Search results

This study aims to explore which outcome measures are used by occupational therapy staff in adult social care settings in the UK, and the factors affecting use of outcome measures.

A quantitative descriptive research design was used, using a cross-sectional study to explore occupational therapy staff views on the use of outcome measures. A 38-question survey was developed on Microsoft Forms. Recruitment occurred online over a three-week period in 2021 via the social media platform “Twitter”. Results were analysed using Excel using descriptive statistics and qualitative results used thematic analysis.

Participants (n = 20) used a range of outcome measures (13) in adult social care settings in the previous 12 months. Standardised measures were used by half the sample in the previous 12 months. The Therapy Outcome Measure and Barthel Index were in most use. The breadth of adult social care practice and practical factors such as caseload and lack of a meaningful tool were found to be barriers to outcome measure use. Facilitators included service improvement, accountability, use of audit and professional occupational therapy leadership.

The overall use of outcome measures can be considered low in this setting, with manager support seen to be key to the use of outcome measures. Further research is needed to investigate nationwide use.

Training, time and manager support are key to use of standardised tests and outcome measures in the adult social care settings. The use of occupational performance measures should be considered to demonstrate unique professional impact.

This contemporary study reveals use of outcome measures within occupational therapy adult social care services in the UK, which is an under researched and under published area.

This paper aims to explore the content of Safeguarding Adult Reviews (SARs) from older adult care homes to understand how safety is understood and might be measured in practice.

SARs relevant to older adult care homes from 2015 onwards were identified via the Social Care Institute of Excellence SARs library. Using thematic analysis, initial inductive coding was mapped to a health-derived safety framework, the Safety Measurement and Monitoring Framework (SMMF).

The content of the SARs reflected the dimensions of the SMMF but gaining a deeper understanding of safety in older adult care homes requires additional understanding of how this unique context interacts with these dimensions to create and prevent risks and harms. This review identified the importance of external factors in care home safety.

This study provides an insight into the scope of safety issues within care homes using the SARs content, and in doing so improves understanding of how it might be measured. The measurement of safety in care homes needs to acknowledge that there are factors external to care homes that a home may have little knowledge of and no ability to control.

The purpose of this paper is to present findings from a mixed-methods study on the impact that COVID-19 has had on adult safeguarding. The research sought to explore the challenges and opportunities presented by COVID-19 to both frontline and non-frontline professionals working in adult safeguarding.

A mixed-methods project was undertaken comprising a literature review, survey, semi-structured interviews and a small number of freedom of information requests. This paper presents the findings predominantly from the survey and interviews.

Unsurprisingly, COVID-19 has presented a variety of challenges for professionals working in adult safeguarding. The themes that occurred most often were the day-to-day changes and challenges, relationships across sectors, information and navigating the ethical questions in safeguarding.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the findings represent the first focused qualitative mixed-method study aimed at understanding more about the impact the pandemic has had on adult safeguarding through the eyes of those professionals working in that field.

A narrative has developed in recent years to link ageing without children to support needs in later life. Social care has long been viewed as a private, familial responsibility, whilst health care is a societal, public good. Childlessness is framed negatively in terms of increased demands on care services and wider family networks. As governments tackle the issue of how to fund and deliver an equitable and sustainable long-term care sector, this paper aims to argue that it is more critical than ever to evaluate views of childlessness in the context of ageing.

Policy-oriented commentary paper.

If the focus on childlessness and ageing is through a lens of a potential care deficit, this continues to frame ageing without children as a risk and does little to challenge increasing reliance on unpaid care. Research and policy need to explore how to make access to social care more equitable and reduce expectations of unpaid care. They also need to increasingly emphasise exploration of aspects of later life beyond the issue of care, for example, by more of a focus on communities, what matters to people to age well and lives that extend beyond traditional views of nuclear families.

This paper uses the UK as a contextual example to argue that the research and policy communities have a role to play in evaluating their constructions of childlessness and ageing and questioning whether they do little more than legitimise government’s unwillingness to take responsibility for social care.

Integrated health and social care initiatives are increasing and health and social care systems are aiming to improve health and social outcomes in disadvantaged groups. There is a global dialogue surrounding improving services by shifting to an integrated health and social care approach. There is consensus of what is “health care”; however, the “social care” definition remains less explored. The authors describe the state of “social care” within the current integrated care literature and identify the depth of integration in current health and social care initiatives.

A narrative literature review, searching Medline, PsychINFO, CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases and grey literature (from 2016 to 2021), employing a search strategy, was conducted.

In total. 276 studies were eligible for full-text review, and 33 studies were included and categorised in types: “social care as community outreach dialogues”, “social care as addressing an ageing population”, “social care as targeting multimorbidity and corresponding social risks factors” and “social care as initiatives addressing the fragmentation of services”. Most initiatives were implemented in the United Kingdom. In total, 21 studies reported expanding integrated governance and partnerships; 27 studies reported having health and social care staff with clear integrated governance; 17 had dedicated funding and 11 used data-sharing and the integration of systems’ records.

The authors' demonstrate that social care approaches are expanding beyond the elderly, and these models have been used to respond to multimorbidity [including coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)], targeting priority groups and individuals with complex presentations.

