Search results

As part of a pilot studyassessing the feasibility of record-linking health and social care data, the purpose of this paper is to examine patterns of non-delivery of home care among older clients (>65 years) of a social home care provider in Glasgow, Scotland. The paper also assesses whether non-delivery is associated with subsequent emergency hospital admission.

After obtaining appropriate permissions, the electronic records of all home care clients were linked to a hospital inpatient database and anonymised. Data on home care plans were collated for 4,815 older non-hospitalised clients, and non-delivered visits were examined. Using case-control methodology, those who had an emergency hospital admission in the next calendar month were identified (n=586), along with age and sex-matched controls, to determine whether non-delivery was a risk factor for hospital admission.

There were 4,170 instances of “No Access” non-delivery among 1,411 people, and 960 instances of “Service Refusal” non-delivery among 427 people. The median number of undelivered visits was two among the one-third of clients who did not receive all their planned care. There were independent associations between being male and living alone, and non-delivery, while increasing age was associated with a decreased likelihood of non-delivery. Having any undelivered home care was associated with an increased risk of emergency hospital admission, but this could be due to uncontrolled confounding.

This study demonstrates untapped potential for innovative research into the quality of social care and effects on health outcomes.

Non-delivery of planned home care, for whatever reason, is associated with emergency hospital admission; this could be a useful indicator of vulnerable clients needing increased surveillance.

The authors aimed to identify the nature of customer harassment against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) workers.

The authors analyzed data from in-depth interviews with 30 LGBTQ service workers in the United States who had recently experienced customer harassment.

Among various forms of customer harassment LGBTQ workers reported, some showed commonalities with previously reported cases of race-based and gender-based customer harassment. However, other cases highlighted unique aspects of LGBTQ-based customer harassment—customers morally condemned their LGBTQ identities, refused their service while displaying emotional disgust, and made sexual advances while imposing sexual stereotypes and fantasies about LGBTQ people. Experiences of customer harassment varied across subgroups of workers who had specific sexual and gender identities, and LGBTQ workers of color were harassed for their LGBTQ and racial identities simultaneously.

Past research on group-based customer harassment has focused on incidents against straight, cisgender women and workers of workers of color, but the present study identified the nature of customer harassment that targeted workers' LGBTQ status.

The purpose of this paper is to report the findings from research into 40 serious case reviews (SCRs) involving adults who self-neglect.

The study comprised analysis of 40 SCRs where self-neglect featured. The reviews were found through detailed searching of Local Safeguarding Adult Board (LSAB) web sites and through contacts with Board managers and independent chairs. A four layer analysis is presented of the characteristics of each case and SCR, of the recommendations and of the emerging themes. Learning for service improvement is presented thematically, focusing on the adult and their immediate context, the team around the adult, the organisations around the team and the Local Safeguarding Board around the organisations.

There is no one typical presentation of self-neglect; cases vary in terms of age, household composition, lack of self-care, lack of care of one's environment and/or refusal to engage. Recommendations foreground LSABs, adult social care and unspecified agencies, and focus on staff support, procedures and the components of best practice and effective SCRs. Reports emphasise the importance of a person-centred approach, within the context of ongoing assessment of mental capacity and risk, with agencies sharing information and working closely together, supported by management and supervision, and practising within detailed procedural guidance.

There is no national database of SCRs commissioned by LSABs and currently there is no requirement to publish the outcomes of such inquiries. It may be that there are further SCRs, or other forms of inquiry, that have been commissioned by Boards but not publicised. This limits the learning that has been available for service improvement.

The paper identifies practice, management and organisational issues that should be considered when working with adults who self-neglect. These cases are often complex and stressful for those involved. The thematic analysis adds to the evidence-base of how best to approach engagement with adults who self-neglect and to engage the multi-agency network in assessing and managing risk and mental capacity.

The paper offers the first formal evaluation of SCRs that focus on adults who self-neglect. The analysis of the findings and the recommendations from the investigations into the 40 cases adds to the evidence-base for effective practice with adults who self-neglect.

