Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 28
Filter
1.
Psych ; JOUR(4):843-855, 4.
Article in English | MDPI | ID: covidwho-2099729

ABSTRACT

This study explored and compared the psychological wellbeing, burnout, coping strategies and work-related quality of life amongst health and social care workers in older adults' care homes and community settings during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom (UK) and Japan. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted in the UK (May–July 2021) and a postal survey conducted in Japan (September–October 2021). Participants recruited were health and social care professionals within nursing, social care and social work occupations working in care home or community settings in the UK and Japan during the pandemic. Data were analysed using SPSS. 1327 respondents across the UK and Japan completed the survey. Respondents' psychological wellbeing was significantly lower in Japan compared to the UK (p ≤0.001). UK respondents had significantly higher personal burnout (p < 0.05) and work-related burnout (p < 0.05) while those in Japan had significantly higher client-related burnout (p < 0.001). The novelty of this study relates to exploring mental wellbeing and quality of working life in two culturally contrasting countries. The overall psychological wellbeing and work-related quality of life of staff who work with older adults in the UK and Japan during the COVID-19 pandemic were lower than the population norm. Greater support and flexible working conditions for this workforce are needed to reduce burnout by improving wellbeing and work-related quality of life.

2.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(20)2022 Oct 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2071407

ABSTRACT

Maternity services cannot be postponed due to the nature of this service, however, the pandemic resulted in wide-ranging and significant changes to working practices and services. This paper aims to describe UK midwives' experiences of working during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study forms part of a larger multiple phase research project using a cross-sectional design based on an online survey. The online survey used validated psychometric tools to measure work-related quality of life, wellbeing, coping, and burnout as well as open-ended questions to further understand the experiences of staff working during the pandemic. This paper reports the qualitative data collected from the open-ended questions. The qualitative data were subjected to thematic analysis and the four main themes that emerged were 'relentless stress/pressure', 'reconfiguration of services', 'protection of self and others', and 'workforce challenges'. The key conclusions were that midwives experienced a reduction in quality of working life and significant stress throughout the pandemic due to a range of factors including staffing shortages, restrictions placed on women's partners, changes to services and management support, all of which compounded workforce pressures that existed prior to the pandemic. This research recommends consultation of front-line midwives in relation to possible changes in practice and workforce planning in preparation for crises such as a pandemic and to ensure equitable and supportive management with access to practical and psychological support.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Midwifery , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Midwifery/methods , Cross-Sectional Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , Self Report , Pandemics , Quality of Life , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Qualitative Research
3.
PLoS One ; 17(9): e0274036, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2039404

ABSTRACT

Nurse, Midwives and Allied Health Professionals (AHPs), along with other health and social care colleagues are the backbone of healthcare services. They have played a key role in responding to the increased demands on healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper compares cross-sectional data on quality of working life, wellbeing, coping and burnout of nurses, midwives and AHPs in the United Kingdom (UK) at two time points during the COVID-19 pandemic. An anonymous online repeated cross-sectional survey was conducted at two timepoints, Phase 1 (7th May 2020-3rd July 2020); Phase 2 (17th November 2020-1st February 2021). The survey consisted of the Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale, the Work-Related Quality of Life Scale, and the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (Phase 2 only) to measure wellbeing, quality of working life and burnout. The Brief COPE scale and Strategies for Coping with Work and Family Stressors scale assessed coping strategies. Descriptive statistics and multiple linear regressions examined the effects of coping strategies and demographic and work-related variables on wellbeing and quality of working life. A total of 1839 nurses, midwives and AHPs responded to the first or second survey, with a final sample of 1410 respondents -586 from Phase 1; 824 from Phase 2, (422 nurses, 192 midwives and 796 AHPs). Wellbeing and quality of working life scores were significantly lower in the Phase 2 sample compared to respondents in Phase 1 (p<0.001). The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant effect on psychological wellbeing and quality of working life which decreased while the use of negative coping and burnout of these healthcare professionals increased. Health services are now trying to respond to the needs of patients with COVID-19 variants while rebuilding services and tackling the backlog of normal care provision. This workforce would benefit from additional support/services to prevent further deterioration in mental health and wellbeing and optimise workforce retention.


