Person‐Centred Care for older people: Convergence and assessment of users’ relatives’ and staff's perspectives

Abstract

Aim Develop two psychometrically sound questionnaires to assess users’ and relatives’ opinions of Person‐Centred Care. Evaluate the convergence between the perspectives of the different agents involved in Person‐Centred Care in the older people: Users, relatives and staff. Examine the relationships between Person‐Centred Care and care quality and the users’ perceived psychological well‐being. Design We used the psychometric technology involved in the development and analysis of tests for the first objective. For the second and third objectives, we used a descriptive‐correlational design. Method The sample comprised 636 clients of older people care residences, 742 relatives and 844 healthcare professionals. The mean age of the centre residents was 81.62 years old (SD = 9.51), the mean age of relatives was 56.7 (SD = 10.15) and the mean age of healthcare professionals was 39.94 (SD = 10.56). Data collection lasted 10 months, between May 2017 and March 2018. Two new Person‐Centred Care instruments were developed and the correlations between different agents were calculated. Results The newly developed measurement instruments demonstrated a unidimensional structure and high internal consistency and stability over time (users: α = .96, ω = .96, r = .91; relatives: α = .97, ω = .97, r = .95). There was high convergence between the Person‐Centred Care evaluations from the staff, users and relatives, with correlations ranging between .62 and .76. Conclusion The new measurement instruments were reliable and valid. The opinions of the staff, users and relatives about Person‐Centred Care in the residential centres were in good agreement. Furthermore, Person‐Centred Care was associated with care quality and residents’ psychological well‐being. Impact A gap in the literature is an examination of the extent to which assessments of Person‐Centred Care made by staff agree with those by users of the services and their relatives. In order to do that, two new measuring instruments were developed, which showed excellent psychometric properties, and are able to reliably, validly evaluate Person‐Centred Care.

Caring self-efficacy of direct care workers in residential aged care settings: A mixed methods scoping review

“…17 The aged care literature has also indicated that the longer direct care workers have been working, the better they understand their clients and the more able they are to build relationships with them. 71 The literature also suggested that high job satisfaction and lower levels of job strain enhanced the application of person-centred care strategies 72,73 Martínez et al found satisfaction among residents and their families was higher with a person-centred care approach. 73 Our review has shown that the lower the level of conflict with residents or their families, the more confident the staff feel.…”

“…71 The literature also suggested that high job satisfaction and lower levels of job strain enhanced the application of person-centred care strategies 72,73 Martínez et al found satisfaction among residents and their families was higher with a person-centred care approach. 73 Our review has shown that the lower the level of conflict with residents or their families, the more confident the staff feel. Undoubtedly, these factors are intertwined with each other and contribute to enhancing the caring selfefficacy of direct care workers.…”

Evaluating person-centered care in residential care facilities from the perspective of caregivers in South Korea: a survey

“…It is difficult to use the tools for measuring PCC in residential care facilities accurately, as only 45.5% of LTC residents’ ratings in 2019 in South Korea [ 36 ]. In addition, there was quite high convergence between the PCC evaluations from the staff, users, and relatives, with correlations ranging between 0.62 and 0.76 [ 37 , 38 ]. The impact of PCC approaches gave positive influences on stress, burnout, and job satisfaction of staff caring for people with dementia in residential care communities [ 6 ].…”