Trust as a key measure of quality and safety after the restriction of family contact in Canadian long-term care settings during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Family caregivers in Canadian long-term care homes are estimated to provide 10 h per week of direct care to approximately 30% of residents through roles including mobility support, mealtime assistance, personal care, social interaction, psychological care, care coordination, and advocacy. Despite these contributions, they continue to be viewed as visitors rather than as key participants in the interdependent relationships that support the long-term care sector. Their marginalization was evident during the COVID-19 pandemic, as Canadian public health policy focused on preventing them from entering long-term care, rather than supporting personal risk management, symptom screening, personal protective equipment, and other mechanisms for safe involvement in care. Several iatrogenic resident outcomes have been attributed to this, including decreased cognitive function, decreased mobility, increased incontinence, weight loss, increased depression and anxiety, increased responsive behaviours amongst those living with dementia, and increased delirium. In this commentary article, we argue that family caregiver presence was conflated as a risk when instead, it contributed to unintended harm. We identify nine well-known human social cognitive predispositions that may have contributed to this. We then examine their implications for trust in long-term care, and consider how quality and safety can be further fostered in long-term care by working in partnership with family caregivers to rebuild trust through enquiry and collaboration. We advocate incorporating trust as an essential measure of quality health service.

Did online publishers "get it right"? Using a naturalistic search strategy to review cognitive health promotion content on internet webpages.

BACKGROUND: One of the most common uses of the Internet is to search for health-related information. Although scientific evidence pertaining to cognitive health promotion has expanded rapidly in recent years, it is unclear how much of this information has been made available to Internet users. Thus, the purpose of our study was to assess the reliability and quality of information about cognitive health promotion encountered by typical Internet users. METHODS: To generate a list of relevant search terms employed by Internet users, we entered seed search terms in Google Trends and recorded any terms consistently used in the prior 2 years. To further approximate the behaviour of typical Internet users, we entered each term in Google and sampled the first two relevant results. This search, completed in October 2014, resulted in a sample of 86 webpages, 48 of which had content related to cognitive health promotion. An interdisciplinary team rated the information reliability and quality of these webpages using a standardized measure. RESULTS: We found that information reliability and quality were moderate, on average. Just one retrieved page mentioned best practice, national recommendations, or consensus guidelines by name. Commercial content (i.e., product promotion, advertising content, or non-commercial) was associated with differences in reliability and quality, with product promoter webpages having the lowest mean reliability and quality ratings. CONCLUSIONS: As efforts to communicate the association between lifestyle and cognitive health continue to expand, we offer these results as a baseline assessment of the reliability and quality of cognitive health promotion on the Internet.