Top

BMC Geriatrics

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Research

Stakeholder perspectives on the preferred service ecosystem for senior citizens living at home: a qualitative interview study

Authors: Christophe Eward Kattouw, Karina Aase, Petter Viksveen

Published in: BMC Geriatrics | Issue 1/2023

Abstract

Background

Most senior citizens want to live independently at home as long as possible. The World Health Organization recommends an age-friendly community approach by transforming the service ecosystem for senior citizens and basing it on the question “What matters to you?”. However, there is limited research-based knowledge to determine the characteristics of the preferred service ecosystem from the perspectives of multiple stakeholders. Therefore, the aim of the study was to gain a deeper understanding of multiple stakeholder perspectives on the preferred service ecosystem for senior citizens living at home.

Methods

Four stakeholder groups (n = 57) from a Norwegian municipality participated in an interview study in 2019 and 2020: senior citizens, carers, healthcare professionals, and managers. Data were analysed according to qualitative content analysis.

Results

Overall, there was considerable correspondence between the four stakeholder groups’ perspectives on the preferred service ecosystem for senior citizens. Six themes were developed: (1) “self-reliance – living independently at home as long as possible”; (2) “remaining active and social within the community”; (3) “support for living at home as long as possible”; (4) “accessible information and services”; (5) “continuity of services”; and (6) “compassionate and competent healthcare professionals”.

Conclusions

In order to adapt and meet changing needs, the preferred service ecosystem should support senior citizens’ autonomy through interpersonal relationships and involvement. Healthcare managers and decision makers should consider a broader range of practical and social support services. Municipalities should plan for and develop age-friendly infrastructures, while healthcare professionals should rely on their compassion and competence to meet senior citizens’ needs.

Available only for authorised users

Dostálová V, Bártová A, Bláhová H, Holmerová I. The needs of older people receiving home care: a scoping review. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2021;33:495–504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-020-01505-3.CrossRefPubMed

Goh AMY, Polacsek M, Malta S, Doyle C, Hallam B, Gahan L, et al. What constitutes ‘good’ home care for people with dementia? An investigation of the views of home care service recipients and providers. BMC Geriatr. 2022;22:42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-021-02727-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Lämås K, Bölenius K, Sandman P-O, Lindkvist M, Edvardsson D. Effects of a person-centred and health-promoting intervention in home care services– a non-randomized controlled trial. BMC Geriatr. 2021;21:720. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-021-02661-5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Saajanaho M, Rantakokko M, Portegijs E, Törmäkangas T, Eronen J, Tsai L-T, et al. Life resources and personal goals in old age. Eur J Ageing. 2016;13:195–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-016-0382-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

van Leeuwen KM, van Loon MS, van Nes FA, Bosmans JE, de Vet HCW, Ket JCF, et al. What does quality of life mean to older adults? A thematic synthesis. PLoS ONE. 2019;14:e0213263. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0213263.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hatcher D, Chang E, Schmied V, Garrido S. Holding momentum: a grounded theory study of strategies for sustaining living at home in older persons. Int J Qualitative Stud Health Well-Being. 2019;14:1658333. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482631.2019.1658333.CrossRef

Vanleerberghe P, De Witte N, Claes C, Schalock RL, Verté D. The quality of life of older people aging in place: a literature review. Qual Life Res. 2017;26:2899–907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1651-0.CrossRefPubMed

Pani-Harreman KE, Bours GJJW, Zander I, Kempen GIJM, van Duren JMA. Definitions, key themes and aspects of ‘ageing in place’: a scoping review. Aging Soc. 2021;41:2026–59. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X20000094.CrossRef

Pani-Harreman KE, van Duren JMA, Kempen GIJM, Bours GJJW. The conceptualisation of vital communities related to ageing in place: a scoping review. Eur J Ageing. 2022;19:49–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-021-00622-w.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Green MM, Meyer C, Hutchinson AM, Sutherland F, Lowthian JA. Co-designing being your best program—A holistic approach to frailty in older community dwelling Australians. Health Soc Care Community 2021:hsc13636. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.13636.

