Elderly Care: Proposal on Hospital Admittance and Discharge

Elderly portion out Proposal on Hospital Admittance and DischargeA end of change to improve the quality of c be for vulner fit older population who later cosmos admitted into faintary and on f altogether away do non strike a lot of choice in services that they receive. They argon each sent stand with a concern package which does not meet all indispensablenesss of the older person or go to a residential home.It has been said that independence and mobility are the two well-nigh precious commodities that the elderly, as a group, call for to nurture as a signifi idlert decline in either will significantly augment their dependence and reliance on former(a)s, either in the family or in the community. ( clean-livingly, S. et al 1996)In general edges, the plight of the elderly in infirmary is probably the approximately precarious of all of the age ranges, irrespective of the complaint for which they were admitted. Any crop of debilitating pathology, flush if it only p uts them in eff for a few long time, may very well weaken their already tenuous grip on independence. The result may be either a prolonged stay in a hospital bed, home discharge with a charge package which may not be totally satis federal agenty and all too often dependent on the ministrations of a group of overstretched healthcare professionals, or discharge to some form of residential care which, although possibly seen by some as being the best option for the debilitated or infirm elderly, has an enormous carry on on both the independence and the alivenessstyle of the elderly person.Let us briefly consider this last option which is not as uncoiled forward an option as may appear at for the first timely sight. Let us personalise the discussion by referring to a hypothetically representative Mrs J., a 78 yr. old lady who has lived al star since her husband died some ten years previously. She is fiercely independent but has been get progressively more frail as the years have done for(p) by to the extent that it is a struggle to get her shopping. As a result her diet is becoming progressively more inadequate.Her personal hygiene, which was meticulous a few years ago, is now too failing, and she spends a peachy deal of her time alone and in bed. She has developed a outset grade chest infection which required her to spend triad days in hospital. When it came time to discharge her, her daughter could not look after her and took the decision that she would be better in a residential home. Mrs.J. had al close no choice in the matter and on the fourth day she found herself in a residential home, surrounded by pack with an average age sooner greater than hers, m any(prenominal) of whom were suffering from variable degrees of dementia.The home had a completely imposed and inflexible regime which was a major imposition on her as she had previously been able to do what she wanted when she wanted. There was virtually no privacy and n constantly a time, day or night, when there was silence or quiet. Her house had to be sold to pay the fees, so she k rising that there was no possibility that she would ever go home again and any money that she had, she was not able to spend as her savings were also taken to pay the fees. In the space of four days her life had been overturned and although she was warm, fed and cared for, by any rationalisation her quality of life had changed for ever.Mrs.J. is quoted as being plum typical of many and her case used to illustrate the enormity of the life changing impact of admission to a residential home.Critically inquiry the need for the proposed changeThe picky change that we shall highlight in this particular essay is the need for multidisciplinary discharge planning, a move which is highlighted in the home(a) swear out Framework for the elderly (Standard Two).As we shall discuss later in this essay, the internal Service Frameworks have been conceived and drafted in response to the perceived need for change. It and then follows that it is a self-serving argument that it is a recognition of a need for change in this bowl that has prompted its inclusion in the National Service Framework .This rather tautological argument is given conviction by a fall of studies that have both looked at, and demonstrated the need for change in this area.The paper by Richards (et al 1998) was a first rate examination of the problem. It covered a moment of areas, but, with specific relevance to our considerations here it highlighted how the tolerant outcome could be improved by a timely multidisciplinary pre-discharge sound judgement by a team which included genial workers.This paper, if nothing else, underlines the need for change and provides a model for how improvements in the multidisciplinary discharge function can produce potential benefits for long-sufferingsEvidence to clog this put on can be found in anyone of a number of tardily published papers (such as Ham C 2004) wh ich has specifically surveyed patient and carer satisfaction levels in the area of welfare and associated services after hospital discharge for the elderly.An outline and critical discussion of how change can be implemented wobble can be a trophic factor in any organisation but no matter how smashing the intentions and aspirations, if it is badly managed, then the end result can be a catastrophic mess. One only has to consider the debacle of the implementation of the Griffiths floor (Griffiths line 1983) in the NHS in the 80s to appreciate how a major charge change could be badly implemented. The Government even set up its own