Quality and safety in residential aged care: an evaluation of a national quality indicator programme

Author:

Inacio Maria C.12ORCID,Eshetie Tesfahun C.13,Caughey Gillian E.124,Whitehead Craig56,Westbrook Johanna7ORCID,Gray Len8,Hibbert Peter9,Beattie Elizabeth10,Braithwaite Jeffrey9,Cameron Ian D.11ORCID,Crotty Maria56,Wesselingh Steve1

Affiliation:

1. Registry of Senior Australians South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute Adelaide South Australia Australia

2. UniSA Allied Health and Human Performance University of South Australia Adelaide South Australia Australia

3. UniSA Clinical & Health Sciences University of South Australia Adelaide South Australia Australia

4. Adelaide Medical School University of Adelaide Adelaide South Australia Australia

5. College of Medicine and Public Health Flinders University Adelaide South Australia Australia

6. Southern Adelaide Local Health Network SA Health Adelaide South Australia Australia

7. Centre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation Macquarie University Sydney New South Wales Australia

8. Centre for Health Services Research The University of Queensland Brisbane Queensland Australia

9. Centre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation Macquarie University Sydney New South Wales Australia

10. School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Queensland University of Technology Brisbane Queensland Australia

11. John Walsh Centre for Rehabilitation Research University of Sydney Sydney New South Wales Australia

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundIn Australia, 243 000 individuals live in approximately 2700 residential aged care facilities yearly. In 2019, a National Aged Care Mandatory Quality Indicator programme (QI programme) was implemented to monitor the quality and safety of care in facilities.AimTo examine the validity of the QI programme indicators using explicit measure review criteria.MethodsThe QI programme manual and reports were reviewed. A modified American College of Physicians Measure Review Criteria was employed to examine the QI programme's eight indicators. Five authors rated each indicator on importance, appropriateness, clinical evidence, specifications and feasibility using a nine‐point scale. A median score of 1–3 was considered to not meet criteria, 4–6 to meet some criteria and 7–9 to meet criteria.ResultsAll indicators, except polypharmacy, met criteria (median scores = 7–9) for importance, appropriateness and clinical evidence. Polypharmacy met some criteria for importance (median = 6, range 2–8), appropriateness (median = 5, range 2–8) and clinical evidence (median = 6, range 3–8). Pressure injury, physical restraints, significant unplanned weight loss, consecutive unplanned weight loss, falls and polypharmacy indicators met some criteria for specifications validity (all median scores = 5) and feasibility and applicability (median scores = 4 to 6). Antipsychotic use and falls resulting in major injury met some criteria for specifications (median = 6–7, range 4–8) and met criteria for feasibility and applicability (median = 7, range 4–8).ConclusionsAustralia's National QI programme is a major stride towards a culture of quality promotion, improvement and transparency. Measures' specifications, feasibility and applicability could be improved to ensure the programme delivers on its intended purposes.

Funder

National Health and Medical Research Council

Hospital Research Foundation

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Internal Medicine

Reference29 articles.

1. Connections Between Quality Measurement and Improvement

2. Accountability Measures — Using Measurement to Promote Quality Improvement

3. Time to tackle unwarranted variations in practice

4. Forty years of unwarranted variation—And still counting

5. CaugheyG LangC BrayS WesselinghS InacioM.Research paper 8 ‐ international and national quality and safety indicators for aged care. Report for the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety. 2020. Available from URL:https://agedcare.royalcommission.gov.au/publications/research-paper-8-international-and-national-quality-and-safety-indicators-aged-care.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

全球学者库

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"全球学者库"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前全球学者库共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2023 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3