11.

del-Pino-Casado R, Frías-Osuna A, Palomino-Moral PA, Ruzafa-Martínez M, Ramos-Morcillo AJ. Social support and subjective burden in caregivers of adults and older adults: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2018;13:e0189874. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189874.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Glomsås HS, Knutsen IR, Fossum M, Christiansen K, Halvorsen K. Family caregivers’ involvement in caring for frail older family members using welfare technology: a qualitative study of home care in transition. BMC Geriatr. 2022;22:223. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-022-02890-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Li W, Manuel DG, Isenberg SR, Tanuseputro P. Caring for older men and women: whose caregivers are more distressed? A population-based retrospective cohort study. BMC Geriatr. 2022;22:890. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-022-03583-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Lopez Hartmann M, De Almeida Mello J, Anthierens S, Declercq A, Van Durme T, Cès S, et al. Caring for a frail older person: the association between informal caregiver burden and being unsatisfied with support from family and friends. Age Ageing. 2019;48:658–64. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afz054.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Grasmo SG, Liaset IF, Redzovic SE. Home care workers’ experiences of work conditions related to their occupational health: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21:962. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06941-z.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Gustafsson L-K, Zander V, Bondesson A, Pettersson T, Anbacken E-M, Östlund G. Actions taken to safeguard the intended health care chain of older people with multiple diagnoses - a critical incident study. BMC Nurs. 2022;21:260. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-022-01039-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Knardahl S. The Health and Well-being of Healthcare Workers. Concepts, Theories and Key Work Factors. Integrating the organization of health services, worker wellbeing and quality of care: towards healthy healthcare, 2021.

18.

Wallin S, Fjellman-Wiklund A, Fagerström L. Work motivation and occupational self-efficacy belief to continue working among ageing home care nurses: a mixed methods study. BMC Nurs. 2022;21:31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-021-00780-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Herrler A, Kukla H, Vennedey V, Stock S. Which features of ambulatory healthcare are preferred by people aged 80 and over? Findings from a systematic review of qualitative studies and appraisal of confidence using GRADE-CERQual. BMC Geriatr. 2022;22:428. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-022-03006-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Newbould L, Tucker S, Wilberforce M. Enabling older people with mental health needs to engage with community social care: a scoping review to inform a theory of change. Health Soc Care Community. 2021;hsc13648. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.13648.

21.

Roe L, Normand C, Wren M-A, Browne J, O’Halloran AM. The impact of frailty on healthcare utilisation in Ireland: evidence from the irish longitudinal study on ageing. BMC Geriatr. 2017;17:203. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-017-0579-0.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Sadler E, Potterton V, Anderson R, Khadjesari Z, Sheehan K, Butt F, et al. Service user, carer and provider perspectives on integrated care for older people with frailty, and factors perceived to facilitate and hinder implementation: a systematic review and narrative synthesis. PLoS ONE. 2019;14:e0216488. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0216488.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

WHO, editor. World report on ageing and health. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2015.

24.

Berntsen G, Gammon D, Steinsbekk A, Salamonsen A, Foss N, Ruland C, et al. How do we deal with multiple goals for care within an individual patient trajectory? A document content analysis of health service research papers on goals for care. BMJ Open. 2015;5. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009403.

25.

Edgman-Levitan S, Schoenbaum SC. Patient-centered care: achieving higher quality by designing care through the patient’s eyes. Isr J Health Policy Res. 2021;10:21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-021-00459-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Klein JH, Young T. Health care: a case of hypercomplexity? Health Syst. 2015;4:104–10. https://doi.org/10.1057/hs.2014.21.CrossRef

27.

Sturmberg J. Health system redesign: how to make health care person-centered, equitable, and sustainable. Cham: Springer; 2018.CrossRef

28.

