Search

This review updated a previous review [Gaugler JE (2005) Family involvement in residential long-term care: a synthesis and critical review. Aging and Mental Health 9 , 105–118] and focused on dementia. Fourteen years of development in family involvement with care homes following placement of a relative was explored. The review aimed to investigate two questions: (1) What types of involvement do families have with care homes following placement of people living with dementia? (2) Which factors influence family involvement with care homes? PsycINFO, MEDLINE and CINAHL Plus were searched for publications between January 2005 and December 2018. Thirty-three papers representing 30 studies were included. Papers were appraised using a quality rating tool designed for use with mixed study designs. Studies were of a reasonable quality though some weaknesses included single-site samples, high attrition rates and poor reporting. Twenty-eight papers highlighted types of involvement including collaboration, family–staff relationship development, decision making and visiting. Twenty-five papers pertained to factors influencing involvement, which included outcome of care quality evaluation, wish for recognition and sense of integration into the care team. Type of family involvement has changed over time with increased emphasis on families' desire for partnership, to be active rather than passive advocates, and to focus on care monitoring and evaluation. Seven themes of family involvement activities are featured and a non-linear process is proposed. When compared to patient and family-centred care principles, an analysis of family involvement types found good fit overall and potential for framework improvements. Over 30 diverse factors influence inter-family variation in the level and nature of family involvement. Consideration of these factors and resolution of the gaps in evidence, including intergenerational and cultural concerns, can improve care home facilitation of family participation. This dementia-specific review is a comprehensive timely complement to Gaugler's seminal work about older adults in care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Self-harm is common in prisoners. There is an association between self-harm in prisoners and subsequent suicide, both within prison and on release. The aim of this study is to develop and evaluate a prediction model to identify male prisoners at high risk of self-harm. Methods. We developed an 11-item screening model, based on risk factors identified from the literature. This screen was administered to 542 prisoners within 7 days of arrival in two male prisons in England. Participants were followed up for 6 months to identify those who subsequently self-harmed in prison. Analysis was conducted using Cox proportional hazard regression. Discrimination and calibration were determined for the model. The model was subsequently optimized using multivariable analysis, weighting variables, and dropping poorly performing items. Results. Seventeen (3.1%) of the participants self-harmed during follow up (median 53days). The strongest risk factors were previous self-harm in prison (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 9.3 [95% CI: 3.3-16.6]) and current suicidal ideation (aHR= 7.6 [2.1-27.4]). As a continuous score, a one-point increase in the suicide screen was significantly associated with self-harm(HR=1.4, 1.1-1.7). At the prespecified cut off score of 5, the screening model was associated with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.66 (0.53-0.79), with poor calibration. The optimized model saw two items dropped fromthe original screening tool, weighting of risk factors based on amultivariablemodel, and an AUC of 0.84 (0.76-0.92). Conclusions. Further work is necessary to clarify the association between risk factors and selfharm in prison. Despite good face validity, current screening tools for self-harm need validation in new prison samples. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]