Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32410685›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2020

Staff members' prioritisation of care in residential aged care facilities: a Q methodology study.

Kristiana Ludlow, Kate Churruca, Virginia Mumford, Louise A Ellis, Jeffrey Braithwaite

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 71 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Disability and rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kristiana LudlowAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Level 6, 75 Talavera Road, North Ryde, NSW, 2109, Australia. kristiana.ludlow@mq.edu.au.
Kate ChurrucaAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Level 6, 75 Talavera Road, North Ryde, NSW, 2109, Australia.
Virginia MumfordAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Level 6, 75 Talavera Road, North Ryde, NSW, 2109, Australia.
Louise A EllisAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Level 6, 75 Talavera Road, North Ryde, NSW, 2109, Australia.
Jeffrey BraithwaiteAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Level 6, 75 Talavera Road, North Ryde, NSW, 2109, Australia.
Macquarie University · AU

Funding

Macquarie University 2017164
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhen healthcare professionals' workloads are greater than available resources, care activities can be missed, omitted or delayed, potentially leading to adverse patient outcomes. Prioritisation, a precursor to missed care, involves decision-making about the order of care task completion based on perceived importance or urgency. Research on prioritisation and missed care has predominantly focused on acute care settings, which differ from residential aged care facilities in terms of funding, structure, staffing levels, skill mix, and approaches to care. The objective of this study was to investigate how care staff prioritise the care provided to residents living in residential aged care.

methodsThirty-one staff members from five Australian residential aged care facilities engaged in a Q sorting activity by ranking 34 cards representing different care activities on a pre-defined grid from 'Least important' (- 4) to 'Most important' (+ 4). Concurrently, they participated in a think-aloud task, verbalising their decision-making processes. Following sorting, participants completed post-sorting interviews, a demographics questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. Q sort data were analysed using centroid factor analysis and varimax rotation in PQMethod. Factor arrays and data from the think-aloud task, field notes and interviews facilitated interpretation of the resulting factors.

resultsA four-factor solution, representing 22 participants and 62% of study variance, satisfied the selection criteria. The four distinct viewpoints represented by the solution were: 1. Prioritisation of clinical care, 2. Prioritisation of activities of daily living, 3. Humanistic approach to the prioritisation of care, and 4. Holistic approach to the prioritisation of care. Participants' prioritisation decisions were largely influenced by their occupations and perceived role responsibilities. Across the four viewpoints, residents having choices about their care ranked as a lower priority.

conclusionsThis study has implications for missed care, as it demonstrates how care tasks deemed outside the scope of staff members' defined roles are often considered a lower priority. Our research also shows that, despite policy regulations mandating person-centred care and the respect of residents' preferences, staff members in residential aged care facilities tend to prioritise more task-oriented aspects of care over person-centredness.

Indexed as

Health PrioritiesAdolescentAdultAgedAustraliaFemaleHealth PersonnelHomes for the AgedHumansMaleMiddle AgedQ-SortQualitative ResearchYoung AdultAged careAssisted living facilitiesHealth workforceImplicit rationingMissed careNursing homesPrioritisationQ methodologyResidential facilities

Identifiers

PMID32410685
PMCPMC7222492
OpenAlexW3026079498

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.