commission to see what lessons could be learned from the episode. (Davidmann 1988)If we consider the overall implications of the report in terms of change management, the innovations failed because they were imposed rather than managed. (Davidmann 1988) some other radical imagination in the field of change management is uttered by Marinker (1997) who poi nts to the rather subtle difference between compliance and concordance. He suggests that human beings generally respond better to suggestion, reason and coercion rather than direct imposition of arbitrary change.The management of change is perhaps the most critical of the elements in this discussion. There is little point in having visual modality or ideas if you cannot successfully implement them into reality (Bennis et al 1999).The whole account of the Management of Change is built upon a set of constructs known as the General Systems Theory (GST). (Newell et al 1992). The process is both general and variable and can be summarised in the phrase Unfreezing, Changing and Refreezing or in simple terms, assessing a situation changing it, and then making the changes stick. (Thompson 1992). totally changes, but particularly health and welfare related ones, should only genuinely be made after careful consideration of the demonstrate bottom underpinning that change (Berwick D 2005). In specific terms one should mensurate the need for implementation of a multidisciplinary discharge procedure by considering the evidence that the current situation could be improved, make managers aware of the findings of need and than be proactive in encouragement in terms of support of any decisions that are made to implement such moves.The Political contextIf one considers the pre-2000 structure and organisation of the NHS, one could come to the conclusion that there were three major problems which, some observers stated were not consistent with what was required of a 21st century care provider, namelya overleap of guinea pig standardsold-fashioned demarcations between staff and barriers between servicesa lack of clear incentives and levers to improve performanceover-centralisation and disempowered patients. (Nickols 2004)There have been a number of reforms in the NHS which potentially impinge on the cases of the dependent elderly. Arguably the most important was the NHS ju t (DOH 2000). This is a lengthy document which calls for some fundamental changes in the working practices, and in some cases the actual roles of a number of healthcare professionals.An analytical assessment would have to conclude that, although there is a lot of detail in some areas of the plan, there is actually relatively little detail in just how these changes should be actioned and arguably even less detail in what it expected the changes to be (Krogstad et al 2002). In the context of our discussion here, we should also note the natural ideological refilling to the NHS Plan, was the Agenda for Change (2004). The National Service Frameworks were then introduced after germinal guidance from the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE 2004)The other reforms that have a bearing on our considerations are Choosing wellness making healthier choices easier (2004) and Building on the Best (2003). Both of these have considerable implications for the care of the elderly. The C hoosing health paper outlines the Government proposals for giving patients greater choice in the implementation of their health care and Building on the Best examines shipway of improving and modifying current practices. There are specific references to the discharge procedures which are relevant to our discussions here.The health contextIn the context of this essay the NHS Plan called for a number of reforms includingIncrease funding and reformAim to regaining geographical inequalities,Improve service standards,Extend patient choice.Each of these areas has a bearing our Mrs.J. The geographical inequalities were primarily due to the historical context in which each area had implemented their own services together with the remnant between funding and demand in each area. The improvement in service standards is mainly driven by the National Service Frameworks and he extension of patient choice clearly has a bearing on Mrs.J. although the choices available may well be less in app licative terms than the complete spectrum of what is actually available and may well be constrained by factors such as available funding and the patients own physical state. (Wierzbicki et al 2001)The National Service Frameworks (amongst other things) sets out to reduce inequalities in service provision between providers and also to set standards of excellence, together with goals and targets that are nationally based rather than neck of the woods based. (Rouse et al 2001).National Service Framework Standard Two has as its stated organise toEnsure that older people are interact as individuals and that they receive appropriate and timely packages of care which meet their inescapably as individuals, regardless of health and kind services boundaries.It is formulated at bottom the concept of Person Centred Care. This is intended to allow the elderly (and their carers) to receive entitled to be treated as individuals, and to allow them to be accountable for their own choices abou t their own care.The Social Care contextIf we tolerate that a patients discharge from hospital is dependent on many disparate and variable factors including (apart from their obvious health considerations), for example, their financial, dependence and support network status. It therefore follows