IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v18y2025i3d10.1007_s40271-025-00729-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Routine Quality-of-Life Measurement in Residential Aged Care: Staff, Resident, and Family Perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Simon Gilbert

    (National Ageing Research Institute, Royal Melbourne Hospital
    La Trobe University)

  • Frances Batchelor

    (National Ageing Research Institute, Royal Melbourne Hospital
    University of Melbourne)

  • Nancy Devlin

    (University of Melbourne)

  • Briony Dow

    (National Ageing Research Institute, Royal Melbourne Hospital
    University of Melbourne
    Deakin University)

  • Brendan Mulhern

    (University of Technology Sydney)

  • Rosalie Viney

    (University of Technology Sydney)

  • Tessa Peasgood

    (University of Melbourne
    University of Sheffield)

  • Lidia Engel

    (National Ageing Research Institute, Royal Melbourne Hospital
    Monash University)

Abstract

Background and objectives There is interest in routinely measuring quality of life (QoL) in aged care homes, evidenced by the Australian Government’s implementation of QoL as a mandatory quality indicator. This study explores views of aged care staff, residents, and family members on the benefits, challenges, and feasibility of implementing routine QoL measures. Methods Qualitative data were gathered to explore staff, resident, and family perspectives on QoL measurement in aged care homes, including purpose, benefits, implementation, and best practice. Two staff workshops were conducted at different aged care homes, and semi-structured interviews were held with 29 proxies (9 family members and 20 staff) and 24 residents. Workshops and interviews were transcribed verbatim, and thematically analysed via a qualitative interpretive approach using NVivo software. Results Analysis yielded four key themes: (1) benefits of routine QoL measurement; (2) challenges in implementation; (3) best practice for collecting surveys; (4) validity concerns. Identified benefits included potentially improved care, monitoring service performance, and informing family members. Staff participants recommended integrating measures into existing care planning and having oversight from a registered nurse. Participants identified potential implementation challenges, including administrative burden, time and resourcing constraints, conflicts of interest, and resistance from staff, providers, and residents. Conclusions This study identifies potential benefits to implementing routine QoL measurement in residential aged care homes. To maximise these benefits, it is important to consider how measurement can be integrated in ways that contribute to existing care planning and practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Simon Gilbert & Frances Batchelor & Nancy Devlin & Briony Dow & Brendan Mulhern & Rosalie Viney & Tessa Peasgood & Lidia Engel, 2025. "Routine Quality-of-Life Measurement in Residential Aged Care: Staff, Resident, and Family Perspectives," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 18(3), pages 211-223, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:18:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s40271-025-00729-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s40271-025-00729-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-025-00729-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40271-025-00729-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:spr:patien:v:18:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s40271-025-00729-7. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.