Silent Partners in Care: Examining Care Transitions for Caregivers of Hip Fracture and Stroke Patients
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Quality of care and patient safety have been demonstrated to be at increased risk during care transitions; making older adults with complex medical issues especially vulnerable due to the multifaceted care they require (Coleman, 2003; Cook et al., 2000; Forster et al., 2003; Murtaugh & Litke, 2002; Picker Institute, 1999; van Walraven et al., 2004). While a strong focus on patient issues during care transitions exists in current literature, there is a dearth of knowledge surrounding the role of informal caregivers in this process. As the senior population continues to grow in Canada, it is inevitable that the health system will be increasingly reliant upon informal caregivers to meet the demanding and complex care needs of older adults. This research explored informal caregiver experiences following an older patient’s medical crisis in order to foster a deeper understanding of caregiver needs during transitional care. This work will support efforts to develop viable interventions within formal care settings to better support and prepare individuals for informal care responsibilities (Canadian Caregiver Coalition, 2008; National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling, 2004). \nMethods: A qualitative, post-positivist grounded theory study was employed to acquire an understanding of the role and needs of informal caregivers during transitional care. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with six community and resource case managers, and informal caregivers of eight hip fracture and two stroke caregivers. Two additional interviews were conducted with hip replacement caregivers. Questions explored individual experiences interacting with and/or providing informal care, and honed in on observed and experienced challenges, support received, and recommendations for future efforts to support care. NVivo8 software facilitated qualitative data analysis through hierarchical coding (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). \nResults: Six properties of caregiver needs arose from the data, each consisting of several important ideas fostering its understanding. The core concept threading across all properties was building capacity to care. Combined, thematic interpretations were integrated into a comprehensive theory of caregiver needs to support a successful care transition from hospital to home, consisting of three layers: 1) Timeline of caregiver needs; 2) Instrumental needs; and 3) Emotional needs. A member-checking process of the theory consisting of both a focus group and individual interviews indicated high face and content validity, and highlighted priority areas for future interventions. \nDiscussion: The developed substantive theory is a valuable tool for which to understand the instrumental and emotional needs of hip fracture and stroke caregivers along a timeline of transitional care between hospital and home. Focus group and individual feedback indicate strong endorsement for theory adoption as a guiding framework for an intervention strategy to support informal caregivers within formal care settings and throughout the transition home. Results suggest the potential to broaden the conceptualization of the substantive theory to a formal explanation of transitional care needs for other medical crises across numerous types of transitions between formal hospital settings and the community.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».