Social comparison as an adaptive strategy has previously been unidentified in care home literature. Residents need more support to express their identities, which may reduce the necessity of social comparison, and improve interrelationships and well-being.

Purpose A growing ageing population with complex healthcare needs is a challenge to the organisation of healthcare support for older people residing in care homes. The lack of specialised healthcare support for care home residents has resulted in poorer outcomes, compared with community-dwelling older people. However, little is known about the forms, staff mix, organisation and delivery of such services for residents’ physical healthcare needs. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach This systematic review, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, aimed to provide an overview of the range of healthcare services delivered to care homes and to identify core features of variation in their organisation, activities and responsibilities. The eligibility criteria for studies were services designed to address the physical healthcare needs of older people, permanently residing in care homes, with or without nursing. To search the literature, terms relating to care homes, healthcare and older people, across ten electronic databases were used. The quality of service descriptions was appraised using a rating tool designed for the study. The evidence was synthesised, by means of a narrative summary, according to key areas of variation, into models of healthcare support with examples of their relative effectiveness. Findings In total, 84 studies, covering 74 interventions, identified a diverse range of specialist healthcare support services, suggesting a wide variety of ways of delivering healthcare support to care homes. These fell within five models: assessment – no consultant; assessment with consultant; assessment/management – no consultant; assessment/management with consultant; and training and support. The predominant model offered a combination of assessment and management. Overall, there was a lack of detail in the data, making judgements of relative effectiveness difficult. Recommendations for future research include the need for clearer descriptions of interventions and particularly of data on resident-level costs and effectiveness, as well as better explanations of how services are implemented (review registration: PROSPERO CRD42017081161). Originality/value There is considerable debate about the best means of providing healthcare to older people in care homes. A number of specialist initiatives have developed and this review seeks to bring these together in a comparative approach deriving models of care of value to policy makers and commissioners.

ObjectiveClinical trials and studies in intensive care units (ICUs) have complex consent processes and often encounter problems in recruiting patients. By interviewing research team members about the challenges in critical care research, we aimed to identify strategies to enhance recruitment and consent to ICU studies.MethodsSemistructured interviews with UK-based researchers (N=17) and patient–public involvement (PPI) contributors (N=8) with experience of ICU studies. Analysis of transcripts of audio-recorded interviews drew on thematic approaches.ResultsSeven themes were identified. Participants emphasised the need for substitute decision-making processes in critical care studies, yet some researchers reported that research ethics committees (RECs) were reluctant to approve such processes. Researchers spoke about the potential benefits of research without prior consent (RWPC) for studies with narrow recruitment windows but believed RECs would not approve them. Participants indicated that the activity of PPI contributors was limited in critical care studies, though researchers who had involved PPI contributors more extensively were clear that their input when designing consent processes was important. Researchers and PPI contributors pointed to resource and staffing limitations as barriers to patient recruitment. Researchers varied in whether and how they used professional consultees as substitute decision-makers, in whether they approached families by telephone to discuss research and in whether they disclosed details of research participation to bereaved relatives.ConclusionCritical care research could benefit from RECs having expertise in consent processes that are suited to this setting, better staffing at research sites, more extensive PPI and an evidence base on stakeholder perspectives on critical care research processes. Guidance on professional consultee processes, telephoning relatives to discuss research, RWPC and disclosure of research participation to bereaved relatives could help to harmonise practice in these areas and enhance recruitment and consent to critical care studies.