Subject(s)
Burnout, Professional , COVID-19 , Midwifery , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Adaptation, Psychological , Allied Health Personnel , Burnout, Professional/epidemiology , Burnout, Professional/psychology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Pandemics , Pregnancy , Quality of Life , SARS-CoV-2
4.
The British Journal of Social Work ; 2022.
Article in English | Web of Science | ID: covidwho-2017740

ABSTRACT

As part of the government's response to the Coronavirus pandemic, temporary changes were made to the 2014 Care Act. These changes-called 'easements'-reduced the requirement on English local authorities (LAs) to meet some of their usual duties where they were not able to do so either as a result of increased demand or where a large proportion of their workforce was absent. Only eight LAs chose to adopt easements. In the five LAs we studied the decision had been taken in the early stage of the pandemic when there was a considerable degree of uncertainty about how society would be able to respond. LAs were required to provide reasons for the decisions although it appeared that most of the five LAs studied had not faced overwhelming demand and had decided to adopt easements as a precaution. By the end of June 2020, no LA was still using easements. The five LAs in this study concluded they could manage without them, as the majority of LAs were doing. They had dealt with considerable opposition in the press and social media as well as Freedom of Information requests in the face of accusations that by using easements they were denying entitlements to care. With the benefit of hindsight, it is unlikely that they did anything very different from LAs that had not used easements. This article reports findings from a study on the effect of the adjustments or 'easements' that were made to the 2014 Care Act when measures to manage the impact of COVID-19 were introduced in England in 2020. Only eight local authorities (LAs) implemented the changes permitted. The experiences of five are explored in this article. Data were collected in 2021 through interviews with Directors of Adult Social Services and other senior managers in these LAs and analysed using a thematic approach. Participants referred to the challenges under which they were working pre-pandemic, including resource pressures and problems recruiting and retaining staff. Despite the conditions attached to adopting easements these LAs had done so because of the uncertainties they were facing. All ceased to use them within a short time because they could manage without them. They had been shocked by the concerted opposition to easements and the time necessitated in responding to this. They contrasted their experiences with the apparent ease with which NHS colleagues had been able to change their practices. The experiences of these LAs may contribute to planning for the continuity of social care in any future emergency.

5.
Journal of Social Work ; : 14680173221109483, 2022.
Article in English | Sage | ID: covidwho-1916853

ABSTRACT

SummaryStress and mental health are among the biggest causes of sickness absence in the UK, with the Social Work and Social Care sectors having among the highest levels of stress and mental health sickness absence of all professions in the UK. Chronically poor working conditions are known to impact employees' psychological and physiological health. The spread of the COVID-19 pandemic has affected both the mode and method of work in Social Care and Social Work. Through a series of cross-sectional online surveys, completed by a total of 4,950 UK Social Care and Social Workers, this study reports the changing working conditions and well-being of UK Social Care and Social Workers at two time points (phases) during the COVID-19 pandemic.FindingsAll working conditions and well-being measures were found to be significantly worse during Phase 2 (November?January 2021) than Phase 1 (May?July 2020), with worse psychological well-being than the UK average in Phase 2. Furthermore, our findings indicate that in January 2021, feelings about general well-being, control at work, and working conditions predicted worsened psychological well-being.ApplicationsOur findings highlight the importance of understanding and addressing the impact of the pandemic on the Social Care and Social Work workforce, thus highlighting that individuals, organizations, and governments need to develop mechanisms to support these employees during and beyond the pandemic.

6.
Health Expect ; 25(4): 1954-1966, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1895979

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 has disproportionately affected people living with dementia and their carers. Its effects on health and social care systems necessitated a rapid-response approach to care planning and decision-making in this population, with reflexivity and responsiveness to changing individual and system needs at its core. Considering this, a decision-aid to help families of persons with dementia was developed. OBJECTIVES: To coproduce with people living with dementia, and the people who care for them, a decision-aid for family carers of people living with dementia, to support decisions during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were undertaken in 2020 with: (1) staff from two English national end-of-life and supportive care organizations; and (2) people living with dementia and family carers. Simultaneously, a rapid review of current evidence on making decisions with older people at the end of life was undertaken. Evidence from these inputs was combined to shape the decision-aid through a series of workshops with key stakeholders, including our patient and public involvement group, which consisted of a person living with dementia and family carers; a group of clinical and academic experts and a group of policy and charity leads. RESULTS: The rapid review of existing evidence highlighted the need to consider both process and outcome elements of decision-making and their effects on people living with dementia and their families. The qualitative interviews discussed a wide range of topics, including trust, agency and confusion in making decisions in the context of COVID-19. The decision-aid primarily focussed on care moves, legal matters, carer wellbeing and help-seeking. CONCLUSIONS: Combining different sources and forms of evidence was a robust and systematic process that proved efficient and valuable in creating a novel decision-aid for family carers within the context of COVID-19. The output from this process is an evidence-based practical decision-aid coproduced with people living with dementia, family carers, clinical and academic experts and leading national dementia and palliative care organizations. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: We worked with people living with dementia and family carers and other key stakeholders throughout this study, from study development and design to inclusion in stakeholder workshops and dissemination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Dementia , Aged , Caregivers , Decision Making , Dementia/therapy , Humans , Pandemics
7.
Journal of Social Work ; : 14680173221083446, 2022.
Article in English | Sage | ID: covidwho-1794098

