| |
Centre for Policy on Ageing | |
 | |
|
Why are some care homes better than others?
— an empirical study of the factors associated with quality of care for older people in residential homes in Surrey, England | | Author(s) | Heather Gage, Wendy Knibb, Joanne Evans |
| Journal title | Health and Social Care in the Community, vol 17, no 6, November 2009 |
| Pages | pp 599-609 |
| Source | http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/hsc |
| Keywords | Care homes ; Management [care] ; Quality ; Quantitative studies ; Surrey. |
| Annotation | Using data gathered from the first announced inspection reports (2002-2003) at all 258 care homes for older people in Surrey, the authors report an empirical study that investigated associations between the quality of care received and the features of the care homes. The number of inspected standards failed in each home was used as the main indicator of quality of care. Independent variables (for each home) were size, type, specialist registration, on-site nursing, ownership, year registered, location, maximum fee, vacancies, resident dependency, whether the home took publicly funded residents, care staff qualifications, and managerial quality. Quality of care was modelled using a Poisson count maximum likelihood method based on 245 (91%) of the inspected homes for which relevant data were available. The results showed that quality of care (as identified by failures on national standards) was statistically associated with being a home that was a for-profit small business (adjusted risk ratio RR = 1.17); was registered before 2000 (adj RR = 1.22), accommodated publicly funded residents (adj RR = 1.12); and was registered to provide nursing care (adj RR = 1.12). Fewer failures were associated with homes that were corporate for-profit (adj RR = 0.82); held a specialist registration (adj RR = 0.91); and charged higher maximum fees (adj RR = 0.98 per 100 pound sterling unit). A secondary analysis revealed a stronger model: higher scores on managerial standards correlated with fewer failures on other standards (r = 0.65, P <0.001). The results of this study may help inform future policy. They are discussed in the context of alternative approaches to measuring quality of residential care, and in terms of their generalisability. (RH). |
| Accession Number | CPA-100323002 A |
| Classmark | KW: QA: 59: 3DQ: 8SY |
Data © Centre for Policy on Ageing |
|
| ...from the Ageinfo database published by Centre for Policy on Ageing. |
| |
|