IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2020i1p57-d467191.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Homestead: Developing a Conceptual Framework through Co-Creation for Innovating Long-Term Dementia Care Environments

Author

Listed:
  • Bram de Boer

    (Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, 6229 GT Maastricht, The Netherlands
    Living Lab in Ageing and Long-Term Care, 6229 GT Maastricht, The Netherlands)

  • Belkis Bozdemir

    (Living Lab in Ageing and Long-Term Care, 6229 GT Maastricht, The Netherlands
    MeanderGroep Zuid Limburg, 6372 PP Landgraaf, The Netherlands)

  • Jack Jansen

    (Living Lab in Ageing and Long-Term Care, 6229 GT Maastricht, The Netherlands
    MeanderGroep Zuid Limburg, 6372 PP Landgraaf, The Netherlands)

  • Monique Hermans

    (Living Lab in Ageing and Long-Term Care, 6229 GT Maastricht, The Netherlands
    MeanderGroep Zuid Limburg, 6372 PP Landgraaf, The Netherlands)

  • Jan P. H. Hamers

    (Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, 6229 GT Maastricht, The Netherlands
    Living Lab in Ageing and Long-Term Care, 6229 GT Maastricht, The Netherlands)

  • Hilde Verbeek

    (Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, 6229 GT Maastricht, The Netherlands
    Living Lab in Ageing and Long-Term Care, 6229 GT Maastricht, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Alternative care environments for regular nursing homes are highly warranted to promote health and well-being of residents with dementia that are part of an age-friendly and dementia-friendly city and society. Insight is lacking on how to translate evidence-based knowledge from theory into a congruent conceptual model for innovation in current practice. This study reports on the co-creation of an alternative nursing home model in the Netherlands. A participatory research approach was used to co-create a conceptual framework with researchers, practitioners and older people following an iterative process. Results indicate that achieving positive outcomes for people with dementia, (in)formal caregivers, and the community is dependent on how well the physical, social and organizational environment are congruently designed. The theoretical underpinnings of the conceptual model have been translated into “the homestead,” which is conceptualized around three main pillars: activation, freedom and relationships. The Homestead Care Model is an illustrative example of how residential care facilities can support the development of age-friendly communities that take into consideration the needs and requirements of older citizens. However, challenges remain to implement radical changes within residential care. More research is needed into the actual implementation of the Homestead Care Model.