ABSTRACT

SummaryInternationally there has been much interest in the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the care and support of older people including those with needs arising from self-neglect and/or hoarding. During the pandemic English local authorities? legal duties remained to respond to concerns about harm about people with care and support needs living in the community. This paper reports interviews with 44 participants working for adult safeguarding/adult protective services (APS) in 31 local authorities recruited from all English regions. Interviews took place online in November-December 2020 as the pandemic's second UK wave was emerging. Analytic induction methods were used to develop themes.FindingsParticipants reported some of the variations in referrals to their services with more contact being received from community sources concerned about their neighbours? welfare. Participants provided accounts of the local organisation of adult safeguarding services during the pandemic, including in some areas the potential for offering early help to older people at risk of harm from self-neglect or hoarding behaviour. Online inter-agency meetings were positively received but were acknowledged to potentially exclude some older people.ApplicationsThis article reports observations from adult safeguarding practitioners about their services which may be of interest internationally and in renewing services that can sustain public interest in the welfare of their older citizens and in developing early help. The findings reflect those from children's services where online meetings are also predicted to enhance professional communications post-pandemic but similarly need to ensure effective engagement with service users and their families.

8.
Journal of Integrated Care ; 30(2):134-145, 2022.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1784461

ABSTRACT

Purpose>A multiagency approach to supporting and enhancing child welfare lies at the heart of policies and practice in England and many other countries. The assumption is that if professionals together from different disciplines share their knowledge and skills this will lead to better outcomes for children and their families. The COVID-19 pandemic interrupted the “normal practice” of such arrangements. This research explored how the pandemic's disruption led to new ways of communicating and professional behaviour, while exploring the potential for longer-term impact in England and other jurisdictions.Design/methodology/approach>Case studies were conducted in 2020 in five English local authorities to explore how schools worked with Children's Social Care and other professionals during the COVID-19 period. It was supplemented by a survey of schools and discussions with and reflections from those with relevant experience in five other countries.Findings>Many schools played an extended role in supporting vulnerable and “in need” families during this period. Children's Social Care recognised their contributions and the improved communication achieved, although schools were divided over whether relationships had improved. Most communication and meetings were online;while benefits were noted there were concerns for families who were digitally disadvantaged.Originality/value>The work provides a contemporary picture of multiagency work during the 2020 pandemic and identifies factors which may shape this work in the future in England and internationally.

10.
Health Soc Care Community ; 30(5): e2928-e2939, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1673090

ABSTRACT

Most people living with dementia want to continue living in their own home for as long as possible and many rely on support from homecare services to do so. There are concerns that homecare often fails to meet the needs of clients with dementia, but there is limited evidence regarding effective interventions to improve its delivery for this client group. We aimed to assess whether a co-designed, 6-session dementia training intervention for homecare workers (NIDUS-professional) was acceptable and feasible. Facilitated training sessions were delivered over 3 months, followed by 3, monthly implementation meetings to embed changes in practice. Two trained and supervised facilitators without clinical qualifications delivered the intervention via group video-calls during Oct 2020-March 2021 to a group of seven homecare workers from one agency in England. Participants provided qualitative feedback 3- and 6-months post intervention. Qualitative interview data and facilitator notes were integrated in a thematic analysis. Adherence to the intervention and fidelity of delivery were high, indicating that it was acceptable and feasible to deliver in practice. Thirty of a possible 42 (71.4%) group sessions were attended. In our thematic analysis we report one over-arching theme: 'Having time and space to reflect is a rare opportunity'. Within this we identified four subthemes (Having time to reflect is a rare opportunity; Reflecting with peers enhances learning; Reflection and perspective taking can improve care; Recognising skills and building confidence) through which we explored how participants valued the intervention to discuss their work and learn new skills. Attendance was lower for the implementation sessions, perhaps reflecting participants' lack of clarity about their purpose. We used our findings to consider how we can maintain positive impacts of the manualised sessions, so that these are translated into tangible, scalable benefits for people living with dementia and the homecare workforce. A randomised feasibility trial is underway.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Dementia , Home Care Services , Home Health Aides , COVID-19/epidemiology , Dementia/therapy , Humans , Pandemics
11.
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry ; 37(3)2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1664408

