Supporting work practices through telehealth: impact on nurses in peripheral regions

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In Canada, workforce shortages in the health care sector constrain the ability of the health care system to meet the needs of its population and of its health care professionals. This issue is of particular importance in peripheral regions of Quebec, where significant inequalities in workforce distribution between regions has lead to acute nursing shortages and increased workloads. Information and communication technologies (ICTs) are innovative solutions that can be used to develop strategies to optimise the use of available resources and to design new nursing work practices. However, current knowledge is still limited about the real impact of ICTs on nursing recruitment and retention. Our aim is to better understand how work practice reorganization, supported by ICTs, and particularly by telehealth, may influence professional, educational, and organizational factors relating to Quebec nurses, notably those working in peripheral regions.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>First, we will conduct a descriptive study on the issue of nursing recruitment. Stratified sampling will be used to select approximately twenty innovative projects relating to the reorganization of work practices based upon ICTs. Semi-structured interviews with key informants will determine professional, educational, and organizational recruitment factors. The results will be used to create a questionnaire which, using a convenience sampling method, will be mailed to 600 third year students and recent graduates of two Quebec university nursing faculties. Descriptive, correlation, and hierarchical regression analyses will be performed to identify factors influencing nursing graduates' intentions to practice in peripheral regions. Secondly, we will conduct five case studies pertaining to the issue of nursing retention. Five ICT projects in semi-urban, rural, and isolated regions have been identified. Qualitative data will be collected through field observation and approximately fifty semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Data from both parts of this research project will be jointly analysed using triangulation of researchers, theoretical approaches, methods, and results. Continuous exchanges with decision makers and periodic knowledge transfer activities are planned to facilitate the dissemination and utilization of research results in policies regarding the nursing recruitment and retention.</p

Journalists, district attorneys and researchers: why IRBs should get in the middle.

BackgroundFederal regulations in the United States have shaped Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) to focus on protecting individual human subjects. Health services research studies focusing on healthcare institutions such as hospitals or clinics do not have individual human subjects. Since U.S. federal regulations are silent on what type of review, if any, these studies require, different IRBs may approach similar studies differently, resulting in undesirable variation in the review of studies focusing on healthcare institutions. Further, although these studies do not focus on individual human subjects, they may pose risks to participating institutions, as well as individuals who work at those institutions, if identifying information becomes public.DiscussionUsing two recent health services research studies conducted in the U.S. as examples, we discuss variations in the level of IRB oversight for studies focusing on institutions rather than individual human subjects. We highlight how lack of IRB guidance poses challenges for researchers who wish to both protect their subjects and work appropriately with the public, journalists or the legal system in the U.S. Competing interests include the public's interest in transparency, the researcher's interest in their science, and the research participants' interests in confidentiality. Potential solutions that may help guide health services researchers to balance these competing interests include: 1) creating consensus guidelines and standard practices that address confidentiality risk to healthcare institutions and their employees; and 2) expanding the IRB role to conduct a streamlined review of health services research studies focusing on healthcare institutions to balance the competing interest of stakeholders on a case-by-case basis.SummaryFor health services research studies focusing on healthcare institutions, we outline the competing interests of researchers, healthcare institutions and the public. We propose solutions to decrease undesirable variations in the review of these studies

Journalists, district attorneys and researchers: why IRBs should get in the middle.

BackgroundFederal regulations in the United States have shaped Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) to focus on protecting individual human subjects. Health services research studies focusing on healthcare institutions such as hospitals or clinics do not have individual human subjects. Since U.S. federal regulations are silent on what type of review, if any, these studies require, different IRBs may approach similar studies differently, resulting in undesirable variation in the review of studies focusing on healthcare institutions. Further, although these studies do not focus on individual human subjects, they may pose risks to participating institutions, as well as individuals who work at those institutions, if identifying information becomes public.DiscussionUsing two recent health services research studies conducted in the U.S. as examples, we discuss variations in the level of IRB oversight for studies focusing on institutions rather than individual human subjects. We highlight how lack of IRB guidance poses challenges for researchers who wish to both protect their subjects and work appropriately with the public, journalists or the legal system in the U.S. Competing interests include the public's interest in transparency, the researcher's interest in their science, and the research participants' interests in confidentiality. Potential solutions that may help guide health services researchers to balance these competing interests include: 1) creating consensus guidelines and standard practices that address confidentiality risk to healthcare institutions and their employees; and 2) expanding the IRB role to conduct a streamlined review of health services research studies focusing on healthcare institutions to balance the competing interest of stakeholders on a case-by-case basis.SummaryFor health services research studies focusing on healthcare institutions, we outline the competing interests of researchers, healthcare institutions and the public. We propose solutions to decrease undesirable variations in the review of these studies

