Search

Objective: Adverse incident research within residential aged care facilities (RACFs) is increasing and there is growing awareness of safety and quality issues. However, large-scale evidence identifying specific areas of need and at-risk residents is lacking. This study used routinely collected incident management system data to quantify the types and rates of adverse incidents experienced by residents of RACFs. Methods: A concurrent mixed-methods design was used to examine 3 years of incident management report data from 72 RACFs in New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory. Qualitative thematic analysis of free-text incident descriptions was undertaken to group adverse incidents into categories. The rates and types of adverse incidents based on these categories were calculated and then compared using incidence rate ratios (IRRs). Results: Deidentified records of 11 987 permanent residents (aged ≥65 years; mean (±s.d.) age 84 ± 8 years) from the facilities were included. Of the 60 268 adverse incidents, falls were the most common event (36%), followed by behaviour-related events (33%), other impacts and injuries (22%) and medication errors (9%). The number of adverse incidents per resident ranged from 0 (42%) to 171, with a median of 2. Women (IRR 0.804; P < 0.001) and residents with low care needs (IRR 0.652; P < 0.001) were significantly less likely to adverse incidents compared with men and residents with high care needs respectively. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that data already collected within electronic management systems can provide crucial baseline information about the risk levels that adverse incidents pose to older Australians living in RACFs. What is known about the topic?: To date, research into aged care adverse incidents has typically focused on single incident types in small studies involving mitigation strategies. Little has been published quantifying the multiple adverse incidents experienced by residents of aged care facilities or reporting organisation-wide rates of adverse incidents. What does this paper add?: This paper adds to the growing breadth of Australian aged care research by providing baseline information on the rates and types of adverse incidents in RACFs across a large and representative provider. What are the implications for practitioners?: This research demonstrates that the wealth of data captured by aged care facilities' incident management information systems can be used to provide insight into areas of commonly occurring adverse incidents. Better use of this information could greatly enhance strategic planning of quality improvement activities and the care provided to residents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. Health-related apps on mobile devices (mHealth apps) have become an effective selfmanagement tool and treatment support for patients. There is limited research, however, on how older people (50 and over) perceive the opportunity of using mHealth apps. Our aim was to investigate the perceptions of older people in Australia regarding the opportunity of using prescribed or doctor-recommended mHealth apps and provide insights which can enhance their uptake of mHealth. Methods. This was a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews involving 21 participants aged 51-82 years. Qualitative thematic analysis was used to categorise the factors that influence the adoption of mHealth apps by older adults. Results. We show that beyond the prominent influencing factors from technology adoption research (such as performance and effort expectancy, social influence and facilitating conditions), health-specific factors such as a trusting doctor-patient relationship and strong health self-efficacy positively influence the intended adoption of mHealth apps among older adults. In addition, the IT security and accurate interpretation of participants' input in an mHealth app can present barriers to mHealth app adoption. Conclusion. Our analyses provide additional insights complementing existing technology adoption research. Their successful adoption and utilisation require further empirical evidence on its effectiveness along with attention to the voices of those who are meant to use them. To address potential barriers, improve the quality and security of mHealth apps, and thus achieve greater patient safety, the involvement of consumers, regulators and health professionals is necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by SARS-CoV-2, and the ensuing implementation of response measures directly impacted the delivery of Australian primary care services. Understanding how these measures affected practice activity is important for gauging both their effectiveness and implications for future service planning. During the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic, a research project was undertaken to determine the impact of the pandemic on Australian general practice activity as a collaborative undertaking between researchers, general practitioners, data custodians, and five primary health networks from New South Wales and Victoria, Australia. The project methodology was based on an established research approach called action research, which involves participatory involvement from key stakeholders throughout the research process. The strength and success of the project's methodological approach stemmed from the synergistic interrelationship between the four key elements of: collaboration, repeated action research cycles (utilising electronic general practice data), engaged governance, and the production and dissemination of apposite knowledge outcomes. The project approach, knowledge outputs and lessons learned can be adapted to future research undertakings across any primary care setting and highlight the utility of action research and interdisciplinary research collaboration to produce knowledge directly relevant to clinical practice. The COVID-19 pandemic directly impacted the delivery of primary care services. We detail a research project framework used during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic to understand how general practice activity was impacted by the pandemic. The knowledge outputs and lessons learned can be adapted to future research undertakings across any primary care setting and highlight the utility of action research and interdisciplinary research collaboration to produce knowledge directly relevant to clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]