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 paper examines three English research papers on self-neglect, from 1957, 1966 and 1975, discussing them in the context of more recent thinking and the statutory framework in England.

In reviewing the three research papers, developments and points of continuity in the field of self-neglect were identified and are discussed in this paper.

In light of the findings of the three articles, the present paper traces some of the classificatory refinements in this field that have taken place since the papers were published, notably in respect of hoarding and severe domestic squalor. Some of the difficulties in making judgements about behaviour thought to breach societal norms are described, and the challenges practitioners face in intervening in cases, particularly where the person concerned is refusing assistance, are examined.

By drawing on the historical research context, the paper contributes to our current understanding of the field of self-neglect.

This review of the decision‐making literature aims to challenge the rational model of decision‐making upon which the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 is premised.

The paper forms part of a larger study commissioned by the Office of the Public Guardian looking into complex cases.

The literature supported the study findings that decisions are not made in a linear way and identified the importance of history and memory, motivation and drive, mood and stability, and openness to influence when assessing the mental capacity of vulnerable people, especially in the context of self‐neglect.

This paper will inform workers in health and social care about the emotional factors that influence decision‐making and increase their ability to make nuanced assessments.

Taken together, with other publications from this project, this paper alerts practitioners to situations where vulnerable people are out of their depth; when the role of depression and anxiety may be at least as salient as their understanding of possible consequences and when the past may exert more control over their actions than their understanding of future options.

The paper's added value is that it uses ideas that are current within academic psychology to make explicit some of the factors that lead to complexity when assessing mental capacity under the MCA, especially in the context of self‐neglect.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the way that practitioners apply the 2005 Mental Capacity Act (MCA) in complex cases involving people with learning disabilities who cannot make some key decisions by themselves. Like many qualitative studies it began with a felt sense that practitioners were struggling to apply the clear framework set out in the Act to real life situations, and that some of the decisions they were faced with did not fit neatly into the linear, cognitive model of decision making set out in the MCA and its accompanying guidance.

The study was conducted under the aegis of the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) during 2010‐2011. A number of “complex” cases were obtained from Social Services, Primary Care Trusts and other organisations and subjected to thematic analysis. The current paper focuses on the 16 cases that involved people with learning disabilities.

A number of issues were identified that underlay the complexity of the cases examined. The cases drew attention, in particular, to the way in which practitioners were confronted with mounting concerns as opposed to single, discrete decisions, with the risk that decisions could be delayed until positive choices were much less available.

The aim of the study was to support the use of the Act in these situations and to give practitioners confidence in applying its principles across a wide range of diverse circumstances. Although the original study specifically related to the English legislation, the factors that led people to consider a case “complex” would apply equally in other jurisdictions. The study also shed light on difficulties that arise when intervening in less formal ways.

The purpose of this paper is to update the core data set of self-neglect safeguarding adult reviews (SARs) and accompanying thematic analysis and explore the degree to which SARs draw upon available research and learning from other completed reviews.

Further published reviews are added to the core data set, mainly drawn from the websites of Safeguarding Adults Boards (SABs). Thematic analysis is updated using the four domains used previously. The four domains and the thematic analysis are rounded in the evidence-based model of good practice, reported in this journal previously. Multiple exclusion homelessness and alcohol misuse are prominent in this sample of reviews.

Familiar findings emerge from the thematic analysis and reinforce the evidence-base of good practice with individuals who self-neglect and for policies and procedures with which to support those practitioners working with such cases. Multiple exclusion homelessness emerges as a subset within this sample, demonstrating that SABs are engaging in reviews of people who die on the streets or in temporary accommodation.

The national database of reviews commissioned by SABs remains incomplete and does not contain many of the SARs reported in this evolving data set. The Care Act 2014 does not require publication of reports but only a summary of findings and recommendations in SAB annual reports. NHS Digital annual data sets do not enable identification of reviews by types of abuse and neglect. It is possible, therefore, that this data set is also incomplete. Drawing together the findings from the reviews nonetheless builds on what is known about the components of effective practice, and effective policy and organisational arrangements for practice.

