IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v20y2011i9-10p1423-1435.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Care recipients’ and family members’ perceptions of quality of older people care: a comparison of home‐based care and nursing homes

Author

Listed:
  • Henna Hasson
  • Judith E Arnetz

Abstract

Aims. To compare care recipients’ and their relatives’ perceptions of quality of care in nursing homes and home‐based care. Background. Older people care is increasingly being provided in community care facilities and private homes instead of hospitals. A few studies have compared care recipients’ and relatives’ perceptions of care quality in nursing homes as opposed to home‐based care. Design. Cross‐sectional surveys. Methods. Care recipients’ and relatives’ perceptions of quality of care were measured by questionnaire in 2003 in two older people care organisations. Quality measures were compared between care settings. Multiple regression was used to determine the predictors of overall quality ratings for each group, and possible interactions between quality measures and care settings were tested. Results. Care recipients rated their opportunities for activities significantly lower in home care than in nursing homes. Relatives of care recipients in home‐based care rated several aspects of care quality significantly lower than relatives of nursing home residents. No significant interaction effects regarding predictors of overall quality ratings between the care settings were found. Staff behaviour was the strongest predictor of care recipients’ overall quality rating, and staff professional skills were the strongest predictor of relatives’ overall quality rating. Conclusions. Compared with nursing homes, home‐based older people care seems to be in greater need of development regarding staff competence, staff interaction with relatives and activities offered to older people. In both settings, nursing staff behaviour influences these stakeholders’ satisfaction with care. Relevance to clinical practice. These results point to a need to improve services in both care settings, but especially in home‐based care. It is suggested that care recipients’ preferences for social and physical activities be investigated on a regular basis in both care settings. Efforts should also be made to improve communication and interaction between family members and older people care staff, especially in home‐based care.

Suggested Citation

  • Henna Hasson & Judith E Arnetz, 2011. "Care recipients’ and family members’ perceptions of quality of older people care: a comparison of home‐based care and nursing homes," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(9‐10), pages 1423-1435, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:20:y:2011:i:9-10:p:1423-1435
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03469.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03469.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03469.x?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Zofia Stojak & Jacek Jamiolkowski & Ludmila Marcinowicz, 2019. "Evaluation of the delivery of long‐term at‐home nursing care: An example of good practice," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5-6), pages 775-780, March.

    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:wly:jocnur:v:20:y:2011:i:9-10:p:1423-1435. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    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.