Verbeek H, Mitchell G. Changing the long-term care spectrum. BMC Geriatr. 2022;22:303–s12877. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-022-02909-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

WHO. The Global Network for Age-friendly Cities and Communities looking back over the last decade, looking forward to the next. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organisation; 2018.

30.

Zonneveld N, Driessen N, Stüssgen RAJ, Minkman MMN. Values of Integrated Care: a systematic review. Int J Integr Care. 2018;18:9. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.4172.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Lusch RF, Vargo SL. Service-dominant logic: premises, perspectives, possibilities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2014.CrossRef

32.

Frow P, McColl-Kennedy JR, Payne A. Co-creation practices: their role in shaping a health care ecosystem. Ind Mark Manage. 2016;56:24–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.03.007.CrossRef

33.

Kaartemo V, Känsäkoski H. Information and knowledge processes in Health Care Value Co-Creation and Co-Destruction. SAGE Open. 2018;8:215824401882048. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244018820482.CrossRef

34.

Oksavik JD, Aarseth T, Solbjør M, Kirchhoff R. What matters to you?’ Normative integration of an intervention to promote participation of older patients with multi-morbidity – a qualitative case study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21:117. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06106-y.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Vargo SL, Wieland H, Akaka MA. Innovation through institutionalization: a service ecosystems perspective. Ind Mark Manage. 2015;44:63–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2014.10.008.CrossRef

36.

Vink J, Koskela-Huotari K, Tronvoll B, Edvardsson B, Wetter-Edman K. Service Ecosystem Design: propositions, process model, and Future Research Agenda. J Service Res 2020:109467052095253. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670520952537.

37.

Osborne SP, Radnor Z, Nasi G. A New Theory for Public Service Management? Toward a (Public) Service-Dominant Approach. Am Rev Public Adm. 2013;43:135–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074012466935.CrossRef

38.

Sudbury-Riley L, Hunter-Jones P. Facilitating inter-professional integration in palliative care: a service ecosystem perspective. Soc Sci Med. 2021;277:113912. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113912.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Ambugo EA, Dar I, Bikova MS, Førland O, Tjerbo T. A qualitative study on promoting reablement among older people living at home in Norway: opportunities and constraints. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022;22:150. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-07543-z.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Hasselder P, Brüchert T, Baumgart S, Bolte G. Destinations fostering older adults’ walking for transport: a cross-sectional study from Germany. BMC Geriatr. 2022;22:219. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-022-02896-w.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

41.

Hornby-Turner YC, Peel NM, Hubbard RE. Health assets in older age: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e013226. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013226.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

42.

Marston HR, Niles-Yokum K, Silva PA. A commentary on Blue Zones®: a critical review of age-friendly environments in the 21st Century and Beyond. IJERPH. 2021;18:837. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18020837.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

Mouchaers I, Verbeek H, Kempen GIJM, van Haastregt JCM, Vlaeyen E, Goderis G, et al. The concept of disability and its causal mechanisms in older people over time from a theoretical perspective: a literature review. Eur J Ageing. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-021-00668-w.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

44.

Abson DJ, Fischer J, Leventon J, Newig J, Schomerus T, Vilsmaier U, et al. Leverage points for sustainability transformation. Ambio. 2017;46:30–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-016-0800-y.CrossRefPubMed

45.

Kurtmollaiev S, Fjuk A, Pedersen PE, Clatworthy S, Kvale K. Organizational Transformation through Service Design: the Institutional Logics Perspective. J Service Res. 2018;21:59–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670517738371.CrossRef

46.

Hölscher K, Wittmayer JM, Loorbach D. Transition versus transformation: what’s the difference? Environ Innov Societal Transitions. 2018;27:1–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2017.10.007.CrossRef

47.

Ersek M, Hickman SE, Thomas AC, Bernard B, Unroe KT. Stakeholder perspectives on the optimizing patient transfers, Impacting Medical Quality, and improving symptoms: transforming Institutional Care (OPTIMISTIC) Project. Gerontologist. 2018;58:1177–87. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnx155.CrossRefPubMed

48.

