GAGE, Heather, KNIBB, Wendy, EVANS, Joanne, WILLIAMS, Peter, RICKMAN, Neil and BRYAN, Karen (2009). 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. Health and Social Care in the Community, 17 (6), 599-609.Full text not available from this repository.
This paper reports an empirical study that investigated associations between the quality of care received by older people in residential settings and features of the care homes in which they live. Data were gathered from the first announced inspection reports (2002–2003) of all 258 care homes for older people in one county of England (Surrey). 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 defined by failures on national standards) was statistically associated with features of care homes and their residents. A higher probability of failing a standard was significantly 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); 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); 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.
|Research Institute, Centre or Group:||Centre for Health and Social Care Research|
|Depositing User:||Carole Harris|
|Date Deposited:||04 Feb 2013 11:25|
|Last Modified:||04 Feb 2013 11:25|
Actions (login required)
Downloads per month over past year