2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/160456
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Describing Long Term Care Options for Elders: Outcomes for Quality Comparison
Abstract:
Describing Long Term Care Options for Elders: Outcomes for Quality Comparison
Conference Sponsor:Midwest Nursing Research Society
Conference Year:2003
Author:Specht, Janet
Contact Address:College of Nursing, 432 NB, Iowa City, IA, 52242, USA
Co-Authors:Meridean L. Maas; Sally Mathis Hartwig
The presentation reports exploratory/descriptive research conducted with recent, innovative, optional models for the long term care (LTC) of older persons. The purposes were to describe the model of care used for each LTC option, including legal aegis (e.g., for profit, not for profit, public); regulatory oversight; clients served; services provided; payors; organization structure; clinical decision-making authority; care planning and documentation system, including patient outcomes; and the potential for sharing an electronic clinical information system for systematic collection and comparison of patient outcomes for quality assessment and improvement. The theoretical framework combined Donabedian’s structure, process, and outcome quality assessment with nursing clinical reasoning and information models underlying the work of the Nursing Classification Research and Effectiveness Center at The University of Iowa. Four innovative organization options were purposively selected: an alternative facility for persons with dementia, 2 nurse case management services for older persons living at home, and an assisted living facility. Following informed consent to participate, interviews with administrators and registered nurses (RN) in each organization were conducted and organization missions, organizational charts, and at least 20 patient records in each organization were reviewed. Findings of descriptive content analysis were: 1) all 4 organizations were private, for-profit, 2) third-party reimbursement was limited for all of the optional models of care, 3) RNs did not directly manage the clinical care of patients in all of the models, 4) patient outcomes were not consistently identified and documented in any of the organizations, and 5) all of the organizations wanted to have an electronic information system that included outcomes (especially family satisfaction and costs) that could be used to assess quality and to compare with other organizations. The research is preliminary to the development of a data repository that can be used to compare and benchmark quality outcomes as more LTC options develop. AN: MN030122
Repository Posting Date:
26-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
17-Oct-2011
Sponsors:
Midwest Nursing Research Society

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleDescribing Long Term Care Options for Elders: Outcomes for Quality Comparisonen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/160456-
dc.description.abstract<table><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-title">Describing Long Term Care Options for Elders: Outcomes for Quality Comparison </td></tr><tr class="item-sponsor"><td class="label">Conference Sponsor:</td><td class="value">Midwest Nursing Research Society</td></tr><tr class="item-year"><td class="label">Conference Year:</td><td class="value">2003</td></tr><tr class="item-author"><td class="label">Author:</td><td class="value">Specht, Janet</td></tr><tr class="item-address"><td class="label">Contact Address:</td><td class="value">College of Nursing, 432 NB, Iowa City, IA, 52242, USA</td></tr><tr class="item-co-authors"><td class="label">Co-Authors:</td><td class="value">Meridean L. Maas; Sally Mathis Hartwig </td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-abstract">The presentation reports exploratory/descriptive research conducted with recent, innovative, optional models for the long term care (LTC) of older persons. The purposes were to describe the model of care used for each LTC option, including legal aegis (e.g., for profit, not for profit, public); regulatory oversight; clients served; services provided; payors; organization structure; clinical decision-making authority; care planning and documentation system, including patient outcomes; and the potential for sharing an electronic clinical information system for systematic collection and comparison of patient outcomes for quality assessment and improvement. The theoretical framework combined Donabedian&rsquo;s structure, process, and outcome quality assessment with nursing clinical reasoning and information models underlying the work of the Nursing Classification Research and Effectiveness Center at The University of Iowa. Four innovative organization options were purposively selected: an alternative facility for persons with dementia, 2 nurse case management services for older persons living at home, and an assisted living facility. Following informed consent to participate, interviews with administrators and registered nurses (RN) in each organization were conducted and organization missions, organizational charts, and at least 20 patient records in each organization were reviewed. Findings of descriptive content analysis were: 1) all 4 organizations were private, for-profit, 2) third-party reimbursement was limited for all of the optional models of care, 3) RNs did not directly manage the clinical care of patients in all of the models, 4) patient outcomes were not consistently identified and documented in any of the organizations, and 5) all of the organizations wanted to have an electronic information system that included outcomes (especially family satisfaction and costs) that could be used to assess quality and to compare with other organizations. The research is preliminary to the development of a data repository that can be used to compare and benchmark quality outcomes as more LTC options develop. AN: MN030122</td></tr></table>en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-26T22:57:38Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-17en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-26T22:57:38Z-
dc.description.sponsorshipMidwest Nursing Research Societyen_GB
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.