Cargando…

Quality indicators for home‐ and community‐based aged care: A critical literature review to inform policy directions

OBJECTIVES: Australia is lagging behind other countries in implementing quality indicators (QIs) in home‐ and community‐based aged care. This research aimed to identify and appraise home care QI sets used internationally for older adults, to inform the future development and utilisation of QIs in th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Foong, Hui Yuan, Siette, Joyce, Jorgensen, Mikaela
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9542125/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35781753
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ajag.13103
_version_ 1784804079639199744
author Foong, Hui Yuan
Siette, Joyce
Jorgensen, Mikaela
author_facet Foong, Hui Yuan
Siette, Joyce
Jorgensen, Mikaela
author_sort Foong, Hui Yuan
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Australia is lagging behind other countries in implementing quality indicators (QIs) in home‐ and community‐based aged care. This research aimed to identify and appraise home care QI sets used internationally for older adults, to inform the future development and utilisation of QIs in the Australian context. METHODS: A systematic search of eligible studies outlining the development and validation of home care QI sets for older adults was undertaken. QIs were categorised using the Donabedian model to identify potential gaps in coverage of key areas of care quality. Each QI was classified as potentially “derivable” or not from existing national routinely collected datasets. Methodological quality was determined using the Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation instrument. RESULTS: Three sets of home care QIs developed and used internationally for older adults were identified. Two of the QI sets focused predominantly on clinical and functional aspects of care. Of 45 unique QIs, the majority were outcome measures (93%), with only three QIs measuring care processes (7%), and zero indicators measuring quality in terms of the structure of care (e.g., waiting time to access services). Nearly half of the individual indicators identified would require Australian home care providers to undertake additional data collection. There were significant methodological limitations in the development of QI sets, particularly in the scientific evidence domain. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified important gaps in existing QI sets, which should be considered by policymakers, researchers, and other stakeholders when developing and applying QIs in the Australian setting.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9542125
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95421252022-10-14 Quality indicators for home‐ and community‐based aged care: A critical literature review to inform policy directions Foong, Hui Yuan Siette, Joyce Jorgensen, Mikaela Australas J Ageing Review Articles OBJECTIVES: Australia is lagging behind other countries in implementing quality indicators (QIs) in home‐ and community‐based aged care. This research aimed to identify and appraise home care QI sets used internationally for older adults, to inform the future development and utilisation of QIs in the Australian context. METHODS: A systematic search of eligible studies outlining the development and validation of home care QI sets for older adults was undertaken. QIs were categorised using the Donabedian model to identify potential gaps in coverage of key areas of care quality. Each QI was classified as potentially “derivable” or not from existing national routinely collected datasets. Methodological quality was determined using the Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation instrument. RESULTS: Three sets of home care QIs developed and used internationally for older adults were identified. Two of the QI sets focused predominantly on clinical and functional aspects of care. Of 45 unique QIs, the majority were outcome measures (93%), with only three QIs measuring care processes (7%), and zero indicators measuring quality in terms of the structure of care (e.g., waiting time to access services). Nearly half of the individual indicators identified would require Australian home care providers to undertake additional data collection. There were significant methodological limitations in the development of QI sets, particularly in the scientific evidence domain. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified important gaps in existing QI sets, which should be considered by policymakers, researchers, and other stakeholders when developing and applying QIs in the Australian setting. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-07-03 2022-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9542125/ /pubmed/35781753 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ajag.13103 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Australasian Journal on Ageing published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of AJA Inc’. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Articles
Foong, Hui Yuan
Siette, Joyce
Jorgensen, Mikaela
Quality indicators for home‐ and community‐based aged care: A critical literature review to inform policy directions
title Quality indicators for home‐ and community‐based aged care: A critical literature review to inform policy directions
title_full Quality indicators for home‐ and community‐based aged care: A critical literature review to inform policy directions
title_fullStr Quality indicators for home‐ and community‐based aged care: A critical literature review to inform policy directions
title_full_unstemmed Quality indicators for home‐ and community‐based aged care: A critical literature review to inform policy directions
title_short Quality indicators for home‐ and community‐based aged care: A critical literature review to inform policy directions
title_sort quality indicators for home‐ and community‐based aged care: a critical literature review to inform policy directions
topic Review Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9542125/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35781753
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ajag.13103
work_keys_str_mv AT foonghuiyuan qualityindicatorsforhomeandcommunitybasedagedcareacriticalliteraturereviewtoinformpolicydirections
AT siettejoyce qualityindicatorsforhomeandcommunitybasedagedcareacriticalliteraturereviewtoinformpolicydirections
AT jorgensenmikaela qualityindicatorsforhomeandcommunitybasedagedcareacriticalliteraturereviewtoinformpolicydirections