Exploratory factor analysis and Rasch analysis to assess the structural validity of the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit Proxy version (ASCOT-Proxy) completed by care home staff.

PURPOSE: Rasch analysis and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) were used to evaluate the structural validity of the ASCOT-Proxy measures completed by staff on behalf of older adults resident in care homes, by comparison to the ASCOT-SCT4, the measure of social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL) from which the ASCOT-Proxy was developed. METHODS: EFA was conducted on the ASCOT-SCT4 and the two ASCOT-Proxy measures (Proxy-Proxy, Proxy-Resident), to determine if they retained the single factor of the original ASCOT-SCT4 measure found in samples of older community-dwelling adults. Rasch analysis was also applied to measures with a single factor structure in the EFA. RESULTS: ASCOT-Proxy-Resident had a single factor structure, as did the original ASCOT-SCT4 (also, found in this analysis when completed by care home staff). The ASCOT-Proxy-Proxy had a two factor structure. Rasch analysis of ASCOT-Proxy-Resident and ASCOT-SCT4 had an acceptable model fit, internal consistency and met the assumptions of unidimensionality and local independence. There was evidence of less than optimal distinguishability at some thresholds between responses, and low frequency of rating of the 'high level needs'. CONCLUSION: The ASCOT-Proxy-Resident is a valid instrument of SCRQoL for older adults resident in care homes, completed by staff proxies. Due to the two-factor structure, which differs from the original ASCOT-SCT4, we do not recommend the use of the ASCOT-Proxy-Proxy measure, although collecting data as part of the ASCOT-Proxy questionnaire may support its feasibility and acceptability. Further qualitative study of how care home staff complete and perceive the ASCOT-Proxy is encouraged for future studies.

Our approach to developing communities of practice to foster research capacities for the adult social care workforce.

Background: Efforts to build and foster adult social care research in England have historically encountered more challenges to its growth and expansion compared with health research, with a sector facing significant barriers in facilitating research activity due to a lack of resourcing, poor valuation or understanding of the profile of social care research. The landscape for supporting research in adult social care has been rather bleak, but in recent years there has been recognition of the need to foster a research community. The National Institute for Health and Care Research in England have committed to investing in social care research capacity by funding six adult social care partnerships, with one based in Southeast England. Process developing Communities of Practice COPs: Three large online networking events were held in the first year of the project to engage managers and practitioners from the local authority and from the wider adult social care sector. These took place in July and November 2021, with a last event in March 2022. Two COPs were identified, following an ordering and thematising process of feedback from the networking events, of: (a) Supporting people with complex needs throughout the lifespan, and (b) Enhancing, diversifying and sustaining the social care workforce. Whilst it would be premature to identify their long-term impacts, through the facilitation of 20 COP meetings held so far, alongside the engagement platforms and enrichment resources, these have provided a space for regular communication in the sector, knowledge sharing and networking between COP members. Conclusions: The COP framework offers a collaborative approach to initiating research from the grass-roots level in adult social care. This paper focuses on how the COP model offers great promise for knowledge-exchange providing a forum to generate and disseminate knowledge around social care in our two COP domains.

Social care research looks into how care and support is delivered enabling people to continue to be independent, keep their dignity and help them achieve a better quality of life. The social care sector is responsible for delivering services and are provided by local authorities, third or private sector organisations. Research in adult social care is important to help the social care workforce understand which approaches and interventions work and how to improve the quality of care and support. However, there are barriers with setting up and running a research study in the social care sector, including limited dedicated time for the social care workforce to do research, accessing participants through providers, commissioners or unpaid carers, and due to the fragmented nature of the sector, difficulties in facilitating or supporting research. There are few opportunities for the social care workforce to develop their skills and experiences to undertake their own research. In order to help the social care workforce foster a culture of research and learning, we have used a well-known group learning and sharing framework called Communities of Practice (COPs) to help generate a culture of research involving all providers and users of social care. We developed the COPs by inviting them to three online networking events to identify what topics of research are important to providers and users. Their ideas were then put into themes and discussed, and two areas were finally decided upon for the COPs of: (a) Supporting people with complex needs throughout the lifespan, and (b) Enhancing, diversifying and sustaining the social care workforce. The COPs provide a place for users and providers to meet and discuss what research is important to them to identify some potential solutions to the problems encountered in adult social care.

