‘It Ain’t What You Do It’s the Way That You Do It’: Lessons for Health Care From Decommissioning of Older People’s Services

Public sector organisations are facing one of the most difficult financial periods in history and local decision-makers are tasked with making tough rationing decisions. Withdrawing or limiting services is an emotive and complex task and something the National Health Service has always found difficult. Over time, local authorities have gained significant experience in the closure of care homes – an equally complex and controversial issue. Drawing on local knowledge and best practice examples, this article highlights lessons and themes identified by those decommissioning care home services. We believe that such lessons are relevant to those making disinvestment decisions across public sector services, including health-care. The study employed semi-structured interviews with 12 Directors of Adult Social Services who had been highlighted nationally as having extensive experience of home closures. Interviews were conducted over a 2-week period in March 2011. Results from the study found that having local policy guidance that is perceived as fair and reasonable was advocated by those involved in home closures. Many local policies had evolved over time and had often been developed following experiences of home closures (both good and bad). Decisions to close care home services require a combination of strong leadership, clear strategic goals, a fair decision-making process, strong evidence of the need for change and good communication, alongside wider stakeholder engagement and support. The current financial challenge means that public sector organisations need to make tough choices on investment and disinvestment decisions. Any such decisions need to be influenced by what we know constitutes best practice. Sharing lessons and experiences within and between sectors could well inform and develop decision-making practices

How financial cutbacks affect job quality and care of the elderly

Based on case studies in 12 nursing homes in the United Kingdom, the authors illustrate how financial cutbacks affect job quality and the quality of care. The dimensions of job quality that suffered most were those directly related to the ability of workers to provide care: reductions in staffing, longer working hours, and work intensification. Cuts to labor costs eroded the quality of workers’ jobs in all 12 homes but with two differential outcomes: in seven homes, care quality was maintained, and in five homes, it deteriorated. Care quality was maintained in homes where a patient-centered care approach and remaining job quality allowed workers to develop work-arounds to protect residents from spillover effects. Care quality declined in homes where custodial approaches to care and low job quality did not provide workers the time or resources to protect residents or to maintain prior levels of care. A tipping point was reached, leading to a spillover into impoverished care

In-reach specialist nursing teams for residential care homes : uptake of services, impact on care provision and cost-effectiveness

Background: A joint NHS-Local Authority initiative in England designed to provide a dedicated nursing and physiotherapy in-reach team (IRT) to four residential care homes has been evaluated.The IRT supported 131 residents and maintained 15 'virtual' beds for specialist nursing in these care homes. Methods: Data captured prospectively (July 2005 to June 2007) included: numbers of referrals; reason for referral; outcome (e.g. admission to IRT bed, short-term IRT support); length of stay in IRT; prevented hospital admissions; early hospital discharges; avoided nursing home transfers; and detection of unrecognised illnesses. An economic analysis was undertaken. Results: 733 referrals were made during the 2 years (range 0.5 to 13.0 per resident per annum)resulting in a total of 6,528 visits. Two thirds of referrals aimed at maintaining the resident's independence in the care home. According to expert panel assessment, 197 hospital admissions were averted over the period; 20 early discharges facilitated; and 28 resident transfers to a nursing home prevented. Detection of previously unrecognised illnesses accounted for a high number of visits. Investment in IRT equalled £44.38 per resident per week. Savings through reduced hospital admissions, early discharges, delayed transfers to nursing homes, and identification of previously unrecognised illnesses are conservatively estimated to produce a final reduction in care cost of £6.33 per resident per week. A sensitivity analysis indicates this figure might range from a weekly overall saving of £36.90 per resident to a 'worst case' estimate of £2.70 extra expenditure per resident per week. Evaluation early in implementation may underestimate some cost-saving activities and greater savings may emerge over a longer time period. Similarly, IRT costs may reduce over time due to the potential for refinement of team without major loss in effectiveness. Conclusion: Introduction of a specialist nursing in-reach team for residential homes is at least cost neutral and, in all probability, cost saving. Further benefits include development of new skills in the care home workforce and enhanced quality of care. Residents are enabled to stay in familiar surroundings rather than unnecessarily spending time in hospital or being transferred to a higher dependency nursing home setting

A systematic review of integrated working between care homes and health care services

© 2011 Davies et al; licensee BioMed Central LtdBackground In the UK there are almost three times as many beds in care homes as in National Health Service (NHS) hospitals. Care homes rely on primary health care for access to medical care and specialist services. Repeated policy documents and government reviews register concern about how health care works with independent providers, and the need to increase the equity, continuity and quality of medical care for care homes. Despite multiple initiatives, it is not known if some approaches to service delivery are more effective in promoting integrated working between the NHS and care homes. This study aims to evaluate the different integrated approaches to health care services supporting older people in care homes, and identify barriers and facilitators to integrated working. Methods A systematic review was conducted using Medline (PubMed), CINAHL, BNI, EMBASE, PsycInfo, DH Data, Kings Fund, Web of Science (WoS incl. SCI, SSCI, HCI) and the Cochrane Library incl. DARE. Studies were included if they evaluated the effectiveness of integrated working between primary health care professionals and care homes, or identified barriers and facilitators to integrated working. Studies were quality assessed; data was extracted on health, service use, cost and process related outcomes. A modified narrative synthesis approach was used to compare and contrast integration using the principles of framework analysis. Results Seventeen studies were included; 10 quantitative studies, two process evaluations, one mixed methods study and four qualitative. The majority were carried out in nursing homes. They were characterised by heterogeneity of topic, interventions, methodology and outcomes. Most quantitative studies reported limited effects of the intervention; there was insufficient information to evaluate cost. Facilitators to integrated working included care home managers' support and protected time for staff training. Studies with the potential for integrated working were longer in duration. Conclusions Despite evidence about what inhibits and facilitates integrated working there was limited evidence about what the outcomes of different approaches to integrated care between health service and care homes might be. The majority of studies only achieved integrated working at the patient level of care and the focus on health service defined problems and outcome measures did not incorporate the priorities of residents or acknowledge the skills of care home staff. There is a need for more research to understand how integrated working is achieved and to test the effect of different approaches on cost, staff satisfaction and resident outcomes

A critical realist evaluation of advance care planning in care homes

Aims: To evaluate care planning in advance of end-of-life care in care homes. Design: A qualitative study. Methods: Qualitative data were collected from January 2018–July 2019 (using focus groups and semi-structured interviews) from three care homes in the South West of England. The data were analysed using thematic analysis followed by Critical Realist Evaluation. Results: Participants comprised of registered nurses (N = 4), care assistants (N = 8), bereaved relatives (N = 7), and domiciliary staff (N = 3). Although the importance of advance care planning was well recognized, the emotional labour of frequently engaging in discussions about death and dying was highlighted as a problem by some care home staff. It was evident that in some cases care home staff's unmet emotional needs led them to rushing and avoiding discussions about death and dying with residents and relatives. A sparsity of mechanisms to support care home staff's emotional needs was noted across all three care homes. Furthermore, a lack of training and knowledge appeared to inhibit care home staff's ability to engage in meaningful care planning conversations with specific groups of residents such as those living with dementia. The lack of training was principally evident amongst non-registered care home staff and those with non-formal caring roles such as housekeeping. Conclusion: There is a need for more focused education to support registered and non-registered care home staff to effectively engage in sensitive discussions about death and dying with residents. Furthermore, greater emotional support is necessary to help build workforce resilience and sustain change. Impact: Knowledge generated from this study can be used to inform the design and development of future advance care planning interventions capable of supporting the delivery of high-quality end-of-life care in care homes

A critical realist evaluation of advance care planning in care homes

Aims: To evaluate care planning in advance of end-of-life care in care homes. Design: A qualitative study. Methods: Qualitative data were collected from January 2018–July 2019 (using focus groups and semi-structured interviews) from three care homes in the South West of England. The data were analysed using thematic analysis followed by Critical Realist Evaluation. Results: Participants comprised of registered nurses (N = 4), care assistants (N = 8), bereaved relatives (N = 7), and domiciliary staff (N = 3). Although the importance of advance care planning was well recognized, the emotional labour of frequently engaging in discussions about death and dying was highlighted as a problem by some care home staff. It was evident that in some cases care home staff's unmet emotional needs led them to rushing and avoiding discussions about death and dying with residents and relatives. A sparsity of mechanisms to support care home staff's emotional needs was noted across all three care homes. Furthermore, a lack of training and knowledge appeared to inhibit care home staff's ability to engage in meaningful care planning conversations with specific groups of residents such as those living with dementia. The lack of training was principally evident amongst non-registered care home staff and those with non-formal caring roles such as housekeeping. Conclusion: There is a need for more focused education to support registered and non-registered care home staff to effectively engage in sensitive discussions about death and dying with residents. Furthermore, greater emotional support is necessary to help build workforce resilience and sustain change. Impact: Knowledge generated from this study can be used to inform the design and development of future advance care planning interventions capable of supporting the delivery of high-quality end-of-life care in care homes

Dementia Care Services UK Market Briefing 2009

This brand new market briefing adds to the growing national debate on the future of dementia care services, making use of a unique and extensive L&B survey (2008) of over 6,000 care homes in the UK which provide care for people with dementia. It builds on the findings of the Alzheimer’s Society’s Dementia UK report (2007) and the national strategy for dementia Living Well with Dementia (2009) to identify market opportunities and provide essential guidance and information with regard to planning and developing new and existing services.Key issues, facts and figures highlighted in the report include:Dementia care is a multi-billion pound market in the UK and this market is set to grow considerably.��Dementia care in care homes dominates the sector in terms of current market value.��The use of dementia home care – though significantly smaller than the equivalent market in care homes – is set to rise markedly in the future.A significant proportion of residents for whom dementia is a known cause of admission are receiving care in settings which are not dedicated to dementia care.The new national dementia strategy for England, Living Well with Dementia should provide the strongest impetus yet for growth in the market for specialist dementia care.Growing awareness surrounding inappropriate use of anti-psychotic drugs on people with dementia in care homes may have a major operational impact on some homes if controls are increased and could substantially increase costs.Despite evidence of increasing dementia specialisation, there are, as yet, no organisations to emerge with full service dementia expertise and integrated care pathways.The supply of dedicated dementia services varies dramatically by region and locality, reflecting local and regional priorities and commissioning strategies.The design and layout of care homes for people with dementia is key and there is an increasing consensus around what constitutes best practice and ‘dementia friendly design’ .Care home fees for dementia are generally higher than fees for frail elderly residents.The report is essential reading for senior executives and managers within any organisation committed to, or considering involvement in, the dementia care sector, including for-profit, \u27third sector\u27 and public sector agencies.For further information, please contact:��Market ReportsTel.��020 7833 9123 orEmail��[email protected]��Download Full Brochure including Order Form��Download Contents and Tables�� Featured item on home page:��no