MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4390957005 · doi:10.5334/ijic.icic23398

Co-design of an integrated home-based primary care model for older adults living with frailty in Ontario, Canada

2023· article· en· W4390957005 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Sophiya Garasia, Harleen Badesha, Aruna Mitra, Joyce Oiwun Cheung

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Journal of Integrated Care · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Établissements canadiensBrampton Civic Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésFocus groupGeneral partnershipNursingIntegrated careHealth carePopulationService (business)Theory of changeAging in placeMedicineGerontologyBusinessSociologyPolitical scienceMarketingEnvironmental health

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background: The demand for home care is predicted to increase with increasing senior population and the aging-at-home phenomenon. Countries world-wide are preparing for this growing demand by making changes to their health care and social care systems. This change is much needed given that, globally, evidence shows that seniors are experiencing fragmented care particularly when they are living with frailty. To address this problem, the Central West Ontario Health Team in Canada is creating an integrated home-based primary care model for individuals 65+ who are living with frailty. At the ICIC23 Conference, I plan to share our research findings, design of the program, learnings from every phase of our co-design and change management approach, and findings from the evaluation of the pilot program. Methods: The program is being co-designed (using Experienced Based Co-Design) in collaboration with patients, caregivers, primary care, hospitals, the municipality, mental health organizations, social workers, home and community care, and other community groups. To date, the co-design team has worked together in partnership to share experiences, segment the population, conduct an environmental scan of documents, and conduct quantitative and qualitative research. First, the team performed descriptive data analysis of hospitalization and community data, and then, three separate focus groups were held with local organizations, service providers, and patients and caregivers (n=60). The data that emerged from the focus groups was then thematically analyzed. The co-design team is now finalizing the program as it is set to be piloted in January 2023, at which point, the program will be evaluated (on measures such as emergency department (ED) diversion and patient experience), updated, and scaled up appropriately. Results: Research showed that 80% of Alternate-Level-of-Care days in the Region are among those who are 65+. A cohort of the older adult population are also high users of the ED who are being discharged home each time. Reported reasons for high ED use include isolation, confusion about the health care system, caregiver burnout, and not receiving proper care in the community in a timely manner. Our research also identified frail older adults to be particularly vulnerable. The program I will describe in the presentation will aim to address these issues. It is novel to Ontario, Canada, and will consist of a screening process to identify “at risk” older adults presenting to the ED, a comprehensive assessment, and ongoing access to an intraprofessional team (consisting of physicians, nurses, physiotherapists, nutritionists, pharmacists, and mental health professionals) that will work together on a shared care plan for each patient. All the tools are being adapted to meet a multi-faceted definition of frailty as well as local needs given that the Central West Region is one of the most ethnically diverse regions in the province. By co-designing, the aim is to implement an integrated program that matches the preferences of patients and their family-members and caregivers. Discussion: The learnings will be helpful to the many groups world-wide who are also planning on creating integrated co-designed primary-care based programs for diverse older adults experiencing frailty.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,384
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,998

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,029
Tête enseignante GPT0,329
Écart entre enseignants0,299 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2023
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational Journal of Integrated CareMême sujetGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesTravaux en français237 207