• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

长期护理中护理关系质量的决定因素——一项参与性研究。

Determinants of the quality of care relationships in long-term care - a participatory study.

作者信息

Scheffelaar Aukelien, Hendriks Michelle, Bos Nanne, Luijkx Katrien, van Dulmen Sandra

机构信息

Nivel (Netherlands institute for health services research), PO Box 1568, 3500 BN, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

出版信息

BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Jun 14;19(1):389. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4195-x.

DOI:10.1186/s12913-019-4195-x
PMID:31200705
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6570956/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The quality of the care relationship between a client and a professional is important in long-term care, as most clients depend on support for a lengthy period. The three largest client groups who receive long-term care in the Netherlands are older adults who are physically or mentally frail, people with mental health problems and people with intellectual disabilities. There is little clarity about how generic and variable the determinants of the quality of care relationships are across these client groups. The aim of this study is to explore and compare the determinants of the quality of care relationships in these three client groups in long-term care.

METHODS

This participatory study involving clients as co-researchers was held in three healthcare organizations, each providing long-term care to one client group. The research was conducted by three teams consisting of researchers and co-researchers. We interviewed clients individually and professionals in focus groups. The focus was on care relationships with professionals where there is weekly recurring contact for at least 3 months. Clients and professionals were selected using a convenience sample. The interviews were coded in open, axial and selective coding. The outcomes were compared between the client groups.

RESULTS

The study sample consisted of 30 clients and 29 professionals. Determinants were categorized into four levels: client, professional, between client and professional, and context. The findings show that the majority of the determinants apply to the care relationships within all three client groups. At the professional level, eleven generic determinants were found. Eight determinants emerged at the client level of which two were found in two client groups only. At the level between a client and a professional, six determinants were found of which one applied to mental healthcare and disability care only. Five determinants were found at the contextual level of which two were specific for two client groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The study yielded a variety of determinants that came to the fore in all three client groups in long-term care. This suggests that including a homogenous client group from a single care setting is not necessary when studying the quality of long-term care relationships.

摘要

背景

在长期护理中,服务对象与专业人员之间的照护关系质量至关重要,因为大多数服务对象在很长一段时间内都依赖他人的支持。在荷兰接受长期护理的三大主要服务对象群体是身体或精神虚弱的老年人、有心理健康问题的人以及有智力障碍的人。对于这些服务对象群体而言,照护关系质量的决定因素在多大程度上具有普遍性和变异性,目前尚不清楚。本研究的目的是探索和比较长期护理中这三个服务对象群体照护关系质量的决定因素。

方法

这项参与性研究将服务对象作为共同研究者,在三个医疗保健机构中进行,每个机构为一个服务对象群体提供长期护理。研究由三个由研究人员和共同研究人员组成的团队进行。我们分别对服务对象进行了访谈,并对专业人员进行了焦点小组访谈。重点是与专业人员的照护关系,这种关系每周至少重复接触3个月。服务对象和专业人员采用便利抽样的方式选取。访谈采用开放式、轴心式和选择性编码进行编码。对不同服务对象群体的结果进行了比较。

结果

研究样本包括30名服务对象和29名专业人员。决定因素分为四个层面:服务对象层面、专业人员层面、服务对象与专业人员之间的层面以及背景层面。研究结果表明,大多数决定因素适用于所有三个服务对象群体的照护关系。在专业人员层面,发现了11个一般性决定因素。在服务对象层面出现了8个决定因素,其中2个仅在两个服务对象群体中发现。在服务对象与专业人员之间的层面,发现了6个决定因素,其中1个仅适用于精神卫生保健和残疾护理。在背景层面发现了5个决定因素,其中2个特定于两个服务对象群体。

结论

该研究得出了在长期护理的所有三个服务对象群体中都凸显出来的各种决定因素。这表明,在研究长期照护关系质量时,没有必要纳入来自单一照护环境的同质化服务对象群体。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4062/6570956/79a05b6eb9a1/12913_2019_4195_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4062/6570956/79a05b6eb9a1/12913_2019_4195_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4062/6570956/79a05b6eb9a1/12913_2019_4195_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Determinants of the quality of care relationships in long-term care - a participatory study.长期护理中护理关系质量的决定因素——一项参与性研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Jun 14;19(1):389. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4195-x.
2
Determinants of the quality of care relationships in long-term care - a systematic review.长期护理中护理关系质量的决定因素——一项系统综述
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Nov 28;18(1):903. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3704-7.
3
Protocol for a participatory study for developing qualitative instruments measuring the quality of long-term care relationships.一项关于开发用于衡量长期护理关系质量的定性工具的参与式研究方案。
BMJ Open. 2018 Dec 2;8(11):e022895. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022895.
4
Qualitative instruments involving clients as co-researchers to assess and improve the quality of care relationships in long-term care: an evaluation of instruments to enhance client participation in quality research.涉及将客户作为共同研究者的定性工具,以评估和改善长期护理中的护理关系质量:评估工具以增强客户参与质量研究。
BMJ Open. 2020 Feb 13;10(2):e033034. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033034.
5
Using client experiences for quality improvement in long-term care organizations.利用客户体验来改善长期护理机构的服务质量。
Int J Qual Health Care. 2012 Jun;24(3):224-9. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzs013. Epub 2012 Apr 6.
6
Are the Dutch long-term care organizations getting better? A trend study of quality indicators between 2007 and 2009 and the patterns of regional influences on performance.荷兰的长期护理机构是否在变得更好?2007 年至 2009 年期间的质量指标趋势研究及对绩效的区域影响模式。
Int J Qual Health Care. 2013 Oct;25(5):505-14. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzt061. Epub 2013 Aug 20.
7
Measuring client experiences in long-term care in the Netherlands: a pilot study with the Consumer Quality Index Long-term Care.测量荷兰长期护理中的客户体验:使用消费者质量指数长期护理进行的试点研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2010 Apr 12;10:95. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-10-95.
8
The study of client-provider interactions: a review of methodological issues.医患互动研究:方法学问题综述
Stud Fam Plann. 1994 Jan-Feb;25(1):1-17.
9
How to assess experienced quality of care in nursing homes from the client's perspective: results of a qualitative study.如何从客户的角度评估养老院的经验护理质量:一项定性研究的结果。
BMC Geriatr. 2020 Feb 17;20(1):67. doi: 10.1186/s12877-020-1466-7.
10
Does diverse staff and skill mix of teams impact quality of care in long-term elderly health care? An exploratory case study.团队中多样化的员工和技能组合会影响长期老年保健中的护理质量吗?一项探索性案例研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Dec 20;18(1):988. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3812-4.