Ethical Challenges in Caring for Unrepresented Adults: A Qualitative Study of Key Stakeholders.

The decision-making process on behalf of unrepresented adults (ie, those who lack capacity to make medical decisions and have no identifiable surrogate) is at risk for not incorporating their interests, raising ethical concerns. We performed semistructured interviews with key stakeholders across multiple sectors in an urban county who participate in the care of or decision-making process for unrepresented adults. This included a safety net healthcare system, social services, and legal services. Participants were healthcare, social service, and legal professionals who worked with unrepresented adults (n = 25). Our interview questions explored the current process for proxy decision making in cases of unrepresented adults and potential alternatives. We recorded, transcribed, and analyzed interviews using the constant comparative method to identify major themes related to ethical challenges if they were raised. Participants grappled with multiple ethical challenges around the care of unrepresented adults. Themes described by participants were: (1) prioritizing autonomy; (2) varying safety thresholds; (3) distributing resources fairly; and (4) taking a moral toll on stakeholders. In conclusion, all stakeholders identified ethical challenges in caring for unrepresented adults. An applied ethical framework that takes these dilemmas into account could improve ethical practice for unrepresented adults and lessen the emotional toll on stakeholders. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:1724-1729, 2019

Older jail inmates and community acute care use.

ObjectivesWe examined older jail inmates' predetainment acute care use (emergency department or hospitalization in the 3 months before arrest) and their plans for using acute care after release.MethodsWe performed a cross-sectional study of 247 jail inmates aged 55 years or older assessing sociodemographic characteristics, health, and geriatric conditions associated with predetainment and anticipated postrelease acute care use.ResultsWe found that 52% of older inmates reported predetainment acute care use and 47% planned to use the emergency department after release. In modified Poisson regression, homelessness was independently associated with predetainment use (relative risk = 1.42; 95% confidence interval = 1.10, 1.83) and having a primary care provider was inversely associated with planned use (relative risk = 0.69; 95% confidence interval = 0.53, 0.89).ConclusionsThe Affordable Care Act has expanded Medicaid eligibility to all persons leaving jail in an effort to decrease postrelease acute care use in this high-risk population. Jail-to-community transitional care models that address the health, geriatric, and social factors prevalent in older adults leaving jail, and that focus on linkages to housing and primary care, are needed to enhance the impact of the act on acute care use for this population

Caring for Unbefriended Older Adults and Adult Orphans: A Clinician Survey

OBJECTIVES: Unbefriended older adults are those who lack the capacity to make medical decisions and do not have a completed advance directive that can guide treatment decisions or a surrogate decision maker. Adult orphans are those who retain medical decision-making capacity but are at risk of becoming unbefriended due to lack of a completed advance health care directive and lack of a surrogate decision maker. In a follow-up to the 2016 American Geriatrics Society (AGS) position statement on unbefriended older adults, we examined clinicians’ experiences in caring for unbefriended older adults and adult orphans. METHODS: Clinicians recruited through the AGS (N = 122) completed an online survey about their experiences with unbefriended older adults regarding the perceived frequency of contact, clinical concerns, practice strategies, and terminology; and also with adult orphans regarding the perceived frequency of contact, methods of identification, and terminology. RESULTS: Almost all inpatient (95.9%) and outpatient (86.4%) clinicians in this sample encounter unbefriended older adults at least quarterly and 92.2% of outpatient clinicians encounter adult orphans at least quarterly. Concerns about safety (95.9%), medication self-management (90.4%), and advance care planning (86.3%) bring unbefriended older adults to outpatient clinicians’ attention “sometimes” to “frequently.” Prolonged hospital stays (87.7%) and delays in transitioning to end-of-life care (85.7%) bring unbefriended older adults to inpatient clinicians’ attention “sometimes” to “frequently.” Clinicians apply a wide range of practice strategies to these populations. Participants suggested alternative terminology to replace “unbefriended” and “adult orphan.” CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that unbefriended older adults are frequently encountered in geriatrics practice, both in the inpatient and outpatient settings, and that there is widespread awareness of adult orphans in the outpatient setting. Clinicians’ awareness of both groups suggests avenues for intervention and prevention. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Health care professionals in geriatric settings will likely encounter older adults in need of advocates. Clinicians, attorneys, and policymakers should collaborate to improve early detection and to meet the needs of this vulnerable population

