Schnelle J F, Keeler E, Hays R D, Simmons S, Ouslander J G, Siu A L
Borun Center for Gerontological Research, Jewish Home for the Aging, Reseda, CA 91335, USA.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 1995 Oct;43(10):1112-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1995.tb07010.x.
More than half of nursing home residents suffer from urinary incontinence. These residents typically have long stays and, because of comorbid cognitive and physical impairments, have little hope of living again in a noninstitutional environment The value of interventions to change functional status of this chronically institutionalized population is often questioned. This paper explores this value issue in the context of two incontinence management interventions that have been shown to improve functional status: (1) Functional Incidental Training (FIT), and (2) Prompted Voiding (PV). The relative value of the different interventions for the nursing home population was estimated using paired preferences.
The cost of two interventions (FIT and PV) that target incontinent nursing home residents was related to the value of these interventions as perceived by consumers of nursing home services. Both interventions decrease incontinence frequency, and one intervention also improves mobility endurance.
Ninety incontinent nursing home residents received the intervention; 37 older nondemented board and care residents and 31 family members of the nursing home residents provided estimates of the intervention's value.
The staff-time allocations involved in implementing both interventions were documented in more than 85 resident care episodes. These time data were converted to labor cost based on the cost of nursing aides who would actually implement the intervention. The value of each intervention was assessed by asking consumers to make choices between the intervention and its associated outcomes (such as increased dryness) and other nursing home services of known cost (e.g., moving to a private room).
Both interventions had labor costs that were greater than "usual care" costs. The additional cost was estimated to be $4.31 per resident per day for PV and $6.42 per resident per day for FIT if these programs were implemented from 7 AM to 7 AM. Consumer preference data indicated that consumers preferred the FIT and PV outcomes to more expensive alternative services, calculated to cost $10.00 per day, often marketed to consumers,
Consumers may prefer the FIT and PV interventions relative to the typical services often marketed to the nursing home consumer. The analysis completed in this paper suggests that both interventions have value for frail residents likely to live out their lives in a nursing home.
超过半数的疗养院居民患有尿失禁。这些居民通常住院时间较长,并且由于存在认知和身体方面的合并症,几乎没有希望在非机构化环境中重新生活。改变这一长期居住在机构中的人群功能状态的干预措施的价值常常受到质疑。本文在两种已被证明能改善功能状态的尿失禁管理干预措施的背景下探讨这一价值问题:(1)功能性偶然训练(FIT),以及(2)定时排尿(PV)。使用配对偏好法估计了不同干预措施对疗养院人群的相对价值。
针对失禁疗养院居民的两种干预措施(FIT和PV)的成本与疗养院服务消费者所感知的这些干预措施的价值相关。两种干预措施均能降低失禁频率,且其中一种干预措施还能提高活动耐力。
90名失禁疗养院居民接受了干预;37名非痴呆的老年寄宿护理居民以及31名疗养院居民的家庭成员对干预措施的价值进行了评估。
在超过85次居民护理事件中记录了实施两种干预措施所涉及的工作人员时间分配情况。这些时间数据根据实际实施干预措施的护理助理的成本转换为劳动力成本。通过要求消费者在干预措施及其相关结果(如干爽程度增加)与已知成本的其他疗养院服务(如搬到私人房间)之间进行选择,来评估每种干预措施的价值。
两种干预措施的劳动力成本均高于“常规护理”成本。如果这些项目从早上7点实施到早上7点,估计额外成本为PV每位居民每天4.31美元,FIT每位居民每天6. .42美元。消费者偏好数据表明,消费者更喜欢FIT和PV的结果,而不是通常向消费者推销的每天成本为10.00美元的更昂贵替代服务。
相对于通常向疗养院消费者推销的典型服务,消费者可能更喜欢FIT和PV干预措施。本文完成的分析表明,这两种干预措施对可能在疗养院度过余生的体弱居民都有价值。