引用本文的文献

1
Nursing ethical dimensions of euthanasia and medically assisted suicide for older people in need of long-term care.为需要长期护理的老年人实施安乐死和医疗协助自杀的护理伦理维度。
Front Psychiatry. 2025 May 14;16:1589487. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1589487. eCollection 2025.
2
Supporting direct support professionals in enabling people with intellectual disabilities to engage in meaningful activities: protocol for the Meaningful Activities 4 All (MA4A) study based on the human-centred design process.支持直接支持专业人员使智障人士能够参与有意义的活动:基于以人为中心的设计过程的有意义活动 4 所有人(MA4A)研究方案。
BMJ Open. 2022 Aug 17;12(8):e061736. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061736.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Protocol for a participatory study for developing qualitative instruments measuring the quality of long-term care relationships.一项关于开发用于衡量长期护理关系质量的定性工具的参与式研究方案。
BMJ Open. 2018 Dec 2;8(11):e022895. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022895.
2
Determinants of the quality of care relationships in long-term care - a systematic review.长期护理中护理关系质量的决定因素——一项系统综述
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Nov 28;18(1):903. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3704-7.
3
Care Aides' Relational Practices and Caring Contributions.
Coping Strategies Used by Older Adults to Deal with Contact Isolation in the Hospital during the COVID-19 Pandemic.
新冠疫情期间老年人在医院应对接触隔离所采用的应对策略
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jul 8;18(14):7317. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18147317.
4
Lessons learned from participatory research to enhance client participation in long-term care research: a multiple case study.从参与式研究中汲取的经验教训,以提高客户对长期护理研究的参与度:一项多案例研究。
Res Involv Engagem. 2020 Jun 1;6:27. doi: 10.1186/s40900-020-00187-5. eCollection 2020.
5
Qualitative instruments involving clients as co-researchers to assess and improve the quality of care relationships in long-term care: an evaluation of instruments to enhance client participation in quality research.涉及将客户作为共同研究者的定性工具,以评估和改善长期护理中的护理关系质量:评估工具以增强客户参与质量研究。
BMJ Open. 2020 Feb 13;10(2):e033034. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033034.
护理助理的关系实践与关怀贡献。
J Gerontol Nurs. 2016 Nov 1;42(11):24-30. doi: 10.3928/00989134-20160901-03. Epub 2016 Sep 6.
4
Staff perspectives of relationships in aged care: A qualitative approach.老年护理中人际关系的员工视角:一种定性研究方法。
Australas J Ageing. 2016 Sep;35(3):198-203. doi: 10.1111/ajag.12276. Epub 2016 Mar 15.
5
Older care-home residents as collaborators or advisors in research: a systematic review.老年护理院居民作为研究中的合作者或顾问:一项系统综述。
Age Ageing. 2016 May;45(3):337-45. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afv201. Epub 2016 Jan 19.
6
A stronger voice.一个更强有力的声音。
Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2015;28(2):211-22. doi: 10.1108/IJHCQA-10-2014-0101.
7
Communicative barriers and resources in nursing homes from the enrolled nurses' perspective: A qualitative interview study.养老院中注册护士视角下的沟通障碍和资源:一项定性访谈研究。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2016 Feb;54:112-21. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.05.006. Epub 2015 Jun 5.
8
Staff members' negotiation of power in client engagement: analysis of practice within an Australian aged care service.员工在客户互动中对权力的协商:对澳大利亚一家老年护理服务机构内实践的分析
J Aging Stud. 2015 Apr;33:37-46. doi: 10.1016/j.jaging.2015.02.011. Epub 2015 Mar 12.
9
Trust, deals and authority: community mental health professionals' experiences of influencing reluctant patients.信任、交易与权威:社区心理健康专业人员影响不情愿患者的经历。
Community Ment Health J. 2014 Nov;50(8):886-95. doi: 10.1007/s10597-014-9720-0. Epub 2014 Mar 25.
10
"We are all fellow human beings": mental health workers' perspectives of being in relationships with clients in community-based mental health services.“我们都是人类同胞”:心理健康工作者对在社区心理健康服务中与客户建立关系的看法。
Issues Ment Health Nurs. 2013 Dec;34(12):883-91. doi: 10.3109/01612840.2013.814735.