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: People from ethnic minority backgrounds living with dementia are more likely to be diagnosed later and have less access to health and social care support than their White counterparts in the United Kingdom (UK). Covid-19 has exacerbated health inequalities and diminished trust from underserved communities in the government and health services. The wider aim of the study was to explore the impact of covid-19 on Black and South-Asian people living with dementia and their carers as well as exploring the experiences of dementia care. The present paper specifically explores their views on trust and mistrust using an ecological model. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 family carers and four people living with dementia from South Asian or Black communities living in the community. Thematic analysis was used to analyse data. DESIGN: An exploratory qualiative design was used. RESULTS: Four main themes were developed exploring trust at the structural, organisational, community and individual level. At the structural level, participants discussed the inequity of Covid-19, some lack of trust in the UK Government and confusion in its messaging, and the anxiety sometimes leading to curtailment of media usage. At the organisational level, there was some evidence of a perceived lack of person-centred and culturally sensitive care from healthcare professionals, as well as concerns around care homes as places of safety. At the neighbourhood community level, participants discussed both a distrust as well as a strengthening of relationships and, at the individual level, factors such as knowledge of services, identity, and faith influenced their experience of the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: People living with dementia need support at all levels and this study highlights how the pandemic impacted each level. Ways to improve trust in the Government and health professionals alongside culturally adapted health messaging should be explored. Alongside this, an examination of how cultural values and norms may influence help-seeking responses to dementia and increase trust in services may be helpful post-pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Dementia , Caregivers , Dementia/epidemiology , Ethnicity , Humans , Minority Groups , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Trust , United Kingdom
12.
Epidemiologia ; 3(1):26-39, 2022.
Article in English | MDPI | ID: covidwho-1625223

ABSTRACT

Many health and social care (HSC) professionals have faced overwhelming pressures throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. As the current situation is constantly changing, and some restrictions across the UK countries such as social distancing and mask wearing in this period (May–July 2021) began to ease, it is important to examine how this workforce has been affected and how employers can help rebuild their services. The aim of this study was to compare cross-sectional data collected from the HSC workforce in the UK at three time points during the COVID-19 pandemic: Phase 1 (May–July 2020), Phase 2 (November 2020–January 2021) and Phase 3 (May–July 2021). Respondents surveyed across the UK (England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland) consisted of nurses, midwives, allied health professionals, social care workers and social workers. Wellbeing and work-related quality of life significantly declined from Phase 1 to 3 (p < 0.001);however, no significant difference occurred between Phases 2 and 3 (p > 0.05). Respondents increasingly used negative coping strategies between Phase 1 (May–July 2020) and Phase 3 (May–July 2021), suggesting that the HSC workforce has been negatively impacted by the pandemic. These results have the potential to inform HSC employers’policies, practices, and interventions as the workforce continues to respond to the COVID-19 virus and its legacy.

13.
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry ; 37(2)2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1615966

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The Covid-19 pandemic has taken a heavy toll on many people living with dementia and carers. Caring for a person living with dementia at home with limited avenues for support and a break challenged many carers. Care homes in England closed to visitors, with very few offering opportunities for a short-stay. We investigated impact of Covid-19 on views and expectations of carers of people living with dementia about residential respite. METHODS/DESIGN: Qualitative interviews with 35 carers were conducted March-December 2020: 30 women and 5 men, with ages ranging 30-83 years. Interviews explored experiences, views of residential respite, and expectations post-Covid. Data were thematically analysed and salient concepts were drawn out and discussed within the research team and study advisers. RESULTS: Three themes were identified in transcripts, relating to impact of Covid-19 on views and expectations of respite: (1) Carers described regularly negotiating risks and stresses of Covid, weighing up how to prevent infection and changing family arrangements to facilitate caring; (2) Carers were balancing different needs, prioritising needs of their relatives while bearing the impact of cumulative caregiving responsibilities. (3) Uncertainty about future residential respite continued, in terms of availability, ongoing restrictions and trustworthy information sources. CONCLUSIONS: Residential respite is a positive, acceptable option for some carers to get a break from caring. Covid-19 may have heighted some of caregiving stressors and there may be an increased need for a break. Views of care homes developed during the pandemic suggest that individual confidence to use respite may need to be rebuilt.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Dementia , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Caregivers , Dementia/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Motivation , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
14.
PLoS One ; 16(12): e0260506, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1591515

