Janet Rigby

Review: what evidence is there about the specific environmental needs of older people who are near the end of life and are cared for in hospices or similar institutions? A literature review.

Relatively little is known about the type of physical environment which is needed and preferred by patients aged 65 and over, with a prognosis of 1 year or less, who are receiving care in hospitals, care homes and hospices, and their families and staff. A narrative literature review was conducted to identify and analyse evidence on this issue, with twenty-nine papers meeting the inclusion criteria. The patients were found to have a wide range of views on their environment, but there was some variation between the views of patients and those of their families and staff. Four main themes emerged: the physical environment should be ‘homely’; it should support patients’ need for social interaction and privacy; it should support the caring activities of staff, family members and patients; and it should allow opportunities for spiritual expression. It is evident that the physical environment contributes significantly to the quality of life of older people with a life-limiting illness, and there is a need for more research in this area. Regular assessment of patients’ environmental needs should form part of care planning.

Improving inpatient Hospice environments for older people in England: A documentary analysis

Abstract Objective To assess the extent to which a grants programme to fund improvements to English inpatient hospice buildings achieved its goals of involving and directly benefiting older people. Method Qualitative content analysis was undertaken of all grant application forms which (a) resulted in funding, and (b) proposed to refurbish or replace inpatient hospice buildings. Data were extracted, and themes identified, on the nature and extent of the benefits envisaged for older people, and how older people were involved in the proposed building projects. Results Of 227 grant applications, 139 (from 111 hospices) met the inclusion criteria. Four categories of building improvement were identified: interior decoration or equipment (n = 386, or 36% of the total); public spaces (n = 291, or 27%), private spaces (n = 283, or 26%), and health and safety (n = 116, or 11%). These improvements, while generally beneficial, were rarely targeted at older people. Most grant applicants stated that they had consulted service users, but only 13 specified that they consulted older people. Limited information was supplied about the methods or findings of these consultations. In 15 grant applications, older people were not mentioned at all. Conclusions Older hospice inpatients, their relatives and advocacy groups should be involved more fully in decisions relating to the physical environment of care. Staff who prepare funding bids should receive training in conducting consultations with service users, and identifying and evaluating other relevant evidence. To ensure a consistently high standard of environmental provision for older people in hospices, evidence-based assessment tools and guidelines should be developed.