Goodman Claire, Gordon Adam L, Martin Finbarr, Davies Sue L, Iliffe Steve, Bowman Clive, Schneider Justine, Meyer Julienne, Victor Christina, Gage Heather, Gladman John Rf, Dening Tom
College Lane, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, Herts AL10 9AB, UK.
Syst Rev. 2014 May 24;3:49. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-3-49.
Care homes in the UK rely on general practice for access to specialist medical and nursing care as well as referral to therapists and secondary care. Service delivery to care homes is highly variable in both quantity and quality. This variability is also evident in the commissioning and organisation of care home-specific services that range from the payment of incentives to general practitioners (GPs) to visit care homes, to the creation of care home specialist teams and outreach services run by geriatricians. No primary studies or systematic reviews have robustly evaluated the impact of these different approaches on organisation and resident-level outcomes. Our aim is to identify factors which may explain the perceived or demonstrated effectiveness of programmes to improve health-related outcomes in older people living in care homes.
METHODS/DESIGN: A realist review approach will be used to develop a theoretical understanding of what works when, why and in what circumstances. Elements of service models of interest include those that focus on assessment and management of residents' health, those that use strategies to encourage closer working between visiting health care providers and care home staff, and those that address system-wide issues about access to assessment and treatment. These will include studies on continence, dignity, and speech and language assessment as well as interventions to promote person centred dementia care, improve strength and mobility, and nutrition. The impact of these interventions and their different mechanisms will be considered in relation to five key outcomes: residents' medication use, use of out of hours' services, hospital admissions (including use of Accident and Emergency) and length of hospital stay, costs and user satisfaction. An iterative three-stage approach will be undertaken that is stakeholder-driven and optimises the knowledge and networks of the research team.
This realist review will explore why and for whom different approaches to providing health care to residents in care homes improves access to health care in the five areas of interest. It will inform commissioning decisions and be the basis for further research. This systematic review protocol is registered on the PROSPERO database reference number: CRD42014009112.
英国的养老院依赖全科医疗服务来获得专科医疗护理以及转介至治疗师和二级医疗机构。向养老院提供的服务在数量和质量上差异很大。这种差异在针对养老院的特定服务的委托和组织中也很明显,这些服务范围从向全科医生(GP)支付激励费用以探访养老院,到组建养老院专科团队以及由老年病医生开展的外展服务。尚无初级研究或系统评价对这些不同方法对机构层面和居民层面结果的影响进行有力评估。我们的目标是确定可能解释改善养老院老年人健康相关结果的项目的感知或已证明的有效性的因素。
方法/设计:将采用现实主义综述方法,从理论上理解何时、为何以及在何种情况下某些措施有效。感兴趣的服务模式要素包括那些专注于居民健康评估和管理的要素、那些采用策略鼓励来访医疗服务提供者与养老院工作人员更紧密合作的要素,以及那些解决全系统评估和治疗获取问题的要素。这些将包括关于大小便失禁、尊严以及言语和语言评估的研究,以及促进以患者为中心的痴呆症护理、改善力量和活动能力以及营养的干预措施。将结合五个关键结果考虑这些干预措施及其不同机制的影响:居民的药物使用情况、非工作时间服务的使用情况、住院情况(包括急诊使用情况)和住院时间、成本以及用户满意度。将采用由利益相关者驱动的迭代三阶段方法,并优化研究团队的知识和网络。
这项现实主义综述将探讨为何以及针对哪些人,为养老院居民提供医疗保健的不同方法能改善在五个感兴趣领域的医疗保健获取情况。它将为委托决策提供信息,并成为进一步研究的基础。本系统评价方案已在PROSPERO数据库注册,注册号:CRD42014009112。