Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Evaluating the quality of care received in long-term care facilities from a consumer perspective: development and construct validity of the Consumer Choice Index – Six Dimension instrument

  • RACHEL MILTE (a1) (a2) (a3), JULIE RATCLIFFE (a3) (a4), CLARE BRADLEY (a1) (a2), WENDY SHULVER (a1) (a2) and MARIA CROTTY (a1) (a2)...

Abstract

The Consumer Choice Index – Six Dimension (CCI-6D) is a new instrument designed specifically to evaluate the quality of care received in long-term care from a consumer perspective. This study aims to demonstrate the construct validity of the CCI-6D. Older residents living in long-term care facilities and proxy family carers (where severely impaired cognition precluded resident consent) participated as consumers of long-term care. Data collected included the CCI-6D instrument, quality of life, physical function and characteristics of the care facility. Relationships between these variables and the CCI-6D dimensions were assessed and analysed through chi-squared and Kruskal–Wallis tests to assess the construct validity of each dimension. Of 430 eligible consumers, a total of 253 completed the questionnaire, of whom 68 (27%) were residents and 185 (73%) were informal carer proxy participants. There was strong evidence of construct validity of the dimensions relating to adequacy of individual care time, access to outside and gardens, access to meaningful activities and flexibility of care. There was more moderate evidence of validity of the home-like own room and shared spaces items, which may be in part due to difficulty in identifying strong discriminatory variables for comparison with these items. The results also indicate a strong association between ‘processes’ of care delivery (as measured by the CCI-6D) and quality of life of care recipients.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Evaluating the quality of care received in long-term care facilities from a consumer perspective: development and construct validity of the Consumer Choice Index – Six Dimension instrument
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Evaluating the quality of care received in long-term care facilities from a consumer perspective: development and construct validity of the Consumer Choice Index – Six Dimension instrument
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Evaluating the quality of care received in long-term care facilities from a consumer perspective: development and construct validity of the Consumer Choice Index – Six Dimension instrument
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Corresponding author

Address for correspondence: Rachel Milte, School of Commerce, University of South Australia, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia E-mail: Rachel.milte@unisa.edu.au

