Slaughter Susan E, Jones C Allyson, Eliasziw Misha, Ickert Carla, Estabrooks Carole A, Wagg Adrian S
Associate Professor, Faculty of Nursing, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.
Professor, Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.
Healthc Policy. 2018 Aug;14(1):44-56. doi: 10.12927/hcpol.2018.25549.
With provincial policy changing institutional care provision for older adults who are unable to safely remain at home, supportive living represents a new middle-ground to provide care for older adults. We compared characteristics of supportive living staff and residents to those in long-term care (LTC), using facility and staff surveys, as well as administrative Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) data, to describe differences and similarities between facility types. Data analysis included t-tests, chi-square tests, ridit analyses and odds ratios. Participants from 15 supportive living facilities were compared to participants from eight LTC homes. Supportive living healthcare aides were younger, worked fewer years and were more likely to work full time than LTC healthcare aides. LTC residents were more likely than supportive living residents to have: cognitive impairment, medical instability, and activities of daily living dependence. This knowledge, which situates supportive living in the new care continuum, is useful for policy makers and administrators deciding on interventions and clinical guidelines for care groups.
随着省级政策改变了对无法安全居家的老年人的机构护理服务,支持性居住成为为老年人提供护理的一种新的中间立场。我们通过设施和员工调查以及行政居民评估工具(RAI)数据,比较了支持性居住机构的工作人员和居民与长期护理(LTC)机构的工作人员和居民的特征,以描述不同机构类型之间的差异和相似之处。数据分析包括t检验、卡方检验、ridit分析和比值比。将来自15个支持性居住设施的参与者与来自8个长期护理机构的参与者进行了比较。支持性居住机构的医疗护理员比长期护理机构的医疗护理员更年轻,工作年限更少,并且更有可能全职工作。长期护理机构的居民比支持性居住机构的居民更有可能出现:认知障碍、病情不稳定和日常生活依赖。这些将支持性居住置于新的护理连续体中的知识,对于政策制定者和管理人员决定护理群体的干预措施和临床指南很有用。