Background: Rising food bank usage in the UK suggests a growing prevalence of food insecurity. However, a formalised, representative measure of food insecurity was not collected in the UK until 2019, over a decade after the initial proliferation of food bank demand. In the absence of a direct measure of food insecurity, this article identifies and summarises longitudinal proxy indicators of UK food insecurity to gain insight into the growth of insecure access to food in the 21st century.

Methods: A rapid evidence synthesis of academic and grey literature (2005–present) identified candidate proxy longitudinal markers of food insecurity. These were assessed to gain insight into the prevalence of, or conditions associated with, food insecurity.

Results: Food bank data clearly demonstrates increased food insecurity. However, this data reflects an unrepresentative, fractional proportion of the food insecure population without accounting for mild/moderate insecurity, or those in need not accessing provision. Economic indicators demonstrate that a period of poor overall UK growth since 2005 has disproportionately impacted the poorest households, likely increasing vulnerability and incidence of food insecurity. This vulnerability has been exacerbated by welfare reform for some households. The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically intensified vulnerabilities and food insecurity. Diet-related health outcomes suggest a reduction in diet quantity/quality. The causes of diet-related disease are complex and diverse; however, evidence of socio-economic inequalities in their incidence suggests poverty, and by extension, food insecurity, as key determinants.

Conclusion: Proxy measures of food insecurity suggest a significant increase since 2005, particularly for severe food insecurity. Proxy measures are inadequate to robustly assess the prevalence of food insecurity in the UK. Failure to collect standardised, representative data at the point at which food bank usage increased significantly impairs attempts to determine the full prevalence of food insecurity, understand the causes, and identify those most at risk.

The purpose of this paper is to report on the views and experiences of older people using Shared Lives (adult placement) in 2012/2013.

As part of a survey collecting information about outcomes for older users of Shared Lives issues of whether it had made a difference to quality of life, and positive and negative experiences of support were explored.

Questionnaires were returned by 150 older people using Shared Lives services. Findings suggest that this model of community-based support has a number of advantages for some older people, such as reducing social isolation and loneliness, promoting independence, choice and control, providing emotional support and increased well-being.

The questionnaire was self-completed and so responses were not followed up to provide deeper insights.

Shared Lives is not appropriate for everyone but it is suggested that this option should form part of local commissioning strategies, be part of a range of options for social care practitioners to consider in their work with older people and helps to meet various current policy imperatives.

The potential of Shared Lives for older people is under-researched and this paper contributes to the literature in exploring the views of older people about family-based support in the community.

Local Safeguarding Adults Board (SAB) policies, procedures, guidance and related documents on self-neglect were gathered and analysed, to map what approaches are being taken across England. This paper aims to identify areas of divergence to highlight innovations or challenges faced by SABs.

Self-neglect documents were identified by searching SAB websites. Data were extracted into a framework enabling synthesis and comparison between documents.

This paper reports on how English SAB documentation defines self-neglect, treats executive capacity, lays out pathways for self-neglect cases, advises on refusal of service input and multi-agency coordination and draws on theories or tools. Greater coherence in understanding self-neglect has developed since it was brought within safeguarding in 2014; however, variation remains regarding scope, referral pathways and threshold criteria.

This review was limited to published SAB documentation at one point in time and could not consider either the wider context of safeguarding guidance and training or implementation in practice.

This review provides an overview of how SABs are interpreting national guidance and guiding practitioners. The trends and areas of uncertainty identified offer a resource for informed research and policy-making.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first systematic survey of SAB self-neglect policies, procedures and guidance since self-neglect was included under safeguarding.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the marketization of domiciliary care, its consequences for employment practice, specifically fragmented time, and the implications for care quality.

Focus groups and face-to-face or telephone interviews were conducted with care commissioners, service providers and care workers across Wales. There were 113 participants in total.

These demonstrate fragmented time’s negative consequences for service providers, care workers and, ultimately, care quality.

No care recipients were interviewed and care quality was explored through the perceptions of other stakeholders.

For policy makers, tensions are evidenced between aspirations for high-quality care and commissioning practice that mitigates against it. Current care commissioning practices need urgent review.

The research extends the definition of fragmented time and integrates with a model of care quality to demonstrate its negative consequences. Links between employment practice and care quality have only previously been hinted at.

This article explores to what extent the long debate in England over the funding of long-term care (LTC) has involved learning from abroad.

It draws on Mossberger and Wolman’s (2003) framework which proposes criteria for assessing policy transfer as a form of prospective policy evaluation: awareness; assessment and application. The documents examined are the sources cited by the reports that examined funding LTC in England since 1999. The study uses interpretive content analysis in a deductive approach (applying the framework) that focuses on both manifest and latent content.

It finds that both the reports and the cited studies tend to focus on a fairly narrow range of nations, with most attention on Germany, Japan and Scotland. Most studies broadly do not provide much in the way of a clear rationale, and the level of details provided varies. There is relatively little focus on problems. Aims, objectives and goals are little mentioned in some studies, but they tend to be fairly abstract or “high level.” Similarly, there is limited detail on settings. Finally, only a few studies provide a clear recommendation.

It focuses on the neglected topic of the evidence behind reports which are intended to provide recommendations for policy change. The Mossberger and Wolman’s (2003) framework has been used in a small-scale but appears to be well-suited for this purpose.