References

Hide All
Addington-Hall, J. and Kalra, L. 2001. Who should measure quality of life? British Medical Journal, 322, 7299, 1417–20.
Alakeson, V. 2010. International development in self-directed care. Issue brief, Commonwealth Fund, New York.
Alzheimer Europe 2011. The Ethics of Dementia Research. Alzheimer Europe Report. Alzheimer Europe, Luxembourg.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2016. Dementia. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Canberra.
Bergland, A. and Kirkevold, M. 2006. Thriving in nursing homes in Norway: contributing aspects described by residents. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 43, 6, 681–91.
Bjork, S., Juthberg, C., Lindkvist, M., Wimo, A., Sandman, P. O., Winblad, B. and Edvardsson, D. 2016. Exploring the prevalence and variance of cognitive impairment, pain, neuropsychiatric symptoms and ADL dependency among persons living in nursing homes; a cross-sectional study. BMC Geriatrics, 16, 154.
Bowling, A. 2005. Techniques of questionnaire design. In Bowling, A. and Ebrahim, S. (eds), Handbook of Health Research Methods: Investigation, Measurement and Analysis. Open University Press, Milton Keynes, UK.
Boyle, G. 2004. Facilitating choice and control for older people in long-term care. Health and Social Care in the Community, 12, 3, 212–20.
Brazier, J., Deverill, M. and Green, C. 1999. A review of the use of health status measures in economic evaluation. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 4, 3, 174–84.
Brazier, J., Ratcliffe, J., Salomon, J. A. and Tsuchiya, A. 2017. Measuring and Valuing Health Benefits for Economic Evaluation. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Brownie, S. and Nancarrow, S. 2013. Effects of person-centered care on residents and staff in aged-care facilities: a systematic review. Clinical Interventions in Aging, 8, 110.
Castle, N. G. and Ferguson, J. C. 2010. What is nursing home quality and how is it measured? The Gerontologist, 50, 4, 426–42.
Chappell, N. L., Reid, C. R. and Gish, J. A. 2007. Staff-based measures of individualized care for persons with dementia in long-term care facilities. Dementia, 6, 4, 527–47.
Coast, J. 2004. Is economic evaluation in touch with society's health values? British Medical Journal, 329, 7476, 1233–6.
Coast, J., Peters, T. J., Natarajan, L., Sproston, K. and Flynn, T. 2008. An assessment of the construct validity of the descriptive system for the ICECAP capability measure for older people. Quality of Life Research, 17, 7, 967–76.
Collopy, B. J. 1988. Autonomy in long term care: some crucial distinctions. The Gerontologist, 28, supplement, 1017.
Coucill, W., Bryan, S., Bentham, P., Buckley, A. and Laight, A. 2001. EQ-5D in patients with dementia – an investigation of inter-rater agreement. Medical Care, 39, 8, 760–71.
Custers, A. F. J., Westerhof, G. J., Kuin, Y., Gerritsen, D. L. and Riksen-Walraven, J. M. 2012. Relatedness, autonomy, and competence in the caring relationship: the perspective of nursing home residents. Journal of Aging Studies, 26, 3, 319–26.
Department of Health 2017. Aged Care Funding Instrument (ACFI) User Guide. Australian Government, Canberra.
Devlin, N., Shah, K. K., Feng, Y., Mulhern, B. and Van Hout, B. 2016. Valuing health-related quality of life: an EQ-5D-5L value set for England. HEDS Discussion Paper 16.02, Health Economics and Decision Science, School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Donabedian, A. 1985. Twenty years of research on the quality of medical care: 1964–1984. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 8, 3, 243–65.
Drummond, M. F., Sculpher, M. J., Torrance, G. W., O'Brien, B. J. and Stoddart, G. L. 2005. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Forder, J. E. and Caiels, J. 2011. Measuring the outcomes of long-term care. Social Science and Medicine, 73, 12, 1766–74.
Glendinning, C., Challis, D., Fernández, J.-L., Jacobs, S., Jones, K., Knapp, M., Manthorpe, J., Moran, N., Netten, A., Stevens, M. and Wilberforce, M. 2008. Evaluation of the individual budgets pilot program: final report. University of York, York, UK.
Havig, A. K., Skogstad, A., Kjekshus, L. E. and Romoren, T. I. 2011. Leadership, staffing and quality of care in nursing homes. BMC Health Services Research, 11, 327, 113.
Helvik, A. S., Engedal, K., Benth, J. S. and Selbæk, G. 2015. Prevalence and severity of dementia in nursing home residents. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 40, 3/4, 166–77.
Hounsome, N., Orrell, M. and Edwards, R. T. 2011. EQ-5D as a quality of life measure in people with dementia and their carers: evidence and key issues. Value in Health, 14, 2, 390–9.
Jorm, A. F., Mackinnon, A. J., Henderson, A. S., Scott, R., Christensen, H., Korten, A. E., Cullen, J. S. and Mulligan, R. 1995. The Psychogeriatric Assessment Scales: a multi-dimensional alternative to the categorical diagnoses of dementia and depression in the elderly. Psychological Medicine, 25, 3, 447–60.
Kane, R. 2001. Long-term care and a good quality of life: bringing them closer together. The Gerontologist, 41, 3, 293304.
Kane, R. A., Caplan, A. L., Urv-Wong, E. K., Freeman, I. C., Aroskar, M. A. and Finch, M. 1997. Everyday matters in the lives of nursing home residents: wish for and perception of choice and control. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 45, 9, 1086–93.
Kane, R. A., Lum, T. Y., Cutler, L. J., Degenholtz, H. B. and Yu, T. C. 2007. Resident outcomes in small-house nursing homes: a longitudinal evaluation of the initial green house program. Journal of the American Geriatric Society, 55, 6, 832–9.
Killett, A., Burns, D., Kelly, F., Brooker, D., Bowes, A., La Fontaine, J., Latham, I., Wilson, M. and O'Neill, M. 2016. Digging deep: how organisational culture affects care home residents’ experiences. Ageing & Society, 36, 1, 160–88.
Kitwood, T. and Bredin, K. 1992. Towards a theory of dementia care: personhood and well-being. Ageing & Society, 12, 3, 269–87.
