Cargando…

Quality of life measurement in community-based aged care – understanding variation between clients and between care service providers

BACKGROUND: Measuring person-centred outcomes and using this information to improve service delivery is a challenge for many care providers. We aimed to identify predictors of QoL among older adults receiving community-based aged care services and examine variation across different community care se...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Siette, Joyce, Jorgensen, Mikaela L., Georgiou, Andrew, Dodds, Laura, McClean, Tom, Westbrook, Johanna I.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8240205/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34182935
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12877-021-02254-2
_version_ 1783715166422040576
author Siette, Joyce
Jorgensen, Mikaela L.
Georgiou, Andrew
Dodds, Laura
McClean, Tom
Westbrook, Johanna I.
author_facet Siette, Joyce
Jorgensen, Mikaela L.
Georgiou, Andrew
Dodds, Laura
McClean, Tom
Westbrook, Johanna I.
author_sort Siette, Joyce
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Measuring person-centred outcomes and using this information to improve service delivery is a challenge for many care providers. We aimed to identify predictors of QoL among older adults receiving community-based aged care services and examine variation across different community care service outlets. METHODS: A retrospective sample of 1141 Australians aged ≥60 years receiving community-based care services from a large service provider within 19 service outlets. Clients’ QoL was captured using the ICEpop CAPability Index. QoL scores and predictors of QoL (i.e. sociodemographic, social participation and service use) were extracted from clients’ electronic records and examined using multivariable regression. Funnel plots were used to examine variation in risk-adjusted QoL scores across service outlets. RESULTS: Mean age was 81.5 years (SD = 8) and 75.5% were women. Clients had a mean QoL score of 0.81 (range 0–1, SD = 0.15). After accounting for other factors, being older (p < 0.01), having lower-level care needs (p < 0.01), receiving services which met needs for assistance with activities of daily living (p < 0.01), and having higher levels of social participation (p < 0.001) were associated with higher QoL scores. Of the 19 service outlets, 21% (n = 4) had lower mean risk-adjusted QoL scores than expected (< 95% control limits) and 16% (n = 3) had higher mean scores than expected. CONCLUSION: Using QoL as an indicator to compare care quality may be feasible, with appropriate risk adjustment. Implementing QoL tools allows providers to measure and monitor their performance and service outcomes, as well as identify clients with poor quality of life who may need extra support. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand clinical trial registry number: ACTRN12617001212347. Registered 18/08/2017. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-021-02254-2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8240205
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82402052021-06-29 Quality of life measurement in community-based aged care – understanding variation between clients and between care service providers Siette, Joyce Jorgensen, Mikaela L. Georgiou, Andrew Dodds, Laura McClean, Tom Westbrook, Johanna I. BMC Geriatr Research BACKGROUND: Measuring person-centred outcomes and using this information to improve service delivery is a challenge for many care providers. We aimed to identify predictors of QoL among older adults receiving community-based aged care services and examine variation across different community care service outlets. METHODS: A retrospective sample of 1141 Australians aged ≥60 years receiving community-based care services from a large service provider within 19 service outlets. Clients’ QoL was captured using the ICEpop CAPability Index. QoL scores and predictors of QoL (i.e. sociodemographic, social participation and service use) were extracted from clients’ electronic records and examined using multivariable regression. Funnel plots were used to examine variation in risk-adjusted QoL scores across service outlets. RESULTS: Mean age was 81.5 years (SD = 8) and 75.5% were women. Clients had a mean QoL score of 0.81 (range 0–1, SD = 0.15). After accounting for other factors, being older (p < 0.01), having lower-level care needs (p < 0.01), receiving services which met needs for assistance with activities of daily living (p < 0.01), and having higher levels of social participation (p < 0.001) were associated with higher QoL scores. Of the 19 service outlets, 21% (n = 4) had lower mean risk-adjusted QoL scores than expected (< 95% control limits) and 16% (n = 3) had higher mean scores than expected. CONCLUSION: Using QoL as an indicator to compare care quality may be feasible, with appropriate risk adjustment. Implementing QoL tools allows providers to measure and monitor their performance and service outcomes, as well as identify clients with poor quality of life who may need extra support. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand clinical trial registry number: ACTRN12617001212347. Registered 18/08/2017. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-021-02254-2. BioMed Central 2021-06-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8240205/ /pubmed/34182935 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12877-021-02254-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Siette, Joyce
Jorgensen, Mikaela L.
Georgiou, Andrew
Dodds, Laura
McClean, Tom
Westbrook, Johanna I.
Quality of life measurement in community-based aged care – understanding variation between clients and between care service providers
title Quality of life measurement in community-based aged care – understanding variation between clients and between care service providers
title_full Quality of life measurement in community-based aged care – understanding variation between clients and between care service providers
title_fullStr Quality of life measurement in community-based aged care – understanding variation between clients and between care service providers
title_full_unstemmed Quality of life measurement in community-based aged care – understanding variation between clients and between care service providers
title_short Quality of life measurement in community-based aged care – understanding variation between clients and between care service providers
title_sort quality of life measurement in community-based aged care – understanding variation between clients and between care service providers
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8240205/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34182935
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12877-021-02254-2
work_keys_str_mv AT siettejoyce qualityoflifemeasurementincommunitybasedagedcareunderstandingvariationbetweenclientsandbetweencareserviceproviders
AT jorgensenmikaelal qualityoflifemeasurementincommunitybasedagedcareunderstandingvariationbetweenclientsandbetweencareserviceproviders
AT georgiouandrew qualityoflifemeasurementincommunitybasedagedcareunderstandingvariationbetweenclientsandbetweencareserviceproviders
AT doddslaura qualityoflifemeasurementincommunitybasedagedcareunderstandingvariationbetweenclientsandbetweencareserviceproviders
AT mccleantom qualityoflifemeasurementincommunitybasedagedcareunderstandingvariationbetweenclientsandbetweencareserviceproviders
AT westbrookjohannai qualityoflifemeasurementincommunitybasedagedcareunderstandingvariationbetweenclientsandbetweencareserviceproviders