Search

Abstract Background Persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) living in the community often require care. The boundaries between professional home care and informal care are blurred, and it is unclear who the typical user of home care is. The objective of this study was to describe the characteristics of persons with SCI using professional home care in Switzerland, determine the frequency of home care visits, and investigate the association of sociodemographic factors, SCI-specific characteristics, secondary health conditions, and functional independence with the use of home care. Methods We used cross-sectional data from the 2017 community survey of the Swiss Spinal Cord Injury Cohort Study (SwiSCI). Out of 3,959 eligible individuals 1294 completed the questionnaire and were included in the analysis (response rate 33%). Using descriptive statistics, differences between home care users and non-users as well as the frequency of home care visits were investigated. The association between sociodemographic factors, SCI-specific characteristics, secondary health conditions, functional independence and the use of home care was analyzed using multivariable logistic regression. Multiple imputation was used to account for missing data. Results Of 1,294 participants, 280 (22%) used professional home care. The median weekly professional home care duration was 6 h (Q1 = 2, Q3 = 12). More home care was used in persons with lower functional independence (Odds ratio (OR) 0.30 per 10 unit decrease in the Spinal Cord Independence Measure, 95%-Confidence interval (CI) 0.24–0.37), fewer secondary health conditions (OR 0.96 per unit Spinal Cord Injury Secondary Conditions Scale, 95%-CI 0.94–0.99), tetraplegia (OR 2.77, 95%-CI 1.92–4.00), women (OR 2.42, 95%-CI 1.70–3.43), higher age (OR 1.22 per 10 years increase, 95%-CI 1.06–1.39), living alone (OR 2.48, 95%-CI 1.53–4.03), and those receiving support from an informal caregiver (OR 1.88, 95%-CI 1.27–2.77). Conclusions This is the first study to examine the use of professional home care from the perspective of persons with SCI in Switzerland. Lower functional independence strongly predicts increased home care use. The findings showed that professional home care complements informal care and is more likely to be used by individuals with SCI who live alone, have tetraplegia, and are female.

Persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) rely significantly on the use of assistive devices (ADs) to increase independence and enhance participation. This study aimed to determine the most important ADs for persons with SCI living in Switzerland and to identify design features of potentially novel ADs greatly facilitating persons with SCI in performing the tasks of daily life. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze cross-sectional data (N = 1294 participants) from the Swiss Spinal Cord Injury Cohort Study 2017. Open-ended questions regarding the importance of ADs and desirable novel ADs were manually coded and assigned to categories. The results showed that the most important ADs for persons with SCI were a manual wheelchair (61%), an adapted car (46%), and a wheelchair tractor (20%). The importance of ADs varied with gender, age, and SCI severity. While none of the participants indicated a desire for a completely novel AD, over one-fifth described specific design features of novel ADs or adaptions of existing ADs, which were most often related to facilitating transfer (12%), walking support (10%), and facilitating access (9%). These findings have implications for the design and development of ADs to better meet the needs of persons with SCI, improve their quality of life, and promote their independence and participation in daily activities.

AIMS OF THE STUDY: In Switzerland, COVID-19 vaccines have been approved for children aged 5–11 years only recently, whereas vaccination of adolescents aged 12 years and older was approved in early summer 2021. Although the disease burden in children and adolescents has been reasonably mild, they can transmit COVID-19 to others, thus vaccinating this age group may help to curb the COVID-19 pandemic. The main objective was to investigate the association between five psychological antecedents of vaccination hesitancy in COVID-19 immunised parents and their intention to have their child vaccinated against COVID-19. Further, we examined if parental vaccination history and conviction of the benefits of Swiss paediatric vaccination recommendations are associated with child vaccination intention, and where parents would like the vaccination performed. METHODS: A cross-sectional anonymous online survey in the COVID-19 vaccination centre Winterthur was conducted between 16 May and 30 September 2021. Individuals receiving COVID-19 vaccines in the vaccination centre were invited to participate. All individuals who participated in the survey after their first dose with children under 16 years were included in the analysis (n = 1318). Using multivariable logistic regression, the association between our main predictor variables, psychological antecedents (confidence, constraints, complacency, calculation, collective responsibility) measured by the validated 5C scale, and parents’ intention to have their child vaccinated against COVID-19 was analysed, adjusted for parental vaccination history, conviction of benefits of vaccination recommendations for children and adults, children’s age group, sociodemographic factors, and time-point of vaccine authorisation for 12–16-year-olds. RESULTS: 58.7% of the parents intended to vaccinate their child against COVID-19. Their preferred vaccination location for their child was the paediatrician or family doctor. Three psychological antecedents were associated with vaccination intention: confidence (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00–1.76; borderline significant), calculation (AOR 0.68, 95% CI 0.58–0.81), and collective responsibility (AOR 1.93, 95% CI 1.47–2.52). Influenza vaccination (AOR 1.53, 95% CI 1.15–2.03) and conviction of the benefits of the Swiss vaccination recommendations for children and adolescents were independently associated with parental vaccination intention. CONCLUSIONS: Campaigns on COVID-19 vaccination for children may increase the intention of parents to have a child vaccinated when they address collective responsibility and calculation (weighing risks and benefits), independent of the conviction of the benefits of the vaccination recommendations, which was also a significant factor. The findings further show that parents of younger children favour their paediatrician or family doctor over vaccination centres as the vaccination setting for their child, an important finding for paediatric COVID-19 vaccination strategies.