Measuring quality of life in care homes when self-report is challenging: the construct validity, structural characteristics and internal consistency of the mixed-methods adult social care outcomes toolkit.

INTRODUCTION: The adult social care outcomes toolkit (ASCOT) measures social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL) using self-completion questionnaires and interviews. Many care home residents find such methods inaccessible, leading to a reliance on proxy-reporting. This study aimed to establish the psychometric properties of the mixed-methods toolkit [ASCOT-Care Homes, 4 outcome (CH4)] for measuring SCRQoL when residents cannot self-report. METHODS: Two cross-sectional, mixed-methods studies were undertaken in care homes for older people in England between 2015 and 2020. We used the ASCOT-CH4 (observation, and interviews with residents and proxies) to collect information about SCRQoL and collected additional data on residents' needs and characteristics, and variables hypothesised to be related to SCRQoL.Hypothesis testing was applied to establish construct validity, Cronbach's alpha for internal consistency and exploratory factor analysis for structural validity. RESULTS: The combined dataset included 475 residents from 54 care homes (34 nursing, 20 residential). Half had a diagnosis of dementia. Less than a third of residents were able to complete an ASCOT interview. Observations and proxy interviews informed researcher ratings, meaning there were no missing ASCOT-CH4 scores. ASCOT-CH4 was found to be a weak unidimensional scale, consistent with other ASCOT measures, with acceptable internal consistency (α = 0.77, 8 items). Construct validity was supported by the findings. CONCLUSIONS: The ASCOT-CH4 is an alternative to conventional proxy-questionnaires for measuring the SCRQoL of care home residents, with good psychometric properties. A limitation is that users need a range of data collection skills. Future research should explore whether findings are replicable when data are collected by other researchers.

Feasibility, validity and reliability of the ASCOT-Proxy and ASCOT-Carer among unpaid carers of people living with dementia in England.

BACKGROUND: People with dementia living at home represent a growing group of social care services users in England. Many are unable to complete questionnaires due to cognitive impairment. The ASCOT-Proxy is an adapted version of an established measure, ASCOT, which was developed as a way of collecting social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL) data from this group of service users, either alone or alongside the ASCOT-Carer, a measure of SCRQoL for unpaid carers. The ASCOT-Proxy includes two perspectives, the proxy-proxy perspective ('My opinion: What I think') and proxy-person perspective ('What I think the person I represent thinks'). We aimed to establish the feasibility, construct validity and reliability of the ASCOT-Proxy and ASCOT-Carer, with unpaid carers of people with dementia living at home unable to self-report. We also aimed to establish structural characteristics of the ASCOT-Proxy. METHODS: Cross-sectional data were collected using self-administered questionnaire (paper or online) among unpaid carers living in England between January 2020 and April 2021. Unpaid carers could take part if they supported someone living with dementia who was unable to self-complete a structured questionnaire. The person living with dementia or their unpaid carer had to use at least one social care service. We used the proportion of missing data to establish feasibility, ordinal exploratory factor analysis to establish structural characteristics, Zumbo's ordinal alpha for internal reliability, and hypothesis testing for construct validity. We also conducted Rasch analysis. RESULTS: We analysed data for 313 carers (62.4(± 12.0) years, 75.7% (N=237) females). We were able to calculate the ASCOT-Proxy-proxy overall score for 90.7% of our sample, the ASCOT-Proxy-person overall score for 88.8% of our sample and in case of the ASCOT-Carer for 99.7% of our sample. As there was an issue with structural characteristics of the ASCOT-Proxy-proxy we conducted Rasch, reliability and construct validity analysis for the ASCOT-Proxy-person and ASCOT-Carer only. CONCLUSIONS: This was a first study to explore psychometric characteristics of the ASCOT-Proxy and ASCOT-Carer with unpaid carers of people with dementia living at home unable to self-report. There are some aspects of the psychometric characteristics of the ASCOT-Proxy and ASCOT-Carer that warrant further investigation in future. Trial registration NA.

Outcome measures from international older adult care home intervention research: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Care homes are increasingly important settings for intervention research to enhance evidence-informed care. For such research to demonstrate effectiveness, it is essential that measures are appropriate for the population, setting and practice contexts. OBJECTIVE: To identify care home intervention studies and describe the resident outcome measures used. DESIGN: Scoping review. METHODS: We reviewed international care home research published from 2015 to August 2022. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and ASSIA. We included any intervention study conducted in a care home, reporting resident outcomes. We extracted resident outcome measures, organised these using the domains of an adapted framework and described their use. RESULTS: From 7,330 records screened, we included 396 datasets reported in 436 publications. These included 12,167 care homes and 836,842 residents, with an average of 80 residents per study. The studies evaluated 859 unique resident outcomes 2,030 times using 732 outcome measures. Outcomes were evaluated between 1 and 112 times, with 75.1% of outcomes evaluated only once. Outcome measures were used 1-120 times, with 68.4% of measures used only once. Only 14 measures were used ≥20 times. Functional status, mood & behaviour and medications were the commonest outcome domains assessed. More than half of outcomes were assessed using scales, with a fifth using existing records or administrative data. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant heterogeneity in the choice and assessment of outcomes for intervention research in care homes. There is an urgent need to develop a consensus on useful and sensitive tools for care homes, working with residents, families and friends and staff.

Piloting of a minimum data set for older people living in care homes in England: protocol for a longitudinal, mixed-methods study.

INTRODUCTION: Health and care data are routinely collected about care home residents in England, yet there is no way to collate these data to inform benchmarking and improvement. The Developing research resources And minimum data set for Care Homes' Adoption and use study has developed a prototype minimum data set (MDS) for piloting. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A mixed-methods longitudinal pilot study will be conducted in 60 care homes (approximately 960 residents) in 3 regions of England, using resident data from cloud-based digital care home records at two-time points. These will be linked to resident and care home level data held within routine National Health Service and social care data sets. Two rounds of focus groups with care home staff (n=8-10 per region) and additional interviews with external stakeholders (n=3 per region) will explore implementation and the perceived utility of the MDS. Data will be assessed for completeness and timeliness of completion. Descriptive statistics, including percentage floor and ceiling effects, will establish data quality. For validated scales, construct validity will be assessed by hypothesis testing and exploratory factor analysis will establish structural validity. Internal consistency will be established using Cronbach's alpha. Longitudinal analysis of the pilot data will demonstrate the value of the MDS to each region. Qualitative data will be analysed inductively using thematic analysis to understand the complexities of implementing an MDS in care homes for older people. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received ethical approval from the London Queen's Square Research Ethics Committee (22/LO/0250). Informed consent is required for participation. Findings will be disseminated to: academics working on data use and integration in social care, care sector organisations, policy makers and commissioners. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals. Partner NIHR Applied Research Collaborations, the National Care Forum and the British Geriatrics Society will disseminate policy briefs.

Supporting the involvement of older adults with complex needs in evaluation of outcomes in long-term care at home programmes.