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There has been a shift in focus of international dementia policies from improving diagnostic rates to enhancing the post-diagnostic support provided to people with dementia and their carers. There is, however, little agreement over what constitutes good post-diagnostic support. This study aimed to identify the components of post-diagnostic dementia support. METHODS: We adopted a qualitative design using interviews, focus groups and observation to explore the perspectives of key stakeholders on the content of post-diagnostic dementia support. Purposive sampling was used to identify sites in England and Wales recognised as delivering good practice. Participants included 17 people with dementia, 31 carers, 68 service managers or funders, and 78 frontline staff. Interviews and focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed for analysis. Forty-eight sessions of observation were completed and recorded in fieldnotes. Components were identified through an inductive, thematic approach and cross-checked against national guidelines and existing frameworks; they were subsequently critically reviewed by a range of experts and our mixed stakeholder panel. RESULTS: Twenty distinct components of post-diagnostic support were identified, related to five themes: timely identification and management of needs; understanding and managing dementia; emotional and psychological wellbeing; practical support; and integrating support. The first and last of these were cross-cutting themes facilitating the delivery of a unique constellation of components of post-diagnostic support to each individual living with dementia or dyad at a particular time. CONCLUSIONS: Our work offers an empirically based framework to inform the development and delivery of holistic, integrated and continuous dementia care from diagnosis to end of life. It highlights the relevance of many components to both people living with dementia and their carers. Since the framework was developed in England and Wales, further research is needed to explore the relevance of our components to other sectors, countries and care systems.


Subject(s)
Caregivers/psychology , Dementia/diagnosis , Social Support , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Focus Groups , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Male , Middle Aged , Qualitative Research
15.
Trials ; 22(1): 865, 2021 Dec 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1551222

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Most people living with dementia want to remain living in their own homes and are supported to do so by family carers. No interventions have consistently demonstrated improvements to people with dementia's life quality, functioning, or other indices of living as well as possible with dementia. We have co-produced, with health and social care professionals and family carers of people with dementia, a new intervention (NIDUS-family). To our knowledge, NIDUS-family is the first manualised intervention that can be tailored to personal goals of people living with dementia and their families and is delivered by facilitators without clinical training. The intervention utilizes components of behavioural management, carer support, psychoeducation, communication and coping skills training, enablement, and environmental adaptations, with modules selected to address dyads' selected goals. We will evaluate the effect of NIDUS-family and usual care on goal attainment, as measured by Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) rated by family carers, compared to usual care alone at 12-month follow-up. We will also determine whether NIDUS-family and usual care is more cost-effective than usual care alone over 12 months. METHODS: A randomised, two-arm, single-masked, multi-site clinical trial involving 297 people living with dementia-family carer dyads. Dyads will be randomised 2:1 to receive the NIDUS-family intervention with usual care (n = 199) or usual care alone (n = 98). The intervention group will be offered, over 1 year, via 6-8 video call or telephone sessions (or face to face if COVID-19 restrictions allow in the recruitment period) in the initial 6 months, followed by telephone follow-ups every 1-2 months to support implementation, with a trained facilitator. DISCUSSION: Increasing the time lived at home by people living with dementia is likely to benefit lives now and in the future. Our intervention, which we adapted to include remote delivery prior to trial commencement due to the COVID-19 pandemic, aims to address barriers to living as well and as independently as possible that distress people living with dementia, exacerbate family carer(s) stress, negatively affect relationships, lead to safety risks, and frequently precipitate avoidable moves to a care home. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number ISRCTN11425138 . Registered on 7 October 2019.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Dementia , Caregivers , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Dementia/diagnosis , Dementia/therapy , Humans , Pandemics , Psychosocial Intervention , Quality of Life , SARS-CoV-2
16.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-292662

