"We've All Lost So Much": The Long-Term Care Home Experiences of Essential Family Caregivers During COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: During the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, long-term care homes (LTCHs) imposed visitor restrictions that prevented essential family caregivers (EFCs) from entering the homes. Under these policies, EFCs had to engage in virtual, window, and outdoor visits, prior to the re-initiation of indoor visits. OBJECTIVE: To understand EFCs' visitation experiences with LTCH residents during COVID-19. METHODS: Seven virtual focus groups with EFCs were conducted and analysed using a thematic approach. FINDINGS: Six themes were identified: (a) inconsistent and poor communication; (b) lack of staffing and resources; (c) increasing discord between EFCs and staff during COVID-19; (d) shock related to reunification; (e) lack of a person-centred or family-centred approach; and, (f) EFC and resident relationships as collateral damage. DISCUSSION: Our findings reflect how EFCs' visitation experiences were affected by factors at the individual, LTCH, and health-system levels. Future sectoral responses and visitation guidelines should recognize EFCs as an integral part of the care team.

"It's the worst thing I've ever been put through in my life": the trauma experienced by essential family caregivers of loved ones in long-term care during the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Essential family caregivers (EFCs) of relatives living in long-term care homes (LTCHs) experienced restricted access to their relatives due to COVID-19 visitation policies. Residents' experiences of separation have been widely documented; yet, few have focused on EFCs' traumatic experiences during the pandemic. Objective: This study aims to explore the EFCs' trauma of being locked out of LTCHs and unable to visit their loved ones in-person during COVID-19. METHODS: Seven online focus groups with a total of 30 EFCs from Ontario and British Columbia, Canada were conducted as part of a larger mixed-method study. We used an inductive approach to thematic analysis to understand the lived experiences of trauma. RESULTS: Four trauma-related themes emerged: 1) trauma from prolonged separation from loved ones; 2) trauma from uncompassionate interactions with the LTCH's staff and administrators; 3) trauma from the inability to provide care to loved ones, and 4) trauma from experiencing prolonged powerlessness and helplessness. DISCUSSION: The EFCs experienced a collective trauma that deeply impacted their relationships with their relatives as well as their perception of the LTC system. Experiences endured by EFCs highlighted policy and practice changes, including the need for trauma-centred approaches to repair relational damage and post-pandemic decision-making that collaborates with EFCs.

Poor and Lost Connections: Essential Family Caregivers' Experiences Using Technology with Family Living in Long-Term Care Homes during COVID-19.

Background: Long-term care homes (LTCHs) restricted essential family caregivers' (EFCs) visitations during COVID-19, and virtual visits using technology were used. Objective: To understand EFCs' virtual visitations experiences during COVID-19 in two Canadian provinces. Methods: Seven focus groups were conducted with EFCs. Thematic analysis was used to identify themes at micro, meso, and macro levels. Results: Four themes were found: 1) a lack of technology and infrastructure; 2) barriers to scheduling visitations; 3) unsuitable technology implementation; and 4) inability of technology to adapt to residents' needs. Discussion: Virtual visitations showcased a confluence of micro, meso, and macro factors that, in some cases, negatively impacted the EFCs, residents, and the relationship between EFCs and residents. Structural and home inequities within and beyond the LTCH impacted the quality of technology-based visitations, underscoring the need to support technology infrastructure and training to ensure residents are able to maintain relationships during visitation bans. Conclusion: EFCs' experiences of technology-based visitations were impacted by structural vulnerabilities of the LTCH sector.

Nursing home staffing standards and staffing levels in six countries.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to collect and compare nurse staffing standards and staffing levels in six counties: the United States, Canada, England, Germany, Norway, and Sweden. DESIGN: The study used descriptive information on staffing regulations and policies as well as actual staffing levels for registered nurses, licensed nurses, and nursing assistants across states, provinces, regions, and countries. METHODS: Data were collected from Internet searches of staffing regulations and policies along with statistical data on actual staffing from reports and documents. Staffing data were converted to hours per resident day to facilitate comparisons across countries. FINDINGS: We found wide variations in both nurse staffing standards and actual staffing levels within and across countries, although comparisons were difficult to make due to differences in measuring staffing, the vagueness of standards, and limited availability of actual staffing data. Both the standards and levels in most countries (except Norway and Sweden) were lower than the recommended levels by experts. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate the need for further attention to nurse staffing standards and levels in order to assure the quality of nursing home care. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A high quality of nursing home care requires adequate levels of nurse staffing, and nurse staffing standards have been shown to improve staffing levels.