Suggested Citation

  • Bram de Boer & Belkis Bozdemir & Jack Jansen & Monique Hermans & Jan P. H. Hamers & Hilde Verbeek, 2020. "The Homestead: Developing a Conceptual Framework through Co-Creation for Innovating Long-Term Dementia Care Environments," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-17, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2020:i:1:p:57-:d:467191
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/1/57/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/1/57/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Annica Backman & Petra Ahnlund & Karin Sjögren & Hugo Lövheim & Katherine S. McGilton & David Edvardsson, 2020. "Embodying person‐centred being and doing: Leading towards person‐centred care in nursing homes as narrated by managers," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(1-2), pages 172-183, January.
    2. Katrien Luijkx & Leonieke van Boekel & Meriam Janssen & Marjolein Verbiest & Annerieke Stoop, 2020. "The Academic Collaborative Center Older Adults: A Description of Co-Creation between Science, Care Practice and Education with the Aim to Contribute to Person-Centered Care for Older Adults," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-14, December.
    3. Hannah R. Marston & Joost van Hoof, 2019. "“Who Doesn’t Think about Technology When Designing Urban Environments for Older People?” A Case Study Approach to a Proposed Extension of the WHO’s Age-Friendly Cities Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-35, September.
    4. W. H. Voorberg & V. J. J. M. Bekkers & L. G. Tummers, 2015. "A Systematic Review of Co-Creation and Co-Production: Embarking on the social innovation journey," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(9), pages 1333-1357, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anne Seneca Terkelsen & Christian Tolstrup Wester & Gabriel Gulis & Jørgen Jespersen & Pernille Tanggaard Andersen, 2022. "Co-Creation and Co-Production of Health Promoting Activities Addressing Older People—A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-20, October.
    2. Valentina Bressan & Allette Snijder & Henriette Hansen & Kim Koldby & Knud Damgaard Andersen & Natalia Allegretti & Federica Porcu & Sara Marsillas & Alvaro García & Alvisa Palese, 2022. "Supporting the Community to Embrace Individuals with Dementia and to Be More Inclusive: Findings of a Conceptual Framework Development Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-14, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Joost van Hoof & Hannah R. Marston, 2021. "Age-Friendly Cities and Communities: State of the Art and Future Perspectives," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-13, February.
    2. Petteri Repo & Kaisa Matschoss, 2019. "Social Innovation for Sustainability Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    3. Wynen, Jan & Boon, Jan & Kleizen, Bjorn & Verhoest, Koen, 2020. "How multiple organizational changes shape managerial support for innovative work behavior : Evidence from the Australian Public Service," Other publications TiSEM 4f721d76-0c44-4d72-a494-9, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    4. Philippe BANCE & Marie-J. BOUCHARD & Dorothea GREILING, 2022. "Conclusions and Directions for further Research," CIRIEC Studies Series, in: Philippe BANCE & Marie-J. BOUCHARD & Dorothea GREILING & CIRIEC (ed.), New perspectives in the co-production of public policies, public services and common goods, volume 3, chapter 0, pages 259-274, CIRIEC - Université de Liège.
    5. Benoît Desmarchelier & Faridah Djellal & Faïz Gallouj, 2018. "Public Service Innovation Networks (PSINs): Collaborating for Innovation and Value Creation," Working Papers halshs-01934275, HAL.
    6. Filippetti, Andrea & Vezzani, Antonio, 2022. "The political economy of public research, or why some governments commit to research more than others," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    7. Anne Seneca Terkelsen & Christian Tolstrup Wester & Gabriel Gulis & Jørgen Jespersen & Pernille Tanggaard Andersen, 2022. "Co-Creation and Co-Production of Health Promoting Activities Addressing Older People—A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-20, October.
    8. Vassallo, Jarrod P. & Banerjee, Sourindra & Zaman, Hasanuzzaman & Prabhu, Jaideep C., 2023. "Design thinking and public sector innovation: The divergent effects of risk-taking, cognitive empathy and emotional empathy on individual performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    9. Tânia Martins & Alexandra Braga & Marisa R. Ferreira & Vítor Braga, 2022. "Diving into Social Innovation: A Bibliometric Analysis," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-18, April.
    10. Anthony A. Sterns & Harvey L. Sterns & Ann Walter, 2020. "Prioritizing Age-Friendly Domains for Transforming a Mid-Sized American City," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-30, December.
    11. Pwint Kay Khine & Jianing Mi & Raza Shahid, 2021. "A Comparative Analysis of Co-Production in Public Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-13, June.
    12. Manuel Alméstar & Sara Romero-Muñoz & Nieves Mestre & Uriel Fogué & Eva Gil & Amanda Masha, 2023. "(Un)Likely Connections between (Un)Likely Actors in the Art/NBS Co-Creation Process: Application of KREBS Cycle of Creativity to the Cyborg Garden Project," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-25, May.
    13. Roberto Vivona & Mehmet Akif Demircioglu & David B. Audretsch, 2023. "The costs of collaborative innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 873-899, June.
    14. Alessandro Piperno & Christian Iaione & Luna Kappler, 2023. "Institutional Collective Actions for Culture and Heritage-Led Urban Regeneration: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-22, May.
    15. Benoît Desmarchelier & Faridah Djellal & Faïz Gallouj, 2018. "Public service innovation networks (PSINs): an instrument for collaborative innovation and value co-creation in public service(s)," Working Papers halshs-01934284, HAL.
    16. Tan, Wee-Liang & Zuckermann, Ghil'ad, 2021. "External impetus, co-production and grassroots innovations: The case of an innovation involving a language," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    17. Liliya Eugenevna Ziganshina & Ekaterina V. Yudina & Liliya I. Talipova & Guzel N. Sharafutdinova & Rustem N. Khairullin, 2020. "Smart and Age-Friendly Cities in Russia: An Exploratory Study of Attitudes, Perceptions, Quality of Life and Health Information Needs," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-15, December.
    18. Juliet Carpenter & Christina Horvath & Ben Spencer, 2021. "Co-Creation as an agonistic practice in the favela of Santa Marta, Rio de Janeiro," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 58(9), pages 1906-1923, July.
    19. Ratten, Vanessa & da Silva Braga, Vitor Lélio & da Encarnação Marques, Carla Susana, 2021. "Sport entrepreneurship and value co-creation in times of crisis: The covid-19 pandemic," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 265-274.
    20. Cinar, Emre & Demircioglu, Mehmet Akif & Acik, Ahmet Coskun & Simms, Chris, 2024. "Public sector innovation in a city state: exploring innovation types and national context in Singapore," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2020:i:1:p:57-:d:467191. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.