Abstract Background One way of measuring the quality of home care are quality indicators (QIs) derived from data collected with the Resident Assessment Instrument-Home Care (RAI-HC). In order to produce meaningful results for quality improvement and quality comparisons across home care organizations (HCOs) and over time, RAI-HC QIs must be valid and reliable. The aim of this systematic review was to identify currently existing RAI-HC QIs and to summarize the scientific knowledge on the validity and reliability of these QIs. Methods A systematic review was performed using the electronic databases PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO and Cochrane Library. Studies describing the development process or the psychometric characteristics of RAI-HC QIs were eligible. The data extraction involved a general description of the included studies as well as the identified RAI-HC QIs and information on validity and reliability. The methodological quality of the identified RAI-HC QI sets was assessed using the Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation (AIRE) instrument. Results Four studies out of 659 initial hits met the inclusion criteria. The included studies described the development and validation process of three RAI-HC QI sets comprising 48 unique RAI-HC QIs, which predominantly refer to outcome of care. Overall, the validity and reliability of the identified RAI-HC QIs were not sufficiently tested. The methodological quality of the three identified RAI-HC QI sets varied across the four AIRE instrument domains. None of the QI sets reached high methodological quality, defined as scores of 50% and higher in all four AIRE instrument domains. Conclusions This is the first review that systematically summarized and appraised the available scientific evidence on the validity and reliability of RAI-HC QIs. It identified insufficient reporting of RAI-HC QIs validation processes and reliability as well as missing state-of-the-art methodologies. The review provides guidance as to what additional validity and reliability testing are needed to strengthen the scientific soundness of RAI-HC QIs. Considering that RAI-HC QIs are already implemented and used to measure and compare quality of home care, further investigations on RAI-HC QIs reliability and validity is recommended.

BackgroundDespite an increasing importance of home care, quality assurance in this healthcare sector in Switzerland is hardly established. In 2010, Swiss home care quality indicators (QIs) based on the Resident Assessment Instrument-Home Care (RAI-HC) were developed. However, these QIs have not been revised since, although internationally new RAI-HC QIs have emerged. The objective of this study was to assess the appropriateness of RAI-HC QIs to measure quality of home care in Switzerland from a public health and healthcare providers' perspective.MethodsFirst, the appropriateness of RAI-HC QIs, identified in a recent systematic review, was assessed by a multidisciplinary expert panel based on the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method taking into account indicators' public health relevance, potential of influence, and comprehensibility. Second, the QIs selected by the experts were afterwards rated regarding their relevance, potential of influence, and practicability from a healthcare providers' perspective in focus groups with home care nurses based on the Nominal-Group-Technique. Data were analyzed using median scores and the Disagreement Index.Results18 of 43 RAI-HC QIs were rated appropriate by the experts from a public health perspective. The 18 QIs cover clinical, psychosocial, functional and service use aspects. Seven of the 18 QIs were subsequently rated appropriate by home care nurses from a healthcare providers' perspective. The focus of these QIs is narrow, because three of seven QIs are pain-related. From both perspectives, the majority of RAI-HC QIs were rated inappropriate because of insufficient potential of influence, with healthcare providers rating them more critically.ConclusionsThe study shows that the appropriateness of RAI-HC QIs differs according to the stakeholder perspective and the intended use of QIs. The findings of this study can guide policy-makers and home care organizations on selecting QIs and to critically reflect on their appropriate use.