BackgroundThere is no consensus regarding the optimal approach to assessment of the quality of life of people with dementia. We undertook the present study to describe and determine the factors associated with ratings of the quality of life of a cohort of people with dementia living in a residential care facility.Methodology/Principal Findings351 people with dementia living in residential care facilities, and their staff and family informants participated in this cross sectional observational study. Quality of life was measured using self (Quality of Life in Alzheimer's Disease [QoL-AD] scale), and informant (QoL-AD and Alzheimer's Disease Related QoL Scale) reports. 226 people (64%) with dementia (median MMSE 17; 12–21) were able to self rate the QoL-AD scale and these subjects' ratings were compared to ratings by staff and family. Both staff and family informant ratings of the QoL-AD underestimated self ratings (mean difference −7.8, 95% CI −8.8, −6.7 for staff rated QoL-AD; and mean difference −7.2, 95% CI −8.5, −6.0 for family rated QoL-AD). Self ratings of QoL were lower among people who were restrained, had fallen or had pain. Informant ratings of the QoL of the participants with dementia were consistently and significantly lower for people with severe cognitive impairment, who had fallen, had presence of neuropsychiatric symptoms, or where care giver distress was present. Documented restraint, reported pain and neuropsychiatric symptoms were independently associated with lower self rating of the QoL-AD in multivariate models. Cognitive impairment, case conferencing, hospitalizations and neuropsychiatric symptoms were found to be independently associated with staff rated ADRQL.ConclusionsThe majority of people with dementia living in residential care facilities can rate their own QoL. Informant ratings underestimate self ratings of QoL of people with dementia, and appear to be associated with factors which are not associated with self ratings.
This study explored how culture shapes relationships in aged care and the extent to which the residential aged care sector supports a cohesive multicultural workforce. An exploratory methodology utilising semi-structured questionnaires collected data from 58 participants comprising: staff who provide direct care to residents; managers; and family members from six residential care facilities in Perth, Western Australia. Communication issues emerged as an over-arching theme, and included interpersonal communication, the effect of cultural norms on communication and the impact of informal and formal workplace policies relating to spoken and written language. Sixty percent of participants from a culturally and linguistically diverse (CaLD) background had experienced negative reactions from residents with dementia, linked to visible cultural difference. They used a range of coping strategies including ignoring, resilience and avoidance in such situations. CaLD participants also reported prejudicial treatment from non-CaLD staff. The findings highlight the need for organisations to incorporate explicit processes which address the multiple layers of influence on cross cultural communication: internalised beliefs and values; moderating effects of education, experience and social circumstance; and factors external to the individuals, including workplace culture and the broader political economy, to develop a cohesive multicultural workplace.
Ageing-in-place is usually viewed as a positive approach to meeting the needs of the older person, supporting them to live independently, or with some assistance, for as long as possible. It implies that older people prefer to live in their own home, rather than in an institution or care centre. However, there is little in the literature about the implications of ageing-in-place for the individual or their carers, or the burden this can place on service providers and aged care communities.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.