Bergerød IJ, Braut GS, Fagerdal B, Gilje B, Wiig S. Developing a next-of-Kin involvement guide in Cancer Care—Results from a Consensus process. Cancer Nurs. 2021;44:E447–57. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCC.0000000000000869.CrossRefPubMed

49.

Han N, Han SH, Chu H, Kim J, Rhew KY, Yoon J-H, et al. Service design oriented multidisciplinary collaborative team care service model development for resolving drug related problems. PLoS ONE. 2018;13:e0201705. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0201705.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

50.

Sahlén S. Designing Better Care. Service design as a means for utilising the patient perspective for innovation in Norwegian healthcare. Master thesis. Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo, 2018.

51.

Fugini M, Bracci E, Sicilia M. Co-production in the Public Sector: Experiences and Challenges. Cham: (SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology); 2016.CrossRef

52.

Voorberg WH, Bekkers VJJM, Tummers LG. A systematic review of Co-Creation and Co-Production: embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Manage Rev. 2015;17:1333–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.930505.CrossRef

53.

Seddon J. Systems thinking in the public sector: the failure of the reform regime ... and a manifesto for a better way. 1st ed. Axminster, United Kingdom: Triarchy Press; 2008.

54.

Maxwell JA. Qualitative research design: an interactive approach. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications; 2013.

55.

Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19:349–57. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042.CrossRefPubMed

56.

Yin RK. Qualitative research from start to finish. Second ed. New York London: The Guilford Press; 2016.

57.

Stickdorn M, Hormess M, Lawrence A, Schneider J. In:. This is service design doing: applying service design thinking in the real world; a practitioners’ handbook. First ed. Sebastapol, CA: O’Reilly; 2018.

58.

King N, Horrocks C, Brooks JM. Interviews in qualitative research. 2nd ed. Los Angeles London New Delhi Singapore Washington, DC Melbourne: SAGE; 2019.

59.

Coleman P. In-Depth interviewing as a Research Method in Healthcare Practice and Education: Value, Limitations and Considerations. Int J Caring Sci. 2019;12:1879–85.

60.

Malterud K, Siersma VD, Guassora AD. Sample size in qualitative interview studies: guided by Information Power. Qual Health Res. 2016;26:1753–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315617444.CrossRefPubMed

61.

Ackoff R. Idealized design: creative corporate visioning. Omega. 1993;21:401–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(93)90073-T.CrossRef

62.

Ackoff R, Magidson J, Addison HJ. Idealized design: creating an organization’s future. Upper Saddle River: Wharton School Pub.; 2006.

63.

O’Donovan B. Editorial for special issue of SPAR: the Vanguard Method in a Systems thinking context. Syst Pract Action Res. 2014;27:1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-012-9247-7.CrossRef

64.

Brookhart SM. Start with higher-order thinking. Educational Leadersh. 2016;2:10–5.

65.

Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today. 2004;24:105–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001.CrossRefPubMed

66.

Vink J, Edvardsson B, Wetter-Edman K, Tronvoll B. Reshaping mental models – enabling innovation through service design. J Service Manage. 2019;30:75–104. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-08-2017-0186.CrossRef

67.

Collins B. Intentional whole health system redesign: Southcentral Foundation’s ‘Nuka’ system of care. London: The King’s fund; 2015.

68.

Gottlieb K. The Nuka System of Care: improving health through ownership and relationships. Int J Circumpolar Health. 2013;72:21118. https://doi.org/10.3402/ijch.v72i0.21118.CrossRef

69.

Jones M. Nuka-style models of primary healthcare. Pract Manage. 2017;27:26–9. https://doi.org/10.12968/prma.2017.27.4.26.CrossRef

70.

Jones M. Introducing Nuka in general practice. Pract Manage. 2018;28:20–3. https://doi.org/10.12968/prma.2018.28.1.20.CrossRef

71.