BACKGROUND: It is important to involve older people in evaluating public programmes that affect their lives. This includes those with physical and cognitive impairments (such as dementia) who may need support to live at home. Many countries have implemented new approaches to support older people to live well at home for longer. However, it can be challenging to involve disabled people in service evaluation, so we are unclear whether services are meeting their needs. AIM: This study explored how a cascading methodology, offering different supports enabled the involvement of home care users with cognitive and physical impairments in the assessment of their care-related quality of life. METHOD: We used multiple tools from the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) with n = 63 older adults who were recipients of home care in the Illawarra. We also offered different physical and cognitive supports as needed. RESULTS: We started with the standard ASCOT questionnaire to assess the care-related quality of life, but then offered alternative formats (including Easy Read) and supports (including physical and cognitive assistance) if the older person needed them to participate. This allowed us to involve a greater diversity of older people in the evaluation, and changed what we found out about whether their care needs were being met. CONCLUSION: There is a need to implement more flexible and inclusive methods to increase the involvement of vulnerable users of long-term care in the assessment of service outcomes. This is important to ensure that the perspectives of all service users inform the delivery of person-centred care. It is also critical to understand the extent to which programmes are meeting the needs of vulnerable service users. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Service users with dementia were involved in the design of the 'Easy Read' questionnaire used in the study.

Developing a minimum data set for older adult care homes in the UK: exploring the concept and defining early core principles.

Reforms to social care in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, in the UK and internationally, place data at the heart of proposed innovations and solutions. The principles are not well established of what constitutes core, or minimum, data to support care home residents. Often, what is included privileges data on resident health over day-to-day care priorities and quality of life. This Personal View argues for evidence-based principles on which to base the development of a UK minimum data set (MDS) for care homes. Co-produced work involving care home staff and older people working with stakeholders is required to define and agree the format, content, structure, and operationalisation of the MDS. Implementation decisions will determine the success of the MDS, affecting aspects including data quality, completeness, and usability. Care home staff who collect the data need to benefit from the MDS and see value in their contribution, and residents must derive benefit from data collection and synthesis.

Developing a Scale of Care Work-Related Quality of Life (CWRQoL) for Long-Term Care Workers in England.

BACKGROUND: Long-term care (LTC) workers are subjected to structural and inherent difficult conditions that are likely to impact their quality of life at work; however, no agreed scale measures it. This study aims to develop a scale to measure the work-related quality of life among LTC workers in England (CWRQoL). The study establishes the domains/sub-domains of CWRQoL, investigates the tool's utility and collates information on existing supporting strategies for CWRQoL. METHODS: We adopt a mixed-methods approach employing inductive/deductive processes at three stages: (1) a scoping review of the literature; (2) interviews and focus groups with frontline LTC workers, managers and LTC stakeholders; and (3) a content validity consensus survey. RESULTS: CWRQoL is composed of seven domains (and 23 sub-domains). Additional domains to those in the literature include financial wellbeing, sufficient time for building relations, managing grief and emotions associated with client death and end of life care. Stakeholders identified several benefits and challenges related to the CWRQoL tool's utility. COVID-19 significantly impacted LTC workers' mental wellbeing and spillover between work and home. CONCLUSIONS: The study highlighted the complex nature of CWRQoL and provided a solid ground for developing and validating a CWRQoL scale.

Understanding and measuring the work-related quality of life among those working in adult social care: A scoping review.

The main aim of this scoping review was to understand how work-related quality of life (WRQoL) in adult social care has been defined and measured in the literature and to map key components of WRQoL among those working in adult social care and similar contexts. The scoping review included studies that: 1- focused on WRQoL/work-related wellbeing (and their synonyms); and 2- included adult social care or community health care. We searched existing evidence from November 2019 until July 2020 through an electronic literature search of eight major databases complemented by the grey literature, searching the reference lists and by contacting our existing network of experts in the field. In addition, we repeated the searches to identify any relevant literature published in 2021. Reporting followed the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. In total, we included 68 publications. These publications indicate that there is an absence of agreement on a definition and measurement of WRQoL in adult social care. Based on a thematic analysis we identified six key components of WRQoL: organisational characteristics; job characteristics; mental wellbeing and health; physical wellbeing and health; spill-over from work to home; and professional identity. In summary, at the moment, there is no agreement on what WRQoL is and how to measure it in adult social care. As a result, there is very limited evidence on how to improve WRQoL among people working in adult social care. However, this scoping review suggests that there are six key components of WRQoL that researchers may consider to include in their future studies.

