Barriers and facilitators to infection prevention and control in Dutch residential care facilities for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities: A theory-informed qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Care institutions are recognised to be a high-risk setting for the emergence and spread of infections and antimicrobial-resistant organisms, which stresses the importance of infection prevention and control (IPC). Accurate implementation is crucial for optimal IPC practice. Despite the wide promotion of IPC and research thereof in the hospital and nursing home setting, similar efforts are lacking in disability care settings. Therefore, this study aimed to assess perceived barriers and facilitators to IPC among professionals working at residential care facilities (RCFs) for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD), as well as to identify professional-reported recommendations to improve IPC. METHODS: This qualitative study involved semi-structured interviews (before COVID-19) with twelve professionals from five Dutch RCFs for people with IDD. An integrated theoretical approach was used to inform data collection and analysis. Thematic analysis using inductive and deductive approaches was conducted. This study followed the COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative research (COREQ) guidelines. RESULTS: Our findings revealed barriers and facilitators at the guideline, client, professional, professional interaction, professional client interaction, client interaction, organisational, community, and societal level. Six main themes covering multiple barriers and facilitators were identified: (1) guidelines' applicability to (work)setting; (2) professionals' cognitions and attitude towards IPC (related to educational background); (3) organisational support and priority; (4) educational system; (5) time availability and staff capacity; and (6) task division and change coaches. The main professional-reported recommendations were the introduction of tailored and practical IPC guidelines, structural IPC education and training among all professionals, and client participation. CONCLUSIONS: To promote IPC, multifaceted and multilevel strategies should be implemented, with a preliminary need for improvements on the guideline, professional, and organisational level. Given the heterogeneous character, i.e., different professionals, clients and care needs, there is a need for a tailored approach to implement IPC and sustain it successfully in disability care. Our findings can inform future IPC practice improvements.

The Unique Challenges Faced by Assisted Living Communities to Meet Federal Guidelines for COVID-19.

This perspective addresses the challenges that assisted living (AL) providers face concerning federal guidelines to prevent increased spread of COVID-19. These challenges include restriction of family visitation, use of third-party providers as essential workers, staffing guidelines, transfer policies, and rural AL hospitalizations. To meet these challenges we recommend that AL providers incorporate digital technology to maintain family-resident communication. We also recommend that states adopt protocols that limit the number of AL communities visited by home health care workers in a 14-day period, appeal to the federal government for hazard pay for direct care workers, and to extend the personal care attendant program to AL. It is further recommended that states work with AL communities to implement COVID-19 comprehensive emergency management plans that are well-coordinated with local emergency operation centers to assist with transfers to COVID-19 specific locations and to assist in rural areas with hospital transfers. Together, these recommendations to AL providers and state and federal agencies address the unique structure and needs of AL and would enable AL communities to be better prepared to care for and reduce those infected with COVID-19.

COVID-19 has united patients and providers against institutional betrayal in health care: A battle to be heard, believed, and protected.

In this commentary, researchers, health care consumers, and medical providers reflect on institutional betrayal during the COVID-19 pandemic in American and Canadian health care systems. Examples of institutional betrayal experienced by patients and their family members, as well as medical providers, are described. Although such examples may be more evident to the general public during the current pandemic, they do not represent new problems. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

American Geriatrics Society (AGS) Policy Brief: COVID-19 and Assisted Living Facilities.

This policy brief sets forth the American Geriatrics Society's (AGS's) recommendations to guide federal, state, and local governments when making decisions about care for older adults in assisted living facilities (ALFs) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. It focuses on the need for personal protective equipment, access to testing, public health support for infection control, and workforce training. The AGS continues to review guidance set forth in peer-reviewed articles, as well as ongoing and updated guidance from the US Department of Health and Human Services, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and other key agencies. This brief is based on the situation and any federal guidance or actions as of April 15, 2020. Joining a separate AGS policy brief on COVID-19 in nursing homes (DOI: 10.1111/jgs.16477), this brief is focused on ALFs, given that varied structure and staffing can impact their response to COVID-19. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1131-1135, 2020.