Search

Background Frailty is an important marker of adverse outcomes for older people accessing the Emergency Department (ED). Older patients with frailty have a higher attendance rate to the ED, spend longer in the ED and have a higher rate of admission (HSE, 2017). Frailty Intervention Therapy Teams (FITT) are designed to screen and assess this population in the ED setting, with the aim of early assessment to help decrease length of stay or avoid admission. Two different FIT Teams have recently been formed within the Cork-Kerry region. The aim of this study was to evaluate staff's experience of these teams. Methods This was a mixed methods study. Structured surveys were developed to collect qualitative and quantitative data. The surveys were constructed using themes listed by Proctor et al. (2011) around implementation and service outcomes. Ward and ED staff were provided with paper surveys within the hospital setting and community staff were surveyed via post. Quantitative survey data was analysed using descriptive statistics and qualitative data was analysed with thematic content analysis. Results Data from 117 surveys was included for analysis (response rate 49%). Results showed that the majority of staff (89%) reported ED was a suitable setting for the FITT, with 85% reporting the information collected by the FITT impacted their involvement. Other themes emerging from staff's experience included timeliness, safety and comprehensive assessment. Conclusion Overall, staff reported the FITT provided a timely service that assisted with decision making and planning. This involved earlier comprehensive assessment, prompt identification of issues which lead to decreased workload for ward staff. It also created an increased volume of referrals to community and ward staff received in a timelier manner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The continuing evolution of adult safeguarding legislation, policy and practice in relation to the abuse of vulnerable adults reflects a growing awareness of the nature and extent of such abuse in Ireland. The Adult Safeguarding Bill, 2017 represents a progressive step in safeguarding older people and vulnerable adults. The intention of the Bill is to put in place additional protections for adults, in particular, for those who may be unable to protect themselves, such as older people or those lacking capacity. Part 3 provides for mandatory reporting by specified/named persons/professionals. This paper sets out to critically analyse the concept of mandatory reporting within adult safeguarding using international comparators as case studies. Methods A rapid realist review of adult safeguarding reporting typologies and systems in five key jurisdictions: Australia, Canada, England, Northern Ireland and Scotland, were explored to answer the question: ' what works, for whom and in what circumstances ?' [1] Results Jurisdictions differ as to who the mandated reporters are, the scope and powers of mandatory reporting, and the types of abuse subject to reporting. Of significance is that the debate on mandatory reporting has increasingly focused on institutional settings, rather than more broadly across services. Key concepts identified are those of protection, empowerment and proportionality. Adult safeguarding legislation must therefore ensure that interventionist and compulsory measures to protect do not excessively restrict the rights of the individual. Conclusion Mandatory reporting may offer professionals increased powers to prevent and reduce the abuse of adults and older people, but this could also change the dynamic of relationships within families, and between families and professionals. Ultimately, the success of any legal approach will rest with professional judgment in balancing autonomy with protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Home-care robots have been developed as one of the assistive technologies, and benefits and challenges of their use have been debated in many countries. Research teams in Japan, Finland and Ireland carried out a questionnaire to explore perceptions of potential users (older people, family caregivers, and health and social care professionals (HSCPs)) towards the use of home-care robots. As part of a larger tri-country comparative study, this paper reports preliminary findings from the data collected from the online survey of HSCPs in Ireland. Methods Questionnaire was developed iteratively among the research teams in three countries. Questions related to the use of advocates in deciding whether to use home-care robots, desirable functions in such robots, and perceptions of privacy protection. Based on networks of professional and advocacy groups, HSCPs were contacted and 123 respondents took part in the questionnaire, and 46 fully completed the questionnaire. Results Out of 46 respondents (44 female, 1 male and 1 did not wish to specify), 80% answered that they are open to the use of home-care robots. Safety monitoring and alert functions were considered to be most desirable in home-care robots. 76% of the respondents placed importance on the guarantee of entitlement to receiving human care, irrespective of the use of home-care robots. 30% answered that they have a negative impression of robots, to some extent. The overall majority (N=39, 85%) felt strongly that a decision as to whether to use home-care robots should be made by the user, and that the access to data collected in any form by robots requires extra care. Conclusion While there was generally a positive perception of the use of home-care robots among Irish HSCPs, cautious attitudes were evident in the areas of decision-making and privacy. This study was funded by the Pfizer Health Research Foundation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]