Cargando…

A cross-sectional study exploring the relationship between regulator quality ratings and care home residents’ quality of life in England

BACKGROUND: The quality of life of people receiving health and social care is an important indicator of service quality, but the relationship between patient experience and outcomes and regulator quality ratings in England is unknown. In 2013, the health and social care regulator in England, the Car...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Towers, Ann-Marie, Palmer, Sinead, Smith, Nick, Collins, Grace, Allan, Stephen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6357453/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30704482
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-019-1093-1
_version_ 1783391796239269888
author Towers, Ann-Marie
Palmer, Sinead
Smith, Nick
Collins, Grace
Allan, Stephen
author_facet Towers, Ann-Marie
Palmer, Sinead
Smith, Nick
Collins, Grace
Allan, Stephen
author_sort Towers, Ann-Marie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The quality of life of people receiving health and social care is an important indicator of service quality, but the relationship between patient experience and outcomes and regulator quality ratings in England is unknown. In 2013, the health and social care regulator in England, the Care Quality Commission (CQC), introduced a new ratings system and by February 2017, all social care services were inspected and awarded new quality ratings (outstanding, good, requires improvement and inadequate). This study aimed to explore whether quality ratings were associated with residents’ quality of life, controlling for confounding variables. METHODS: We conducted a nested, cross-sectional study, collecting social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL) data for 293 older care home residents in 34 care homes (20 nursing and 14 residential) in the South East of England. CQC ratings and other resident and home-level variables were also collected for the analysis. Multilevel modelling explored whether residents’ social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL) was associated with regulator ratings, controlling for confounding variables. RESULTS: Outstanding and good homes were collapsed into one category and compared with homes requiring improvement. Nationally, only 2 % of care homes for older people are rated as inadequate and it was not possible to capture sufficient numbers for the analysis. We recruited one but it was re-inspected during the fieldwork period and its rating changed to requires improvement. The random intercept multilevel model, which accounted for 16.93% of the differences in SCRQoL within homes and 69.80% between, indicated that better SCRQoL was significantly associated with being female, better functioning, no dementia diagnosis, fewer communication difficulties, and living in a care home rated as outstanding/good by CQC. Size of home and registration category were not significant predictors. CONCLUSIONS: This study found evidence that quality ratings are associated with residents’ SCRQoL. As well as aiming to improve quality and ensure minimum standards, quality ratings have the potential to inform user choice and help the public compare care homes based on quality. Future research to establish the generalisability and replicability of the results is required.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6357453
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63574532019-02-07 A cross-sectional study exploring the relationship between regulator quality ratings and care home residents’ quality of life in England Towers, Ann-Marie Palmer, Sinead Smith, Nick Collins, Grace Allan, Stephen Health Qual Life Outcomes Research BACKGROUND: The quality of life of people receiving health and social care is an important indicator of service quality, but the relationship between patient experience and outcomes and regulator quality ratings in England is unknown. In 2013, the health and social care regulator in England, the Care Quality Commission (CQC), introduced a new ratings system and by February 2017, all social care services were inspected and awarded new quality ratings (outstanding, good, requires improvement and inadequate). This study aimed to explore whether quality ratings were associated with residents’ quality of life, controlling for confounding variables. METHODS: We conducted a nested, cross-sectional study, collecting social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL) data for 293 older care home residents in 34 care homes (20 nursing and 14 residential) in the South East of England. CQC ratings and other resident and home-level variables were also collected for the analysis. Multilevel modelling explored whether residents’ social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL) was associated with regulator ratings, controlling for confounding variables. RESULTS: Outstanding and good homes were collapsed into one category and compared with homes requiring improvement. Nationally, only 2 % of care homes for older people are rated as inadequate and it was not possible to capture sufficient numbers for the analysis. We recruited one but it was re-inspected during the fieldwork period and its rating changed to requires improvement. The random intercept multilevel model, which accounted for 16.93% of the differences in SCRQoL within homes and 69.80% between, indicated that better SCRQoL was significantly associated with being female, better functioning, no dementia diagnosis, fewer communication difficulties, and living in a care home rated as outstanding/good by CQC. Size of home and registration category were not significant predictors. CONCLUSIONS: This study found evidence that quality ratings are associated with residents’ SCRQoL. As well as aiming to improve quality and ensure minimum standards, quality ratings have the potential to inform user choice and help the public compare care homes based on quality. Future research to establish the generalisability and replicability of the results is required. BioMed Central 2019-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC6357453/ /pubmed/30704482 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-019-1093-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Towers, Ann-Marie
Palmer, Sinead
Smith, Nick
Collins, Grace
Allan, Stephen
A cross-sectional study exploring the relationship between regulator quality ratings and care home residents’ quality of life in England
title A cross-sectional study exploring the relationship between regulator quality ratings and care home residents’ quality of life in England
title_full A cross-sectional study exploring the relationship between regulator quality ratings and care home residents’ quality of life in England
title_fullStr A cross-sectional study exploring the relationship between regulator quality ratings and care home residents’ quality of life in England
title_full_unstemmed A cross-sectional study exploring the relationship between regulator quality ratings and care home residents’ quality of life in England
title_short A cross-sectional study exploring the relationship between regulator quality ratings and care home residents’ quality of life in England
title_sort cross-sectional study exploring the relationship between regulator quality ratings and care home residents’ quality of life in england
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6357453/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30704482
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-019-1093-1
work_keys_str_mv AT towersannmarie acrosssectionalstudyexploringtherelationshipbetweenregulatorqualityratingsandcarehomeresidentsqualityoflifeinengland
AT palmersinead acrosssectionalstudyexploringtherelationshipbetweenregulatorqualityratingsandcarehomeresidentsqualityoflifeinengland
AT smithnick acrosssectionalstudyexploringtherelationshipbetweenregulatorqualityratingsandcarehomeresidentsqualityoflifeinengland
AT collinsgrace acrosssectionalstudyexploringtherelationshipbetweenregulatorqualityratingsandcarehomeresidentsqualityoflifeinengland
AT allanstephen acrosssectionalstudyexploringtherelationshipbetweenregulatorqualityratingsandcarehomeresidentsqualityoflifeinengland
AT towersannmarie crosssectionalstudyexploringtherelationshipbetweenregulatorqualityratingsandcarehomeresidentsqualityoflifeinengland
AT palmersinead crosssectionalstudyexploringtherelationshipbetweenregulatorqualityratingsandcarehomeresidentsqualityoflifeinengland
AT smithnick crosssectionalstudyexploringtherelationshipbetweenregulatorqualityratingsandcarehomeresidentsqualityoflifeinengland
AT collinsgrace crosssectionalstudyexploringtherelationshipbetweenregulatorqualityratingsandcarehomeresidentsqualityoflifeinengland
AT allanstephen crosssectionalstudyexploringtherelationshipbetweenregulatorqualityratingsandcarehomeresidentsqualityoflifeinengland