环境审计工具在专门建造和非专门建造的痴呆症护理环境中的验证。
Validation of the Environmental Audit Tool in both purpose-built and non-purpose-built dementia care settings.
作者信息
Smith Ronald, Fleming Richard, Chenoweth Lynn, Jeon Yun-Hee, Stein-Parbury Jane, Brodaty Henry
机构信息
Faculty of Health Science, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
出版信息
Australas J Ageing. 2012 Sep;31(3):159-63. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-6612.2011.00559.x. Epub 2011 Aug 7.
AIM
To provide further validation of the Environmental Audit Tool (EAT) by describing data on scores from 56 facilities and comparing the scores of facilities with a purpose-built dementia environment with those with non-purpose-built designs.
METHODS
Fifty-six facilities were assessed with the EAT. EAT scores for 24 purpose-built environments were compared with 32 non-purpose-built environments using a Wilcoxon rank-sum test.
RESULTS
Descriptive data on EAT scores are presented across all facilities. Facilities scored well on safety/security, familiarity, highlighting useful stimuli and privacy. Purpose-built unit scores were significantly higher than those for non-purpose-built environments for nine of 10 subscales of the EAT and the overall EAT score.
CONCLUSION
The EAT can assess the quality of homelike environments in residential aged care facilities for people with dementia, differentiate between the quality of design in various types of facilities and provide an evidence basis for devising improvements.
目的
通过描述56家机构的评分数据，并比较具有专门设计的痴呆症环境的机构与非专门设计的机构的评分，对环境审计工具（EAT）进行进一步验证。
方法
使用EAT对56家机构进行评估。采用Wilcoxon秩和检验，将24个专门设计环境的EAT评分与32个非专门设计环境的评分进行比较。
结果
呈现了所有机构EAT评分的描述性数据。机构在安全保障、熟悉度、突出有用刺激和隐私方面得分较高。在EAT的10个分量表中的9个以及总体EAT评分方面，专门设计单元的得分显著高于非专门设计环境的得分。
结论
EAT可以评估痴呆症患者居住型老年护理机构中类似家庭环境的质量，区分各类机构的设计质量，并为制定改进措施提供证据基础。
Zotero 插件