BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests that an increase in baccalaureate-educated registered nurses (BRNs) leads to better quality of care in hospitals. For geriatric long-term care facilities such as nursing homes, this relationship is less clear. Most studies assessing the relationship between nurse staffing and quality of care in long-term care facilities are US-based, and only a few have focused on the unique contribution of registered nurses. In this study, we focus on BRNs, as they are expected to serve as role models and change agents, while little is known about their unique contribution to quality of care in long-term care facilities. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study among 282 wards and 6,145 residents from 95 Dutch long-term care facilities. The relationship between the presence of BRNs in wards and quality of care was assessed, controlling for background characteristics, i.e. ward size, and residents' age, gender, length of stay, comorbidities, and care dependency status. Multilevel logistic regression analyses, using a generalized estimating equation approach, were performed. RESULTS: 57% of the wards employed BRNs. In these wards, the BRNs delivered on average 4.8 min of care per resident per day. Among residents living in somatic wards that employed BRNs, the probability of experiencing a fall (odds ratio 1.44; 95% CI 1.06-1.96) and receiving antipsychotic drugs (odds ratio 2.15; 95% CI 1.66-2.78) was higher, whereas the probability of having an indwelling urinary catheter was lower (odds ratio 0.70; 95% CI 0.53-0.91). Among residents living in psychogeriatric wards that employed BRNs, the probability of experiencing a medication incident was lower (odds ratio 0.68; 95% CI 0.49-0.95). For residents from both ward types, the probability of suffering from nosocomial pressure ulcers did not significantly differ for residents in wards employing BRNs. CONCLUSIONS: In wards that employed BRNs, their mean amount of time spent per resident was low, while quality of care on most wards was acceptable. No consistent evidence was found for a relationship between the presence of BRNs in wards and quality of care outcomes, controlling for background characteristics. Future studies should consider the mediating and moderating role of staffing-related work processes and ward environment characteristics on quality of care.
DOCUMENT
BACKGROUND: Limited research has examined what is actually done in the process of care by nursing staff in long-term institutional care. The applied instruments employed different terminologies, and psychometric properties were inadequately described. This study aimed to develop and test an observational instrument to identify and examine the amount of time spent on nursing interventions in long-term institutional care using a standardized language.METHODS: The Groningen Observational instrument for Long-Term Institutional Care (GO-LTIC) is based on the conceptual framework of the Nursing Interventions Classification. Developmental, validation, and reliability stages of the GO-LTIC included: 1) item generation to identify potential setting-specific interventions; 2) examining content validity with a Delphi panel resulting in relevant interventions by calculating the item content validity index; 3) testing feasibility with trained observers observing nursing assistants; and 4) calculating inter-rater reliability using (non) agreement and Cohen's kappa for the identification of interventions and an intraclass correlation coefficient for the amount of time spent on interventions. Bland-Altman plots were applied to visualize the agreement between observers. A one-sample student T-test verified if the difference between observers differed significantly from zero.RESULTS: The final version of the GO-LTIC comprised 116 nursing interventions categorized into six domains. Substantial to almost perfect kappa's were found for interventions in the domains basic (0.67-0.92) and complex (0.70-0.94) physiological care. For the domains of behavioral, family, and health system interventions, the kappa's ranged from fair to almost perfect (0.30-1.00). Intraclass correlation coefficients for the amount of time spent on interventions ranged from fair to excellent for the physiological domains (0.48-0.99) and poor to excellent for the other domains (0.00-1.00). Bland Altman plots indicated that the clinical magnitude of differences in minutes was small. No statistical significant differences between observers (p > 0.05) were found.CONCLUSIONS: The GO-LTIC shows good content validity and acceptable inter-rater reliability to examine the amount of time spent on nursing interventions by nursing staff. This may provide managers with valuable information to make decisions about resource allocation, task allocation of nursing staff, and the examination of the costs of nursing services.
DOCUMENT
Background Clients facing decision-making for long-term care are in need of support and accessible information. Construction of preferences, including context and calculations, for clients in long-term care is challenging because of the variability in supply and demand. This study considers clients in four different sectors of long-term care: the nursing and care of the elderly, mental health care, care of people with disabilities, and social care. The aim is to understand the construction of preferences in real-life situations. Method Client choices were investigated by qualitative descriptive research. Data were collected from 16 in-depth interviews and 79 client records. Interviews were conducted with clients and relatives or informal caregivers from different care sectors. The original client records were explored, containing texts, letters, and comments of clients and caregivers. All data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results Four cases showed how preferences were constructed during the decision-making process. Clients discussed a wide range of challenging aspects that have an impact on the construction of preferences, e.g. previous experiences, current treatment or family situation. This study describes two main characteristics of the construction of preferences: context and calculation. Conclusion Clients face diverse challenges during the decision-making process on long-term care and their construction of preferences is variable. A well-designed tool to support the elicitation of preferences seems beneficial.
DOCUMENT
As more and more older adults prefer to stay in their homes as they age, thereandapos;s a need for technology to support this. A relevant technology is Artificial Intelligence (AI)-driven lifestyle monitoring, utilizing data from sensors placed in the home. This technology is not intended to replace nurses but to serve as a support tool. Understanding the specific competencies that nurses require to effectively use it is crucial. The aim of this study is to identify the essential competencies nurses require to work with AI-driven lifestyle monitoring in long-term care.
MULTIFILE
Purpose: Collaborative deliberation comprises personal engagement, recognition of alternative actions, comparative learning, preference elicitation, and preference integration. Collaborative deliberation may be improved by assisting preference elicitation during shared decision-making. This study proposes a framework for preference elicitation to facilitate collaborative deliberation in long-term care consultations. Methods: First, a literature overview was conducted comprising current models for the elicitation of preferences in health and social care settings. The models were reviewed and compared. Second, qualitative research was applied to explore those issues that matter most to clients in long-term care. Data were collected from clients in long-term care, comprising 16 interviews, 3 focus groups, 79 client records, and 200 online client reports. The qualitative analysis followed a deductive approach. The results of the literature overview and qualitative research were combined. Results: Based on the literature overview, five overarching domains of preferences were described: “Health”, “Daily life”, “Family and friends”, ”Living conditions”, and “Finances”. The credibility of these domains was confirmed by qualitative data analysis. During interviews, clients addressed issues that matter in their lives, including a “click” with their care professional, safety, contact with loved ones, and assistance with daily structure and activities. These data were used to determine the content of the domains. Conclusion: A framework for preference elicitation in long-term care is proposed. This framework could be useful for clients and professionals in preference elicitation during collaborative deliberation.
DOCUMENT
AI-driven lifestyle monitoring systems collect data from ambient, motion, contact, light, and physiological sensors placed in the home, enabling AI algorithms to identify daily routines and detect deviations to support older adults "aging in place." Despite its potential to support several challenges in long-term care for older adults, implementation remains limited. This study explored the facilitators and barriers to implementing AIdriven lifestyle monitoring in long-term care for older adults, as perceived by formal and informal caregivers, as well as management, in both an adopting and non-adopting healthcare organization. A qualitative interview study using semi-structured interviews was conducted with 22 participants (5 informal caregivers, 10 formal caregivers, and 7 participants in a management position) from two long-term care organizations. Reflexive thematic analysis, guided by the nonadoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, and sustainability (NASSS) framework, structured findings into facilitators and barriers. 12 facilitators and 16 barriers were identified, highlighting AI-driven lifestyle monitoring as a valuable, patient-centred, and unobtrusive tool enhancing care efficiency and caregiver reassurance. However, barriers such as privacy concerns, notification overload, training needs, and organizational alignment must be addressed. Contextual factors, including regulations, partnerships, and financial considerations, further influence implementation. This study showed that to optimize implementation of AI-driven lifestyle monitoring, organizations should address privacy concerns, provide training, engage in system (re)design and create a shared vision. A comprehensive multi-level approach across all levels is essential for successful AI integration in long-term care for older adults.
DOCUMENT
Background: During the process of decision-making for long-term care, clients are often dependent on informal support and available information about quality ratings of care services. However, clients do not take ratings into account when considering preferred care, and need assistance to understand their preferences. A tool to elicit preferences for long-term care could be beneficial. Therefore, the aim of this qualitative descriptive study is to understand the user requirements and develop a web-based preference elicitation tool for clients in need of longterm care. Methods: We applied a user-centred design in which end-users influence the development of the tool. The included end-users were clients, relatives, and healthcare professionals. Data collection took place between November 2017 and March 2018 by means of meetings with the development team consisting of four users, walkthrough interviews with 21 individual users, video-audio recordings, field notes, and observations during the use of the tool. Data were collected during three phases of iteration: Look and feel, Navigation, and Content. A deductive and inductive content analysis approach was used for data analysis. Results: The layout was considered accessible and easy during the Look and feel phase, and users asked for neutral images. Users found navigation easy, and expressed the need for concise and shorter text blocks. Users reached consensus about the categories of preferences, wished to adjust the content with propositions about well-being, and discussed linguistic difficulties. Conclusion: By incorporating the requirements of end-users, the user-centred design proved to be useful in progressing from the prototype to the finalized tool ‘What matters to me’. This tool may assist the elicitation of client’s preferences in their search for long-term care.
