ArticleZeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie2021
[Attitudes to publication of quality testing reports in nursing homes].
Article in Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Nursing and Living Quality Act (PfleWoqG) regulates the implementation of legally regulated quality inspections and publication of statutory quality inspection reports for residential nursing homes in Bavaria. In the currently valid version, the quality records have to be published but a decision of the higher administrative court (VGH) repealed this rule and it is no longer in force. OBJECTIVE AND
methodsWithin the framework of a project for the Bavarian State Ministry for Health and Nursing concerning the revision of the publication of legally regulated quality testing reports, appraisals by the institutional management in nursing homes were collated. The E‑survey reached 24% (n = 529) of all residential care homes for elderly people and residential care homes for handicapped people in Bavaria. RESULTS AND
conclusionApproximately two thirds of the persons questioned attested that the inspections and the resulting reports reflected an appropriate picture of the quality of nursing carried out in the institutions. Nevertheless, the vast majority did not approve of the obligatory publication of the quality testing records. While the inspections were seen as a valuable basis to reflect on the quality of care in the institutions, it was simultaneously argued that the inspections are only snapshots, which could be misinterpreted by the public. It was criticized that the quality testing records were not comprehensible for users. Furthermore, it was commented that the ratings of the responsible authorities were influenced by the competence of the inspectors and their subjective point of view and there was therefore a risk that invalid results would be made public.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32737570What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.