Liza Van Eenoo

Quality of Care and Job Satisfaction in the European Home Care Setting: Research Protocol

Introduction: Since the European population is ageing, a growing number of elderly will need home care. Consequently, high quality home care for the elderly remains an important challenge. Job satisfaction among care professionals is regarded as an important aspect of the quality of home care. Aim: This paper describes a research protocol to identify elements that have an impact on job satisfaction among care professionals and on quality of care for older people in the home care setting of six European countries. Methods: Data on elements at the macro-level (policy), meso-level (care organisations) and micro-level (clients) are of importance in determining job satisfaction and quality of care. Macro-level indicators will be identified in a previously published literature review. At meso- and micro-level, data will be collected by means of two questionnaires utilsed with both care organisations and care professionals, and by means of interRAI Home Care assessments of clients. The client assessments will be used to calculate quality of care indicators. Subsequently, data will be analysed by means of linear and stepwise multiple regression analyses, correlations and multilevel techniques. Conclusions and Discussion: These results can guide health care policy makers in their decision making process in order to increase the quality of home care in their organisation, in their country or in Europe.

Quality indicators for community care for older people: A systematic review

Background Health care systems that succeed in preventing long term care and hospital admissions of frail older people may substantially save on their public spending. The key might be found in high-quality care in the community. Quality Indicators (QIs) of a sufficient methodological level are a prerequisite to monitor, compare, and improve care quality. This systematic review identified existing QIs for community care for older people and assessed their methodological quality. Methods Relevant studies were identified by searches in electronic reference databases and selected by two reviewers independently. Eligible publications described the development or application of QIs to assess the quality of community care for older people. Information about the QIs, the study sample, and specific setting was extracted. The methodological quality of the QI sets was assessed with the Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation (AIRE) instrument. A score of 50% or higher on a domain was considered to indicate high methodological quality. Results Searches resulted in 25 included articles, describing 17 QI sets with 567 QIs. Most indicators referred to care processes (80%) and measured clinical issues (63%), mainly about follow-up, monitoring, examinations and treatment. About two-third of the QIs focussed on specific disease groups. The methodological quality of the indicator sets varied considerably. The highest overall level was achieved on the domain ‘Additional evidence, formulation and usage’ (51%), followed by ‘Scientific evidence’ (39%) and ‘Stakeholder involvement’ (28%). Conclusion A substantial number of QIs is available to assess the quality of community care for older people. However, generic QIs, measuring care outcomes and non-clinical aspects are relatively scarce and most QI sets do not meet standards of high methodological quality. This study can support policy makers and clinicians to navigate through a large number of QIs and select QIs for their purposes. PROSPERO Registration: 2014:CRD42014007199