that before a considered decision can be made to discharge the patient, a full and careful assessment of these dissimilar aspects should ideally be made. (Gould et al. 1995). The input of the social worker to the multidisciplinary pre-discharge team is therefore vital in this respect as it is unlikely that other healthcare professionals will be in a position to make an assessment of all of these factors.If one reads contemporary peer reviewed literature on the subject, the term seamless interface is a concept that frequently appears. (Dixon et al 2003). This reflects the moves towards the take down of the Empire concept of each health and welfare related subspecialty. (Lee et al 2004). An d the positive integration of each, for the overall benefit of the patient.Central to this process is the approach of the Single Assessment Process (SAP) which is arguably the most important new work practice to facilitate good multidisciplinary working practices. This reduces the duplication of work, origin of facts and paperwork that hitherto was commonplace (Fatchett A. 1998).In specific consideration of our Mrs.J. we could find that she was visited by one member of the discharge team (typically the social worker), and an assessment of all of the factors that we have discussed could be made and recorded in a one central document or reference point (computer). It is the stated aim of the SAP that the needs and wishes of the elderly patient will remain at the heart of the whole process. (Mannion R et al 2005)To consider the requirements of the National Service Frameworks and in the context of social work we should also mention the concept of the carers or patients Champion that h as been specifically encouraged. (Bartley M. 2004). These are designated workers (often specially trained or experienced social workers), who would stand up for the need of the patient or their carers. In Mrs.J.s case we could aim that such a champion could assess her needs as being more appropriately dealt with by an intensive course of both physiatrics and an occupational therapy input rather than necessarily being arbitrarily position in a residential home.The social worker is ideally laid to assess and indeed to action interventions such as that of the occupational therapist, who can be shown to produce considerable impact on the ability of the infirm elderly to remain at home. (Gilbertson et al 2000). We should not leave this area without a demonstration that the evidence base in this area of social worker input as being both positive and skillful by quoting the Logan paper (et al 1997)ReferencesAgenda for Change, 23 November 2004,Government White PaperHMSO 2004Bartley M. ( 2004),Health Inequality. An Introduction to Theories, Concepts and Methods.Cambridge University Press 2004Bennis, Benne Chin (Eds.) 1999,The preparation of Change (2nd Edition)..Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York 1999.Berwick D 2005 Broadening the view of evidence-based medicine Qual. Saf. Health Care, Oct 2005 14 315 316.Building on the best 2003,Department of HealthHMSO capital of the United Kingdom 09/12/2003Choosing Health making healthier choices easier 2004Government White Paper,HMSO capital of the United Kingdom 16.11.2004Davidmann 1988,Reorganising the National Health Service An Evaluation of the Griffiths Report,HMSO London 1988Dixon, Holland, and Mays 2003 Primary care core values Developing primary care gatekeeping, commissioning, and managed care BMJ, Jul 2003 317 cxxv 128.DOH 2000,NHS Plan,HMSO London 2000Fatchett A. (1998),Nursing in the new NHS Modern, Dependable.London Bailliere TindallGilbertson, tool Langhorne, Andrew Walker, Ann Allen, and Gordon D Murray 2 000 Domiciliary occupational therapy for patients with cerebrovascular accident discharged from hospital randomized controlled trial BMJ, Mar 2000 320 603 606 doi10.1136/bmj.320.7235.603Gould MM, Iliffe S. 1995,Hospital at home a case study in service development.Br J Health Care Manage 1995 1 809-812.Griffiths Report 1983NHS Management Inquiry Report DHSS, 1983 Oct 25Ham C. (2004),Health Policy in Britain 5th ed.Basingstoke Palgrave MacmillanKrogstad, Dag Hofoss, and Per Hjortdahl 2002 tenacity of hospital care beyond the question of personal contact BMJ, Jan 2002 324 36 38.Lee, Wong, Yeung Wong, and Tsang 2004 Interfacing between primary and secondary care is needed BMJ, Aug 2004 329 403.Logan PA, Gladman JRF, Lincoln NB. 1997,A randomised controlled trial of enhanced social service occupational therapy for stroke patients.Clin Rehab 1997 11 107-113Mannion R, Davies H, Marshall M (2005)Cultures for Performance in Health Care. hymen Open University PressMarinker M.1997,From c ompliance to concordance achieving shared goals,BMJ 19973147478.Newell Simon. 1992,Human line of work Solving.Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs 1992.NICE 2004,Management guidelines NHS DirectiveHMSO, Tuesday 7 December 2004Nickols F 2004,Change Management 101 A Primer,London Macmillian 2004Richards, Joanna Coast, David J Gunnell, Tim J Peters, tail end Pounsford, and Mary-Anne Darlow 1998 Randomised controlled trial comparing effectiveness and acceptability of an early discharge, hospital at home scheme with acute hospital care BMJ, Jun 1998 316 1796 1801Rouse, Jolley, and claim 2001 National service frameworks BMJ, Dec 2001 323 1429.Thompson 1992,Organisations in Action.McGraw-Hill, New York 1992.Whitely,S. et al (1996)Health and Social Care Management,Basingstoke Macmillan.Wierzbicki and Reynolds 2001 National service frameworks financial implications are capacious BMJ, Sep 2001 321 705.PDG