Unmet health-related needs of community-dwelling older adults during COVID-19 lockdown in a diverse urban cohort.

Background Shelter-in-place orders during the COVID-19 pandemic created unmet health-related and access-related needs among older adults. We sought to understand the prevalence of these needs among community-dwelling older adults. Methods We performed a retrospective chart review of pandemic-related outreach calls to older adults between March and July 2020 at four urban, primary care clinics: a home-based practice, a safety net adult medicine clinic, an academic geriatrics practice, and a safety net clinic for adults living with HIV. Participants included those 60 or older at three sites, and those 65 or older with a chronic health condition at the fourth. We describe unmet health-related needs (the need for medication refills, medical supplies, or food) and access-related needs (ability to perform a telehealth visit, need for a call back from the primary care provider). We performed bivariate and multivariate analyses to examine the association between unmet needs and demographics, medical conditions, and healthcare utilization. Results Sixty-two percent of people had at least one unmet need. Twenty-six percent had at least one unmet health-related need; 14.0% needed medication refills, 12.5% needed medical supplies, and 3.0% had food insecurity. Among access-related needs, 33% were not ready for video visits, and 36.4% asked for a return call from their provider. Prevalence of any unmet health-related need was the highest among Asian versus White (36.4% vs. 19.1%) and in the highest versus lowest poverty zip codes (30.8% vs. 18.2%). Those with diabetes and COPD had higher unmet health-related needs than those without, and there was no change in healthcare utilization. Conclusions During COVID, we found that disruptions in access to services created unmet needs among older adults, particularly for those who self-identified as Asian. We must foreground the needs of this older population group in the response to future public health crises.Background Shelter-in-place orders during the COVID-19 pandemic created unmet health-related and access-related needs among older adults. We sought to understand the prevalence of these needs among community-dwelling older adults. Methods We performed a retrospective chart review of pandemic-related outreach calls to older adults between March and July 2020 at four urban, primary care clinics: a home-based practice, a safety net adult medicine clinic, an academic geriatrics practice, and a safety net clinic for adults living with HIV. Participants included those 60 or older at three sites, and those 65 or older with a chronic health condition at the fourth. We describe unmet health-related needs (the need for medication refills, medical supplies, or food) and access-related needs (ability to perform a telehealth visit, need for a call back from the primary care provider). We performed bivariate and multivariate analyses to examine the association between unmet needs and demographics, medical conditions, and healthcare utilization. Results Sixty-two percent of people had at least one unmet need. Twenty-six percent had at least one unmet health-related need; 14.0% needed medication refills, 12.5% needed medical supplies, and 3.0% had food insecurity. Among access-related needs, 33% were not ready for video visits, and 36.4% asked for a return call from their provider. Prevalence of any unmet health-related need was the highest among Asian versus White (36.4% vs. 19.1%) and in the highest versus lowest poverty zip codes (30.8% vs. 18.2%). Those with diabetes and COPD had higher unmet health-related needs than those without, and there was no change in healthcare utilization. Conclusions During COVID, we found that disruptions in access to services created unmet needs among older adults, particularly for those who self-identified as Asian. We must foreground the needs of this older population group in the response to future public health crises.A