The uptake and use of a minimum data set (MDS) for older people living and dying in care homes: a realist review.

BACKGROUND: Care homes provide long term care for older people. Countries with standardised approaches to residents' assessment, care planning and review (known as minimum data sets (MDS)) use the aggregate data to guide resource allocation, monitor quality, and for research. Less is known about how an MDS affects how staff assess, provide and review residents' everyday care. The review aimed to develop a theory-driven understanding of how care home staff can effectively implement and use MDS to plan and deliver care for residents. METHODS: The realist review was organised according to RAMESES (Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: and Evolving Standards) guidelines. There were three overlapping stages: 1) defining the scope of the review and theory development on the use of minimum data set 2) testing and refining candidate programme theories through iterative literature searches and stakeholders' consultations as well as discussion among the research team; and 3) data synthesis from stages 1 and 2. The following databases were used MEDLINE via OVID, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), ASSIA [Applied Social Sciences Citation Index and Abstracts]) and sources of grey literature. RESULTS: Fifty-one papers informed the development of three key interlinked theoretical propositions: motivation (mandates and incentives for Minimum Data Set completion); frontline staff monitoring (when Minimum Data Set completion is built into the working practices of the care home); and embedded recording systems (Minimum Data Set recording system is integral to collecting residents' data). By valuing the contributions of staff and building on existing ways of working, the uptake and use of an MDS could enable all staff to learn with and from each other about what is important for residents' care CONCLUSIONS: Minimum Data Sets provides commissioners service providers and researchers with standardised information useful for commissioning planning and analysis. For it to be equally useful for care home staff it requires key activities that address the staff experiences of care, their work with others and the use of digital technology. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number CRD42020171323.

Exploring the structural characteristics of the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) and ASCOT-Carer.

Background: Measurement models inform the approach to assess a measure's validity and also how a measure is understood, applied and interpreted. With preference-based measures (PBMs), it is generally accepted that they are formative; however, if they are applied without preferences, they may be reflective, formative or mixed. In this study, we sought to empirically test whether the reflective, formative or mixed measurement model best describes PBMs of social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL) - specifically, the ASCOT and ASCOT-Carer. We also explored the network approach, as an alternative. Methods: ASCOT and ASCOT-Carer data were analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis and Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes models to test reflective, formative or mixed measurement models, respectively. Network analysis of partial correlations using the Gaussian graphical model was also conducted. Results: The results indicated that the reflective measurement model is the worst fit for ASCOT and ASCOT-Carer. The formative or mixed measurement models may apply to ASCOT. The mixed measurement model was the best fit for ASCOT-Carer. The network analysis indicated that the most important or influential items were Occupation and Personal cleanliness and comfort (ASCOT) and Time and space and Self-care (ASCOT-Carer). Conclusions: The ASCOT and ASCOT-Carer are best described as formative/mixed or mixed measurement models, respectively. These findings may guide the approach to the validation of cross-culturally adapted and translated versions. Specifically, we recommend that EFA be applied to establish structural characteristics, especially if the measure will be applied as a PBM and as a measure of SCRQoL. Network analysis may also provide further useful insights into structural characteristics.

For many people living with long-term health conditions or disabilities, community-based social care services (like, home care) enable them to maintain independence, stay connected, and to live well. For families and friends who care for someone ('carers'), these services may also help them. They may allow carers to continue in paid employment and to have time for hobbies, friendships, to stay healthy, and connect with others in a similar situation. An important question is what type(s) of community-based services, best support people and their carers. To find this out, we need a way of measuring the effect services have on people's lives. The Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) is a questionnaire that asks people about aspects of their life that might be affected by social care services (for example, having control over everyday life). This questionnaire has already been used by researchers and care providers to review how well social care services support people. There is also another version of the questionnaire called the ASCOT-Carer, which looks at aspects of life that are important to carers. There has been interest in culturally adapting and translating these measures into other languages. However, there are different ways of establishing how well a translated version relates back to the original. This is important to make sure that the new version is measuring what we expect it to. In this paper, we compare different ways of understanding the information collected using the ASCOT and ASCOT-Carer in England. This will inform how to approach the testing of ASCOT (and other similar measures) that have been translated into new languages. It also helps us to understand how different aspects of life that are supported by social care services are related to each other. This can inform our understanding of people's needs and how to best support them.

