Assessing Special Care Units for Dementia

Norris-Baker, Carolyn; Weisman, Gerald D.; Lawton, M. Powell; Sloane, Philip D.; Kaup, Migette L.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-4841-6_8

Cited by 17 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After each question of both PEAP and EAT-HC was considered, we determined that EAT-HC was more appropriate because not only it is user-friendly, but it was also developed specifically for small-scale group living facilities for residents with higher levels of cognitive and/or physical impairments. EAT-HC is easier for the care staff to use in their own facility, while PEAP requires assessment from experts in environment and aging care (Fleming, 2011; Lawton et al, 2000; Norris-Baker et al, 1999). Therefore, EAT-HC was considered the most appropriate instrument for environmental assessment of Japan’s GCUs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Japanese Translation and Validation of the Environmental Assessment Tool–Higher Care

Brennan

Doan

Bennett

et al. 2021

HERD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The purpose of this study was to translate the Environmental Assessment Tool–Higher Care (EAT-HC) into Japanese and validate its use in small-scale group living facilities in Japan. Background: Environment of a facility is shown to improve its residents’ quality of life (QOL). Japan’s “welfare-based nursing homes for the elderly” are gradually shifting to a small-scale group living concept called group care units (GCUs). However, there is no appropriate environmental tool available for evaluating GCUs. The application of valid environmental assessment tools brings about a better understanding of the nature of good environments and the relationship between environments and outcomes for residents living with dementia. Methods: The study had a mixed method design conducted in several steps, covering translation and adaptation. The translation phase involved (1) forward translation and (2) backward translation. The adaptation phase involved (3) content validity and homogeneity reliability and (4) concurrent validity and interrater reliability. Results: 71 Items (92%) met the acceptable level of content validity (item-content validity index [CVI] > .79) and had good scale-CVI of .88. Concurrent validity was confirmed between .65 and .78 ( p < .001). For reliability test, the internal consistency of six subscales was between .88 and .98. Overall interobserver agreement was 90.3%. Intraclass correlation coefficients were .80–.98 ( p < .001), and homogeneity reliability coefficient for all items was >.76 ( p < .01). Conclusions: Validation of the EAT-HC-Japanese Version (EAT-HC-JV) was confirmed as an appropriate tool for environmental assessment to enhance the QOL in Japan’s GCUs. For future study, we plan to modify the EAT-HC-JV to adapt to Japanese cultural aspects in order to increase its usability in Japan.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Japanese Translation and Validation of the Environmental Assessment Tool–Higher Care

Brennan

Doan

Bennett

et al. 2021

HERD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The researcher noted that color contrast was of great importance in an unfamiliar environment when seeking information. The PEAP method was validated in studies by Lawton et al (2000) and Morgan et al (2004), and inter-rater reliability was demonstrated by Norris-Baker et al (1999). Sheehy et al (2011) tested the content validity of a survey, the Birth Unit Design Spatial Evaluation Tool (BUDSET) (Foureur, et al, 2010), which includes the domains of fear cascade, facilities (bath, patient room, physical support), aesthetics (light, color, texture, indoor air, and odor), and support.…”

Section: Color Studies In General Medical Settingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Color and NICU Design

Shepley

Ames

Lin

2023

HERD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The appropriate use of color in healthcare settings has been a topic of interest for designers and researchers, and the need for evidence-based standards evident. The purpose of this article is to summarize recent research on color as applicable to neonatal intensive care units and to propose standards for color in these settings. Background: Research on this topic is limited due to difficulties associated with constructing research protocols, challenges in setting parameters for the independent variable (color), and the need to simultaneously address infants, families, and caregivers. Methods: For our literature review, the following research question was developed: Does the use of color in the design of the neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) impact health outcomes in newborn infants, families, and/or staff? Using Arksey and O’Malley’s framework for conducting a structured literature review, we (1) identified the research question, (2) identified relevant studies, (3) selected studies, and (4) collated and summarized the results. Only four papers were found regarding NICUs, so the search was expanded to include related healthcare and authors reporting on best practice. Results: Overall, the primary research focused on behavioral or physiological outcomes including the role of wayfinding and art, the impact of lighting on color, and tools for evaluating the impact of color. Best practice recommendations sometimes reflected the primary research but occasionally provided contradictory advice. Conclusions: Based on the reviewed literature, five topics are addressed: palette malleability; the use of the primary colors, blue, red, and yellow; and the relationship between light and color.

show abstract

“…In the study of physical care environment, the Professional Environmental Assessment Protocol (PEAP; Lawton et al, 2000 ; Norris-Baker et al., 1999 ; Weisman, 1994 ) appears to be the most commonly used and seems to be the best validated questionnaire focused on the extent to which the physical setting supports users in special care units and people in nursing homes ( Elf et al, 2017 ). However, an important piece of information is missing since the PEAP is intended for care managers without including experiences from the users’ perspective.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Supportiveness of Healthcare Environments’ Light and Color: Development and Validation of the Light and Color Questionnaire (LCQ)

Lindahl

Thulesius

Rask

et al. 2020

HERD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a self-report instrument measuring patients’, family members’, and staff’s perceived support from light and color in the physical environment of an emergency department (ED)—the Light and Color Questionnaire (LCQ). Background: The physical care environment is an important part of a comprehensive caring approach in all levels of care not only for patients but also for family members and staff. However, no existing self-report questionnaire assessing the extent to which light and color are perceived as being supportive in the physical care environment from the users’ perspective was found. Method: The LCQ was developed as part of a pre–post study in which an ED serving 125,000 people was refurbished and remodeled using evidence-based design. The LCQ consists of six items for light and five items for color and assesses awareness/orientation, safety/security, functional abilities, privacy, personal control, and stimulation. The study was carried out in four steps: constructions of items, assessment of face validity, data collection, and data analysis. Result/Conclusion: Psychometric evaluation of the two versions, LCQ-Patient/Family member and LCQ-Staff, showed satisfactory content and internal validity (>90%) and high internal consistency (Cronbach’s coefficient α = .9) to support the use of the questionnaire for research and development purposes. Explorative factor analysis of a total of 600 questionnaire responses confirmed light and color as distinctive and independent dimensions creating perceptions of more or less supportiveness for respondents. The LCQ instrument may be useful for architects, administrators, and researchers of healthcare environments.

show abstract

Assessing Special Care Units for Dementia

Cited by 17 publications

References 12 publications

Japanese Translation and Validation of the Environmental Assessment Tool–Higher Care

Japanese Translation and Validation of the Environmental Assessment Tool–Higher Care

Color and NICU Design

Assessing the Supportiveness of Healthcare Environments’ Light and Color: Development and Validation of the Light and Color Questionnaire (LCQ)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About