DOCUMENT
As more and more older adults prefer to stay in their homes as they age, there’s a need for technology to support this. A relevant technology is Artificial Intelligence (AI)-driven lifestyle monitoring, utilizing data from sensors placed in the home. This technology is not intended to replace nurses but to serve as a support tool. Understanding the specific competencies that nurses require to effectively use it is crucial. The aim of this study is to identify the essential competencies nurses require to work with AI-driven lifestyle monitoring in longterm care. Methods: A three round modified Delphi study was conducted, consisting of two online questionnaires and one focus group. A group of 48 experts participated in the study: nurses, innovators, developers, researchers, managers and educators. In the first two rounds experts assessed clarity and relevance on a proposed list of competencies, with the opportunity to provide suggestions for adjustments or inclusion of new competencies. In the third round the items without consensus were bespoken in a focus group. Findings: After the first round consensus was reached on relevance and clarity on n = 46 (72 %) of the competencies, after the second round on n = 54 (83 %) of the competencies. After the third round a final list of 10 competency domains and 61 sub-competencies was finalized. The 10 competency domains are: Fundamentals of AI, Participation in AI design, Patient-centered needs assessment, Personalisation of AI to patients’ situation, Data reporting, Interpretation of AI output, Integration of AI output into clinical practice, Communication about AI use, Implementation of AI and Evaluation of AI use. These competencies span from basic understanding of AIdriven lifestyle monitoring, to being able to integrate it in daily work, being able to evaluate it and communicate its use to other stakeholders, including patients and informal caregivers. Conclusion: Our study introduces a novel framework highlighting the (sub)competencies, required for nurses to work with AI-driven lifestyle monitoring in long-term care. These findings provide a foundation for developing initial educational programs and lifelong learning activities for nurses in this evolving field. Moreover, the importance that experts attach to AI competencies calls for a broader discussion about a potential shift in nursing responsibilities and tasks as healthcare becomes increasingly technologically advanced and data-driven, possibly leading to new roles within nursing.
DOCUMENT
Background: As more and more older adults prefer to stay in their homes as they age, there’s a need for technology to support this. A relevant technology is Artificial Intelligence (AI)-driven lifestyle monitoring, utilizing data from sensors placed in the home. This technology is not intended to replace nurses but to serve as a support tool. Understanding the specific competencies that nurses require to effectively use it is crucial. The aim of this study is to identify the essential competencies nurses require to work with AI-driven lifestyle monitoring in longterm care. Methods: A three round modified Delphi study was conducted, consisting of two online questionnaires and one focus group. A group of 48 experts participated in the study: nurses, innovators, developers, researchers, managers and educators. In the first two rounds experts assessed clarity and relevance on a proposed list of competencies, with the opportunity to provide suggestions for adjustments or inclusion of new competencies. In the third round the items without consensus were bespoken in a focus group. Findings: After the first round consensus was reached on relevance and clarity on n = 46 (72 %) of the competencies, after the second round on n = 54 (83 %) of the competencies. After the third round a final list of 10 competency domains and 61 sub-competencies was finalized. The 10 competency domains are: Fundamentals of AI, Participation in AI design, Patient-centered needs assessment, Personalisation of AI to patients’ situation, Data reporting, Interpretation of AI output, Integration of AI output into clinical practice, Communication about AI use, Implementation of AI and Evaluation of AI use. These competencies span from basic understanding of AIdriven lifestyle monitoring, to being able to integrate it in daily work, being able to evaluate it and communicate its use to other stakeholders, including patients and informal caregivers. Conclusion: Our study introduces a novel framework highlighting the (sub)competencies, required for nurses to work with AI-driven lifestyle monitoring in long-term care. These findings provide a foundation for developing initial educational programs and lifelong learning activities for nurses in this evolving field. Moreover, the importance that experts attach to AI competencies calls for a broader discussion about a potential shift in nursing responsibilities and tasks as healthcare becomes increasingly technologically advanced and data-driven, possibly leading to new roles within nursing.
LINK
In the Netherlands, client and family participation in care for people with intellectual disabilities has been in vogue for a long time, and increasingly receives attention (KPMG and Vilans 2017). However, the perspective and experiential knowledge of service users and relatives is often still insuBiciently used for the co-creation of care. The professional perspective is often still dominant. In addition, professionals mainly focus on clients and less on relatives, even though relatives often play an important role in the client’s (quality of) life (Wiersma 2017). The project ‘Inclusive Collaboration in Disability Care’[1] (ICDC) focusses on enhancing equal communication between people with intellectual disabilities, their relatives, and professional caregivers, and hence contributes to redressing power imbalances in longterm care. It investigates the question: “How can the triangle of client, relative and professional caregiver together co-create better care and support?”.
DOCUMENT