Social care-related quality of life of people with dementia and their carers in England.

People with dementia and their carers are a growing subgroup of people who use community-based social care. These services are designed to maintain people's quality of life while living at home. The ASCOT measure of social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL), designed to evaluate quality and effectiveness of social care, has been adapted for proxy-report when someone is unable to self-report. The ASCOT-Carer has been developed to measure carer's own SCRQoL. This study sought to establish the factors related to SCRQoL of people living with dementia (PLWD, proxy-reported by carers) and their carers. Data were collected via a self-administered postal or online survey of 313 carers in England, from January 2020 to April 2021. Carers were eligible if they supported someone living with dementia at home, who was unable to self-complete questionnaires. The person living with dementia or their carer had to use at least one social care service, e.g. home care. We recruited participants via an online volunteer panel and NHS sites. Multiple regression was applied to explore the factors significantly related to ASCOT SCRQoL by self- and proxy-report. Key influences on carers' own SCRQoL were their health, financial difficulties associated with caring, and satisfaction with social care support. Inadequate home design was significantly negatively associated with SCRQoL for PLWD. The latter stages of the pandemic-related restrictions (the tier system from 2nd December 2020 to study end, April 2021) were associated with significantly worse SCRQoL for PLWD, but not for carers. The study offers insight into the factors associated with SCRQoL. In particular, the findings highlight the importance of adequate home design for people with dementia; satisfactory social care support and limiting any adverse financial impact of caring are important for carers. The findings indicate a negative effect of COVID restrictions on SCRQoL of people with dementia.

Unmet social care needs of people living with and beyond cancer: prevalence and predictors from an English longitudinal survey.

OBJECTIVES: This study estimates the prevalence of unmet social care needs of people over 50 living in England with cancer and the effect of cancer on unmet needs. METHODS: We used data from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. We estimated the mean, standard deviation and 95% CI of the prevalence of unmet social care needs among people with cancer. Logistic regression analysis with individual random effects was used to estimate the effect of cancer on unmet needs controlling for other determinants. Pain measures were included stepwise in the regression to estimate their mediating effect. RESULTS: The prevalence rate of unmet social care needs among people living with cancer is 9% (SD = 0.29; 95% CI: 8.3-10) compared to 6% (SD = 0.24; 95% CI: 6.1-6.5) among people without cancer. People with cancer have significantly higher odds of having unmet needs by a factor of 1.44 (95% CI: 1.20-1.72), after controlling for the effect of other characteristics. Adding pain measures reduces the effect of cancer to a factor of 1.36 (95% CI: 1.14-1.64) in the odds of unmet needs but still remains statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: A more integrated approach to cancer care is more likely to address the high level of unmet needs and consequent adverse implications.