Answering the question “why” remains a significant challenge for safeguarding adult reviews. The findings confirm the relevance of the evidence-base for effective practice but SARs are limited in their analysis of what enables and what obstructs the components of best practice. Greater explicit use of research and other published SARs might assist with answering the “why” question, drawing attention where appropriate to policies being pursued by the central government that undermine any initiative to end rough sleeping.

This paper extends the thematic analysis of available reviews that focus on work with adults who self-neglect, further reinforcing the evidence-base for practice. The evidence-base also supports practice with individuals who experience multiple exclusion homelessness. Policymakers and practitioners have an approach to follow in this complex, challenging and demanding area of practice.

The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, to update the core data set of self-neglect safeguarding adult reviews (SARs) and accompanying thematic analysis; second, to draw together the learning available from this data set of reviews to propose a model of good practice that can be used as the basis for subsequent SARs.

Further published reviews are added to the core data set from the websites of Safeguarding Adults Boards (SABs). Thematic analysis is updated using the four domains employed previously. A sufficient number of reviews have been performed from which to construct an evidence-based model of good practice. A framework is presented with the proposition that this can be used as a proportional methodology for further SARs where self-neglect is in focus.

Familiar findings emerge from the thematic analysis. This level of analysis, constructed over time and across reviews, enables a framework to be developed that pulls together the findings into a model of good practice with individuals who self-neglect and for policies and procedures with which to support those practitioners involved in such cases. This framework can then be used as an evidence-based model with which to review new cases where SARs are commissioned.

The national database of reviews commissioned by SABs is incomplete and does not contain many of the SARs reported in this evolving data set. The Care Act 2014 does not require publication of reports but only a summary of findings and recommendations in SAB annual reports. It is possible, therefore, that this data set is also incomplete. Drawing together the findings from the reviews nonetheless enables conclusions to be proposed about the components of effective practice, and effective policy and organisational arrangements for practice. Future reviews can then explore what enables such effective to be achieved and what barriers obstruct the realisation of effective practice.

Answering the question “why” is a significant challenge for SARs. A framework is presented here, drawn from research on SARs featuring self-neglect, that enables those involved in reviews to explore the enablers and barriers with respect to an evidence-based model of effective practice. The framework introduces explicitly research and review evidence into the review process.

The paper extends the thematic analysis of available reviews that focus on work with adults who self-neglect, further building on the evidence base for practice. The paper also proposes a new approach to SARs by using the findings and recommendations systematically within a framework designed to answer “why” questions – what promotes and what obstructs effective practice.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse in detail the findings from 40 serious case reviews (SCRs) involving adults who self-neglect, and to consider the commissioning and reporting of such inquiries in the context of accountability that also involves the Coroner and the Local Government Ombudsman.

This study comprised a cross-case analysis of 32 SCRs, using a four-layer design of the adult and their living context, the team around the adult, the organisations around the team, and the Local Safeguarding Board around the organisations.

Available reports tend towards description of events rather than appraisal of what influenced practice. They highlight the challenges in cases of self-neglect practice, including person-centred approaches, capacity assessment and securing engagement. Familiar themes emerge when the spotlight turns to professional and organisational networks, namely information-sharing, supervision, recording and compliance with procedures and legal rules. Some Local Safeguarding Adults Boards found the process of conducting and then using serious case reviews for service improvement challenging.

The cross-case approach to thematic analysis focuses on reports into situations where outcomes of professional and organisational intervention had been disappointing. Nonetheless, the themes derived from this analysis are similar to other research findings on what represents best practice when working with cases involving self-neglect.

The paper identifies learning for the effective commissioning and conduct of SCRs, and for service improvement with respect to practice with adults who self-neglect.

The paper offers further detailed analysis of a large sample of SCRs that builds the evidence-base for effective practice with adults who self-neglect and for efficient management of process of commissioning and conducting SCRs.