Kreitzer MJ, Monsen KA, Nandram SS, de Blok J. Buurtzorg Nederland: A Global Model of Social Innovation, Change, and Whole-Systems Healing. Global Adv Health Med. 2015;4:40–4. https://doi.org/10.7453/gahmj.2014.030.CrossRef

72.

Nandram SS. Organizational Innovation by integrating simplification. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2015.CrossRef

73.

Eide AH, Josephsson S, Vik K, editors. Participation in health and welfare services: professional concepts and lived experience. 1 Edition. New York: Routledge; 2017.

74.

Rémillard-Boilard S, Buffel T, Phillipson C. Developing Age-Friendly Cities and Communities: Eleven Case Studies from around the World. IJERPH. 2020;18:133. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18010133.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

75.

Janssen BM, Van Regenmortel T, Abma TA. Balancing risk prevention and health promotion: towards a harmonizing approach in care for older people in the community. Health Care Anal. 2014;22:82–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-011-0200-1.CrossRefPubMed

76.

Turjamaa R, Hartikainen S, Pietilä A-M. Forgotten resources of older home care clients: Focus group study in Finland: resources of older home care clients. Nurs Health Sci. 2013;15:333–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12037.CrossRefPubMed

77.

Golenko X, Paine K, Meyer C. Evaluation of a wellness and reablement approach in Australia: Learnings from a pilot project. Health Soc Care Community 2021:hsc13447. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.13447.

78.

Ingstad K, Moe A, Brataas HV. Patient Involvement During a Pathway of Home-Based Reablement for Older Persons: A Longitudinal Single-Case Study. JMDH 2021;Volume 14:1911–21. https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S321760.

79.

Johansson A, Ernsth Bravell M, Karlsson AB, Fristedt S. Valuable aspects of home rehabilitation in Sweden: experiences from older adults. Health Sci Rep 2021;4. https://doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.249.

80.

Mjøsund HL, Moe CF, Burton E, Uhrenfeldt L. Integration of physical activity in Reablement for Community Dwelling older adults: a systematic scoping review. JMDH 2020;Volume 13:1291–315. https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S270247.

81.

Gill L, Bradley SL, Cameron ID, Ratcliffe J. How do clients in Australia experience Consumer Directed Care? BMC Geriatr. 2018;18:148. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-018-0838-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

82.

van Hoof J, Marston HR. Age-Friendly Cities and Communities: state of the art and future perspectives. IJERPH. 2021;18:1644. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041644.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

83.

Thordardottir B, Malmgren Fänge A, Lethin C, Rodriguez Gatta D, Chiatti C. Acceptance and Use of innovative Assistive Technologies among people with cognitive impairment and their caregivers: a systematic review. Biomed Res Int. 2019;2019:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9196729.CrossRef

84.

Yusif S, Soar J, Hafeez-Baig A. Older people, assistive technologies, and the barriers to adoption: a systematic review. Int J Med Informatics. 2016;94:112–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2016.07.004.CrossRef

85.

Meiqari L, Al-Oudat T, Essink D, Scheele F, Wright P. How have researchers defined and used the concept of ‘continuity of care’ for chronic conditions in the context of resource-constrained settings? A scoping review of existing literature and a proposed conceptual framework. Health Res Policy Sys. 2019;17:27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-019-0426-1.CrossRef

86.

Dawson A, Bowes A, Kelly F, Velzke K, Ward R. Evidence of what works to support and sustain care at home for people with dementia: a literature review with a systematic approach. BMC Geriatr. 2015;15:59. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-015-0053-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

87.

Dostálová V, Bártová A, Bláhová H, Holmerová I. The experiences and needs of frail older people receiving home health care: a qualitative study. Int J Older People Nurs. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1111/opn.12418.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

88.

Durkin M, Gurbutt R, Carson J. Qualities, teaching, and measurement of compassion in nursing: a systematic review. Nurse Educ Today. 2018;63:50–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2018.01.025.CrossRefPubMed

89.

Herrler A, