Abstract

BackgroundSmall-scale and homelike facilities for older people with dementia are rising in current dementia care. In these facilities, a small number of residents live together and form a household with staff. Normal, daily life and social participation are emphasized. It is expected that these facilities improve residents' quality of life. Moreover, it may have a positive influence on staff's job satisfaction and families involvement and satisfaction with care. However, effects of these small-scale and homelike facilities have hardly been investigated. Since the number of people with dementia increases, and institutional long-term care is more and more organized in small-scale and homelike facilities, more research into effects is necessary. This paper presents the design of a study investigating effects of small-scale living facilities in the Netherlands on residents, family caregivers and nursing staff.Methods and designA longitudinal, quasi-experimental study is carried out, in which 2 dementia care settings are compared: small-scale living facilities and regular psychogeriatric wards in traditional nursing homes. Data is collected from residents, their family caregivers and nursing staff at baseline and after 6 and 12 months of follow-up. Approximately 2 weeks prior to baseline measurement, residents are screened on cognition and activities of daily living (ADL). Based on this screening profile, residents in psychogeriatric wards are matched to residents living in small-scale living facilities. The primary outcome measure for residents is quality of life. In addition, neuropsychiatric symptoms, depressive symptoms and social engagement are assessed. Involvement with care, perceived burden and satisfaction with care provision are primary outcome variables for family caregivers. The primary outcomes for nursing staff are job satisfaction and motivation. Furthermore, job characteristics social support, autonomy and workload are measured. A process evaluation is performed to investigate to what extent small-scale living facilities and psychogeriatric wards are designed as they were intended. In addition, participants' satisfaction and experiences with small-scale living facilities are investigated.DiscussionA longitudinal, quasi-experimental study is presented to investigate effects of small-scale living facilities. Although some challenges concerning this design exist, it is currently the most feasible method to assess effects of this relatively new dementia care setting.

Highlights

  • Small-scale and homelike facilities for older people with dementia are rising in current dementia care

  • Most people suffering from dementia are cared for at home, but institutional care is often inevitable as the disease progresses

  • Institutional care for people with dementia has been organized to this medical model [5,6] and this has resulted in large-scale institutional nursing homes

Read more

Summary

Methods and design

A longitudinal, quasi-experimental study is carried out (April 2008 – January 2010). Two types of dementia care settings are compared: small-scale living facilities (experimental group) and psychogeriatric wards in traditional nursing homes (control group). Target population The target populations of this study are older people with dementia, who receive institutional nursing home care, their family caregivers and nursing staff working at their unit They are recruited in two types of dementia care settings: small-scale living facilities and psychogeriatric wards in traditional nursing homes, all in the southern part of the Netherlands. Based on the profile of residents in small-scale living facilities, residents in psychogeriatric wards in traditional nursing homes with a relatively similar profile are recruited This procedure is conducted to enhance comparability of groups at baseline with respect to cognition and ADL-capacity. Data collection The primary outcome measure for residents, quality of life (QUALIDEM), is assessed by 2 registered nurses (RNs) or certified nursing assistants (CNAs), as well as by residents' main family caregiver.

Discussion
Background
11. Annerstedt L
16. Dettbarn-Reggentin J
25. Association: AP
37. Droes RM
45. Sig NVVA
Findings
52. Karasek RAJ: Job Content Instrument
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call