Uptake and use of a minimum data set (MDS) for older people living and dying in care homes in England: a realist review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Care homes provide nursing and social care for older people who can no longer live independently at home. In the UK, there is no consistent approach to how information about residents' medical history, care needs and preferences are collected and shared. This limits opportunities to understand the care home population, have a systematic approach to assessment and documentation of care, identifiy care home residents at risk of deterioration and review care. Countries with standardised approaches to residents' assessment, care planning and review (eg, minimum data sets (MDS)) use the data to understand the care home population, guide resource allocation, monitor services delivery and for research. The aim of this realist review is to develop a theory-driven understanding of how care home staff implement and use MDS to plan and deliver care of individual residents. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A realist review will be conducted in three research stages.Stage 1 will scope the literature and develop candidate programme theories of what ensures effective uptake and sustained implementation of an MDS.Stage2 will test and refine these theories through further iterative searches of the evidence from the literature to establish how effective uptake of an MDS can be achieved.Stage 3 will consult with relevant stakeholders to test or refine the programme theory (theories) of how an MDS works at the resident level of care for different stakeholders and in what circumstances. Data synthesis will use realist logic to align data from each eligible article with possible context-mechanism-outcome configurations or specific elements that answer the research questions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The University of Hertfordshire Ethics Committee has approved this study (HSK/SF/UH/04169). Findings will be disseminated through briefings with stakeholders, conference presentations, a national consultation on the use of an MDS in UK long-term care settings, publications in peer-reviewed journals and in print and social media publications accessible to residents, relatives and care home staff. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020171323; this review protocol is registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews.

A cross-sectional study exploring the relationship between regulator quality ratings and care home residents' quality of life in England.

BACKGROUND: The quality of life of people receiving health and social care is an important indicator of service quality, but the relationship between patient experience and outcomes and regulator quality ratings in England is unknown. In 2013, the health and social care regulator in England, the Care Quality Commission (CQC), introduced a new ratings system and by February 2017, all social care services were inspected and awarded new quality ratings (outstanding, good, requires improvement and inadequate). This study aimed to explore whether quality ratings were associated with residents' quality of life, controlling for confounding variables. METHODS: We conducted a nested, cross-sectional study, collecting social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL) data for 293 older care home residents in 34 care homes (20 nursing and 14 residential) in the South East of England. CQC ratings and other resident and home-level variables were also collected for the analysis. Multilevel modelling explored whether residents' social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL) was associated with regulator ratings, controlling for confounding variables. RESULTS: Outstanding and good homes were collapsed into one category and compared with homes requiring improvement. Nationally, only 2 % of care homes for older people are rated as inadequate and it was not possible to capture sufficient numbers for the analysis. We recruited one but it was re-inspected during the fieldwork period and its rating changed to requires improvement. The random intercept multilevel model, which accounted for 16.93% of the differences in SCRQoL within homes and 69.80% between, indicated that better SCRQoL was significantly associated with being female, better functioning, no dementia diagnosis, fewer communication difficulties, and living in a care home rated as outstanding/good by CQC. Size of home and registration category were not significant predictors. CONCLUSIONS: This study found evidence that quality ratings are associated with residents' SCRQoL. As well as aiming to improve quality and ensure minimum standards, quality ratings have the potential to inform user choice and help the public compare care homes based on quality. Future research to establish the generalisability and replicability of the results is required.

Validity and test-retest reliability of the self-completion adult social care outcomes toolkit (ASCOT-SCT4) with adults with long-term physical, sensory and mental health conditions in England.

BACKGROUND: The Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT-SCT4) is a multi-attribute utility index designed for the evaluation of long-term social care services. The measure comprises eight attributes that capture aspects of social care-related quality of life. The instrument has previously been validated with a sample of older adults who used home care services in England. This paper aims to demonstrate the instrument's test-retest reliability and provide evidence for its validity in a diverse sample of adults who use publicly-funded, community-based social care in England. METHODS: A survey of 770 social care service users was conducted in England. A subsample of 100 services users participated in a follow-up interview between 7 and 21 days after baseline. Spearman rank correlation coefficients between the ASCOT-SCT4 index score and the EQ-5D-3 L, the ICECAP-A or ICECAP-O and overall quality of life were used to assess convergent validity. Data on variables hypothesised to be related to the ASCOT-SCT4 index score, as well as rating of individual attributes, were also collected. Hypothesised relationships were tested using one-way ANOVA or Fisher's exact test. Test-retest reliability was assessed using the intra-class correlation coefficient for the ASCOT-SCT4 index score at baseline and follow-up. RESULTS: There were moderate to strong correlations between the ASCOT-SCT4 index and EQ-5D-3 L, the ICECAP-A or ICECAP-O, and overall quality of life (all correlations ≥ 0.3). The construct validity was further supported by statistically significant hypothesised relationships between the ASCOT-SCT4 index and individual characteristics in univariate and multivariate analysis. There was also further evidence for the construct validity for the revised Food and drink and Dignity items. The test-retest reliability was considered to be good (ICC = 0.783; 95% CI: 0.678-0.857). CONCLUSIONS: The ASCOT-SCT4 index has good test-retest reliability for adults with physical or sensory disabilities who use social care services. The index score and the attributes appear to be valid for adults receiving social care for support reasons connected to underlying mental health problems, and physical or sensory disabilities. Further reliability testing with a wider sample of social care users is warranted, as is further exploration of the relationship between the ASCOT-SCT4, ICECAP-A/O and EQ-5D-3 L indices.

