↓ Skip to main content

Gaps between the subjective needs of older facility residents and how care workers understand them: a pairwise cross-sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Gaps between the subjective needs of older facility residents and how care workers understand them: a pairwise cross-sectional study
Published in
BMC Research Notes, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13104-016-1851-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tomoko Ohura, Takahiro Higashi, Tatsuro Ishizaki, Takeo Nakayama

Abstract

To promote active daily living and improve the quality of life of older facility residents, it is important that care staff understand their day-to-day activities and needs. However, only a few studies have examined the needs of older residents and how care workers understand them. This study aimed to examine the subjective needs of older residents at aged care facilities, care workers' understanding of these needs, and the gaps that exist between them. Structured interviews with older residents with no severe cognitive impairment in ten Japanese aged care facilities and a questionnaire survey of care workers were conducted in 2008 regarding resident subjective needs. The questionnaire, which had satisfactory factorial validity, internal consistency, and reproducibility, consisted of seven items on basic activities of daily living (BADL), five items on instrumental ADL (IADL), eight items on environment and lifestyle (EL), and five items on emotion (EM). Pair-wise analyses were performed to compare responses. Responses of 115 pairs were analyzed (residents ≥75 years, 85 %; 21 men, 94 women). Median proportions of residents with IADL (66 %) and EL (69 %) needs were lower compared with those with BADL (83 %) and EM (91 %) needs. Median proportions of care workers understanding IADL (55 %) and EL (60 %) needs were lower compared with those understanding BADL (87 %) and EM (87 %) needs. Less than half of the care workers understood IADL needs for household chores (30 %) and money management (43 %), and an EL need for playing a role (41 %). Gaps were found between resident subjective needs and how care workers understood them. Specifically, care workers underestimated older residents' IADL and EL needs, especially with regard to playing a role. These results highlight the need for care workers to set goals based on each resident's subjective needs and plan strategies for care provision accordingly.

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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 22%
Student > Bachelor 6 15%
Student > Master 5 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Librarian 2 5%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 13 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 24%
Psychology 4 10%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Arts and Humanities 2 5%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 14 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 February 2016.
All research outputs
#14,246,461
of 22,842,950 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,955
of 4,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,872
of 396,720 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#59
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,842,950 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,266 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
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 396,720 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.