ABSTRACT

Reports of Covid-19 pandemic related day centre closures impacting negatively on their attenders and family carers have fuelled a resurgence of interest in these services. The absence of detailed descriptions of this common, but often ‘invisible’, preventive service from the literature limits the evidence base since outcomes data without context are less meaningful. This descriptive article aims to demystify these diverse and multi-faceted settings by painting a rich, contemporary, pre-Covid pandemic picture of four purposively selected English day centres for older people using data from diary notes made during 56 full-day visits, documentation provided by centre managers, and interviews with 23 centre managers, staff and volunteers. The article aims to further understanding of these settings for potential collaborators and social care and health professionals, particularly in the context of rising social prescribing initiatives in England with their focus on linking older people to asset-based community resources. We provide baseline data for conversations concerning optimisation of such services in the post-pandemic recovery period and beyond: how buildings may be regarded as valuable community assets with potential, and how other parts of the health and care system may better interact with day services to improve older people’s, carers’ and others’ health and wellbeing, and to benefit of staff working elsewhere in health and care.

17.
Health Soc Care Community ; 30(5): e1926-e1934, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1501409

ABSTRACT

Personal Assistants (PA) or client-hired workers are directly employed by people needing care and support, often making use of government funding. In the context of Covid-19, questions emerged about how this workforce is supported to practice safely. This paper reports PAs' understanding and views of infection control during the early months of the Covid-19 pandemic in England. Telephone interviews were undertaken with 41 PAs between 16th April and 21st May 2020. PAs were recruited from a sample that had participated in a previous study in 2014-16. Interview questions focused on changes arising from the pandemic. Data were transcribed and analysed using Framework analysis. This paper focuses on PAs' perceptions of their role and responsibilities in preventing and managing infection. Arising themes were identified about barriers and facilitators affecting infection control in five areas: accessing information, social isolation, handwashing, hygiene, personal protective equipment and potential attitude to vaccines. Infection prevention and control are under-researched in the home care sector generally and efforts are needed to develop knowledge of how to manage infection risks in home settings by non-clinically trained staff such as PAs and how to engage home care users with these efforts, especially when they are the direct employers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/prevention & control , England , Humans , Hygiene , Pandemics/prevention & control
18.
International Journal of Human Rights ; : 1-23, 2021.
Article in English | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-1345679

ABSTRACT

Care homes for older people attract human rights discourse. This has intensified during the Covid-19 pandemic, which disproportionately affected care home communities with various human rights ramifications. Activist scholarship in human rights can contribute to the protection and realisation of the rights of people living, working in and visiting care homes through high-quality research. This article reports the findings of an analysis of pre-pandemic scholarship that explored the ways authors approached the topic of human rights of older people in care homes. The aim was to produce a typology of approaches to the topic as a basis for critical reflection and as a starting point for future activist scholarship in gerontology, social policy and law. Reflexive thematic analysis of 23 international English-language peer-reviewed articles published between 1998 and March 2019 was undertaken. Analysis was framed in the context of the health and social care setting of England. The article reports the pertinent and common assumptions that care homes are ‘inherently risky’ places for the protection of the human rights of ‘vulnerable’ care home residents. The article highlights five types of approaches: the anti-institutional, the legalistic, the care quality, the equality approach, and the issue-based approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of International Journal of Human Rights is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

19.
British Journal of Social Work ; 51(5):1879-1896, 2021.
Article in English | CINAHL | ID: covidwho-1334180

ABSTRACT

The impacts on adult social work in England of the Covid-19 pandemic were sudden and are proving long-standing. In England, many social workers moved to home working and virtual contact with colleagues, managers, staff from other agencies and service users. A first national lockdown was followed by a lessening of restrictions, but a second wave started at the end of Summer 2020 and restrictions were re-introduced. This study draws on telephone interviews with a sample of twenty-two social workers working with adults in a wide range of roles and settings in ten local authorities and two National Health Service Hospital Trusts, interviewed August–October 2020. Following transcription, interview data were analysed thematically. Findings are reported under three emerging themes: using professional judgement, new and emerging case work and embedding change. These are compared with findings from studies of practice in children's services and of surveys of social workers during the Covid-19 pandemic. Implications for practice, service users and research are explored.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL