March 22, 2022

BACKGROUND: Long-term care (LTC) residents frequently experience transitions in the location of more advanced care delivery, including receiving emergency department (ED) care. In this proof-of-concept study, we aimed to determine if we could identify measures in quality of care across transitions from LTC to the ED, via emergency medical services and back, by applying Institute of Medicine (IOM) Quality of Care Domains to an existing dataset. METHODS: In the Older Persons’ Transitions in Care (OPTIC) study, we collected information on residents’ transitions in two Western Canadian cities. We applied the IOM’s Quality of Care Domains to the OPTIC data to create binary measures of transition quality. We report the median (MED) per cent and IQR of measures met within each domain of quality. RESULTS: We tracked 637 transitions over a 12-month period, with data collected from each setting. We developed 19 safety measures, 20 measures of resident-centred care, 3 measures of timely care and 5 measures of effective care. We were unable to develop measures for equitable care at an individual transfer level. Domain scores varied across individual transitions, with the highest scores in safety (MED 79%, IQR: 63-95), efficiency (66%; IQR: 66-99), and resident-centred (45%; IQR: 25-65), followed by effectiveness (36%; IQR: 16-56), and timeliness (0%; IQR: 0-50). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show variation in scores across the domains of quality suggesting that it is possible to track quality of transitions for individuals across all settings, and not only within settings. We recommend that future work in tracking quality of care be performed at several levels (LTC, region, health authority, province). Such tracking is necessary to evaluate and improve overall quality of care.

Learning Objectives:
1. Understand what inappropriate health care is, and why it is important.
2. Identify the most underused clinical practices in Canada.
3. Identify most overused clinical practices in Canada.

AIM: To explore how an ecological approach be used to explore relationships among workplace empowerment, authentic leadership, trust in management, areas of work life and co-worker incivility experiences of new graduate nurses. DESIGN: Key concepts related to new graduate nurses’ incivility experience informed the research question building on the findings of our first author’s integrative review. Second, relevant theories and concepts were identified by conducting a literature review. Third, the themes build on prior theories and factors to propose a hypothetical model. DATA SOURCES: (2016-2019) CINAHL, OVID, PSYCINFO, PUBMED, EBSCO, ERIC, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library; PROQUEST and Google Scholar. REVIEW METHODS: (a) Constructs identified in an IR (Blackstock et al., 2018) guided a literature review on predictive variables linked to new graduate nurse’s co-worker incivility experiences; (b) an ecological approach was explored; and (c) we demonstrate how multidimensional organizational factors related to incivility experiences of new graduate nurses can be situated in an ecological model. RESULTS: Structural and organizational factors, and nurse leaders influencing new graduate nurses’ experiences are situated in an ecological model. Placing new graduate nurses’ co-worker incivility experiences in the microsystem and close to the mesosystem (nurse supervisor) and exosystem (workplace empowerment) of our ecological model provides new insights into their incivility experiences and informs future research. CONCLUSION: The ecological approach and operational definition of incivility help to clarify incivility behaviours as not merely individual behaviours observed by others needing corrective cognitive behaviours, nor support in a graduate transition program, but rather a symptom of work environment factors contributing to multidimensional work environments of new graduate nurses’ and influence incivility behaviours. IMPACT: New graduate nurse co-worker incivility research could measure change across time and across system domains informed by this ecological approach and can shape new ways of thinking about how to prevent and mitigate incivility.

Although there is agreement that COVID-19 has had devastating impacts in long-term care facilities (LTCFs), estimates of cases and deaths have varied widely with little attention to the causes of this variation. We developed a typology of data vulnerabilities and a strategy for approximating the true total of COVID-19 cases and deaths in LTCFs. Based on iterative qualitative consensus, we categorized LTCF reporting vulnerabilities and their potential impacts on accuracy. Concurrently, we compiled one dataset based on LTCF self-reports and one based on confirmatory matching with California’s COVID-19 databases, including death certificates. Through March 2021, Alameda County LTCFs reported 6663 COVID-19 cases and 481 deaths. In contrast, our confirmatory matching file includes 5010 cases and 594 deaths, corresponding to 25% fewer cases but 23% more deaths. We argue that the higher (self-report) case total approximates the lower bound of true COVID-19 cases, and the higher (confirmed match) death total approximates the lower bound of true COVID-19 deaths, both of which are higher than state and federal counts. LTCFs other than nursing facilities accounted for 35% of cases and 29% of deaths. Improving the accuracy of COVID-19 figures, particularly across types of LTCFs, would better inform interventions for these vulnerable populations.

BACKGROUND: Deliberative dialogues (DDs) are used in policy-making and healthcare research to enhance knowledge exchange and research implementation strategies. They allow organized dissemination and integration of relevant research, contextual considerations, and input from diverse stakeholder perspectives. Despite recent interest in involving patient and public perspectives in the design and development of healthcare services, DDs typically involve only professional stakeholders. A DD took place in May 2019 that aimed to improve the social environment (eg, safety, social inclusion) and decrease social isolation in a rent-geared-to-income housing complex in a large urban community. Tenants of the housing complex, public health, primary care, and social service providers participated. This study aimed to determine how including community tenants impacted the planning and execution of a DD, including adjustments made to the traditional DD model to improve accessibility. METHODS: A Core Working Group (CWG) and Steering Committee coordinated with researchers to plan the DD, purposefully recruit participants, and determine appropriate accommodations for tenants. A single mixed-methods case study was used to evaluate the DD process. Meeting minutes, field notes, and researchers’ observations were collected throughout all stages. Stakeholders’ contributions to and perception of the DD were assessed using participant observation, survey responses, and focus groups (FGs). RESULTS: 34 participants attended the DD and 28 (82%) completed the survey. All stakeholder groups rated the overall DD experience positively and valued tenants’ involvement. The tenants heavily influenced the planning and DD process, including decisions about key DD features. Suggestions to improve the experience for tenants were identified. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate the viability of and provide recommendations for DDs involving public participants. Like previous DDs, participants found the use of engaged facilitators, issue briefs, and off-the-record deliberations useful. Similarly, professional stakeholders did not highly value consensus as an output, although it was highly valued among tenants, as was actionability.