↓ Skip to main content

Exploring access to care among older people in the last phase of life using the behavioural model of health services use: a qualitative study from the perspective of the next of kin of older persons…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Exploring access to care among older people in the last phase of life using the behavioural model of health services use: a qualitative study from the perspective of the next of kin of older persons who had died in a nursing home
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12877-015-0126-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna Condelius, Magdalena Andersson

Abstract

There is little investigation into what care older people access during the last phase of their life and what factors enable access to care in this group. Illuminating this from the perspective of the next of kin may provide valuable insights into how the health and social care system operates with reference to providing care for this vulnerable group. The behavioural model of health services use has a wide field of application but has not been tested conceptually regarding access to care from the perspective of the next of kin. The aim of this study was to explore the care accessed by older people during the last phase of their life from the perspective of the next of kin and to conceptually test the behavioural model of health services use. The data collection took place in 2011 by means of qualitative interviews with 14 next of kin of older people who had died in a nursing home. The interviews were analysed using directed content analysis. The behavioural model of health services use was used in deriving the initial coding scheme, including the categories: utilization of health services, consumer satisfaction and characteristics of the population at risk. Utilization of health services in the last phase of life was described in five subcategories named after the type of care accessed i.e. admission to a nursing home, primary healthcare, hospital care, dental care and informal care. The needs were illuminated in the subcategories: general deterioration, medical conditions and acute illness and deterioration when death approaches. Factors that enabled access to care were described in three subcategories: the organisation of care, next of kin and the older person. These factors could also constitute barriers to accessing care. Next of kin's satisfaction with care was illuminated in the subcategories: satisfaction, dissatisfaction and factors influencing satisfaction. One new category was constructed inductively: the situation of the next of kin. A bed in a nursing home was often accessed during what the next of kin regarded as the last phase of life. The needs among older people in the last phase of life can be regarded as complex and worsening over time. Most enabling factors lied within the organisation of care but the next of kin enabled access to care and contributed significantly to care quality. More research is needed regarding ageism and stigmatic attitudes among professionals and informal caregivers acting as a barrier to accessing care for older people in the last phase of their life. The behavioural model of health services use was extended with a new category showing that the situation of the next of kin must be taken into consideration when investigating access to care from their perspective. It may also be appropriate to include informal care as part of the concept of access when investigating access to care among older people in the last phase of their life. The results may not be transferable to older people who have not gained access to a bed in a nursing home or to countries where the healthcare system differs largely from the Swedish.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 85 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 19%
Student > Master 14 16%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 26 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 18 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 15%
Social Sciences 10 12%
Psychology 5 6%
Computer Science 5 6%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 25 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 November 2015.
All research outputs
#18,616,159
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#2,714
of 3,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,311
of 287,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#33
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,241 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 287,075 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.