The acceptability and feasibility of using the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) to inform practice in care homes.

BACKGROUND: The Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) measures social care related quality of life (SCRQoL) and can be used to measure outcomes and demonstrate impact across different social care settings. This exploratory study built on previous work by collecting new inter-rater reliability data on the mixed-methods version of the toolkit and exploring how it might be used to inform practice in four case study homes. METHOD: We worked with two care home providers to agree an in-depth study collecting SCRQoL data in four case-study homes. Data was collected about residents' age, ethnicity, cognitive impairment, ability to perform activities of daily living and SCRQoL in the four homes. Feedback sessions with staff and managers were held in the homes two weeks after baseline and follow-up data collected three months later. Interviews with managers explored their views of the feedback and recorded any changes that had been made because of it. RESULTS: Participant recruitment was challenging, despite working in partnership with the homes. Resident response rates ranged from 23 to 54 % with 58 residents from four care homes taking part in the research. 53 % lacked capacity to consent. Inter-rater reliability for the ASCOT ratings of SCRQoL were good at time one (IRR = 0.72) and excellent at time two (IRR = 0.76). During the study, residents' ability to perform activities of daily living declined significantly (z = -2.67, p < .01), as did their expected needs in the absence of services (z = -2.41, p < .05). Despite these rapid declines in functionings, residents' current SCRQoL declined slightly but not significantly (Z = -1.49, p = .14). Staff responded positively to the feedback given and managers reported implementing changes in practice because of it. CONCLUSION: This exploratory study faced many challenges in the recruitment of residents, many of whom were cognitively impaired. Nevertheless, without a mixed-methods approach many of the residents living in the care homes would have been excluded from the research altogether or had their views represented only by a representative or proxy. The value of the mixed-methods toolkit and its potential for use by providers is discussed.

The Long-Term Conditions Questionnaire: conceptual framework and item development.

PURPOSE: To identify the main issues of importance when living with long-term conditions to refine a conceptual framework for informing the item development of a patient-reported outcome measure for long-term conditions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews (n=48) were conducted with people living with at least one long-term condition. Participants were recruited through primary care. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed by thematic analysis. The analysis served to refine the conceptual framework, based on reviews of the literature and stakeholder consultations, for developing candidate items for a new measure for long-term conditions. RESULTS: Three main organizing concepts were identified: impact of long-term conditions, experience of services and support, and self-care. The findings helped to refine a conceptual framework, leading to the development of 23 items that represent issues of importance in long-term conditions. The 23 candidate items formed the first draft of the measure, currently named the Long-Term Conditions Questionnaire. CONCLUSION: The aim of this study was to refine the conceptual framework and develop items for a patient-reported outcome measure for long-term conditions, including single and multiple morbidities and physical and mental health conditions. Qualitative interviews identified the key themes for assessing outcomes in long-term conditions, and these underpinned the development of the initial draft of the measure. These initial items will undergo cognitive testing to refine the items prior to further validation in a survey.