Löfgren, A. C., Bucht, G., Eriksson, S. and Lundström, R. 1993. Physical health and cognitive ability among married long-term-care patients and among their spouses – a comparison between home care and nursing home care. International Psychogeriatrics, 5, 2, 157–68.
Malley, J. N., Towers, A. M., Netten, A. P., Brazier, J. E., Forder, J. E. and Flynn, T. 2012. An assessment of the construct validity of the ASCOT measure of social care-related quality of life with older people. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 10, 21, 114.
McHugh, M. L. 2013. The Chi-square test of independence. Biochemia Medica, 23, 2, 143–9.
Millan-Calenti, J. C., Tubio, J., Pita-Fernandez, S., Gonzalez-Abraldes, I., Lorenzo, T. and Maseda, A. 2009. Prevalence of cognitive impairment: effects of level of education, age, sex and associated factors. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 28, 5, 455460.
Milte, R., Shulver, W., Killington, M., Bradley, C., Ratcliffe, J. and Crotty, M. 2016. Quality in residential care from the perspective of people living with dementia: the importance of personhood. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 63, March-April, 917.
Mulhern, B., Rowen, D., Brazier, J., Smith, S., Romeo, R., Tait, R., Watchurst, C., Chua, K.-C., Loftus, V., Young, T., Lamping, D., Knapp, M., Howard, R. and Banerjee, S. 2013. Development of DEMQOL-U and DEMQOL-PROXY-U: generation of preference-based indices from DEMQOL and DEMQOL-PROXY for use in economic evaluation. Health Technology Assessment, 17, 5, 1160.
Murphy, J., Tester, S., Hubbard, G., Downs, M. and MacDonald, C. 2005. Enabling frail older people with a communication difficulty to express their views: the use of Talking Mats as an interview tool. Health & Social Care in the Community, 13, 2, 95107.
Nakrem, S., Vinsnes, A. G., Harkless, G. E., Paulsen, B. and Seim, A. 2009. Nursing sensitive quality indicators for nursing home care: international review of literature, policy and practice. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46, 6, 848–57.
Netten, A., Beadle-Brown, J., Trukeschitz, B., Towers, A.-M., Welch, E., Forder, J., Smith, J. and Alden, E. 2010. Measuring the outcomes of care homes: final report. PSSRU Discussion Paper 2696/2, Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.
Netten, A., Burge, P., Malley, J., Potoglou, D., Brazier, J., Flynn, T. and Forder, J. 2009. Outcomes of Social Care for Adults (OSCA). PSSRU Discussion Paper 2648/2, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) 2005. Long-term Care for Older People. OECD Publishing, Paris.
Palm, R., Kohler, K., Schwab, C. G., Bartholomeyczik, S. and Holle, B. 2013. Longitudinal evaluation of dementia care in German nursing homes: the ‘DemenzMonitor’ study protocol. BMC Geriatrics, 13, 123, 112.
Rahman, A. N. and Applebaum, R. A. 2009. The nursing home minimum data set assessment instrument: manifest functions and unintended consequences – past, present, and future. Gerontologist, 49, 6, 727–35.
Ribbe, M. W., Ljunggren, G., Steel, K., Topinkova, E., Hawes, C., Ikegami, N., Henrard, J.-C. and Jónnson, P. V. 1997. Nursing homes in 10 nations: a comparison between countries and settings. Age and Ageing, 26, supplement 2, 312.
Sansoni, J., Marosszeky, N., Jeon, Y.-H., Chenoweth, L., Hawthorne, G., King, M., Budge, M., Zapart, S., Sansoni, E., Senior, K., Kenny, P. and Low, L.-F. 2007. Final report: dementia outcomes measurement suite project. Centre for Health Service Development, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.
Schenk, L., Meyer, R., Behr, A., Kuhlmey, A. and Holzhausen, M. 2013. Quality of life in nursing homes: results of a qualitative resident survey. Quality of Life Research, 22, 10, 2929–38.
Shah, S., Vanclay, F. and Cooper, B. 1989. Improving the sensitivity of the Barthel Index for stroke rehabilitation. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 42, 8, 703–9.
Smith, S., Lamping, D., Banerjee, S., Harwood, R. and Foley, B. 2005. Measurement of health-related quality of life for people with dementia: development of a new instrument (DEMQOL) and an evaluation of current methodology. Health Technology Assessment, 9, 10, 1112.
Smith, S., Lamping, D. L., Banerjee, S., Harwood, R. H., Foley, B., Smith, P., Cook, J. C., Murray, J., Prince, M., Levin, E., Mann, A. and Knapp, M. 2007. Development of a new measure of health-related quality of life for people with dementia: DEMQOL. Psychological Medicine, 37, 5, 737–46.
Stevens, K. and Palfreyman, S. 2012. The use of qualitative methods in developing the descriptive systems of preference-based measures of health-related quality of life for use in economic evaluation. Value in Health, 15, 8, 991–8.
Towers, A. M., Smith, N., Palmer, S., Welch, E. and Netten, A. 2016. The acceptability and feasibility of using the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) to inform practice in care homes. BMC Health Services Research, 16, 523, 114.
Turnpenny, A., Caiels, J., Crowther, T., Richardson, L., Whelton, R., Beadle-Brown, J., Apps, J. and Rand, S. 2015. Developing an Easy Read version of the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT). QORU Working Paper, Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.
van Leeuwen, K. M., Jansen, A. P., Muntinga, M. E., Bosmans, J. E., Westerman, M. J., van Tulder, M. W. and van der Horst, H. E. 2015. Exploration of the content validity and feasibility of the EQ-5D-3L, ICECAP-O and ASCOT in older adults. BMC Health Services Research, 15, 201, 110.
van Lummel, R. C., Walgaard, S., Pijnappels, M., Elders, P. J., Garcia-Aymerich, J., van Dieen, J. H. and Beek, P. J. 2015. Physical performance and physical activity in older adults: associated but separate domains of physical function in old age. PLoS One, 10, 12, e0144048.
World Health Organization 2012. Dementia: A Public Health Priority. Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse, World Health Organization, Geneva.

Keywords

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed