costs resulting from unplanned secondary care usage by care home residents.

Digital technologies to prevent falls in people living with dementia or mild cognitive impairment: a rapid systematic overview of systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVE: Falls are a common cause of potentially preventable death, disability and loss of independence with an annual estimated cost of £4.4bn. People living with dementia (PlwD) or mild cognitive impairment (MCI) have an increased fall risk. This overview evaluates evidence for technologies aiming to reduce falls and fall risk for PlwD or MCI. METHODS: In October 2022, we searched five databases for evidence syntheses. We used standard methods to rapidly screen, extract data, assess risk of bias and overlap, and synthesise the evidence for each technology type. RESULTS: We included seven systematic reviews, incorporating 22 relevant primary studies with 1,412 unique participants. All reviews had critical flaws on AMSTAR-2: constituent primary studies were small, heterogeneous, mostly non-randomised and assessed as low or moderate quality. Technologies assessed were: wearable sensors, environmental sensor-based systems, exergaming, virtual reality systems. We found no evidence relating to apps. Review evidence for the direct impact on falls was available only from environmental sensors, and this was inconclusive. For wearables and virtual reality technologies there was evidence that technologies may differentiate PlwD who fell from those who did not; and for exergaming that balance may be improved. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence for technology to reduce falls and falls risk for PlwD and MCI is methodologically weak, based on small numbers of participants and often indirect. There is a need for higher-quality RCTs to provide robust evidence for effectiveness of fall prevention technologies. Such technologies should be designed with input from users and consideration of the wider implementation context.

Variations in older people's emergency care use by social care setting: a systematic review of international evidence.

BACKGROUND: Older adults' use of social care and their healthcare utilization are closely related. Residents of care homes access emergency care more often than the wider older population; however, less is known about emergency care use across other social care settings. SOURCES OF DATA: A systematic review was conducted, searching six electronic databases between January 2012 and February 2022. AREAS OF AGREEMENT: Older people access emergency care from a variety of community settings. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY: Differences in study design contributed to high variation observed between studies. GROWING POINTS: Although data were limited, findings suggest that emergency hospital attendance is lowest from nursing homes and highest from assisted living facilities, whilst emergency admissions varied little by social care setting. AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH: There is a paucity of published research on emergency hospital use from social care settings, particularly home care and assisted living facilities. More attention is needed on this area, with standardized definitions to enable comparisons between studies.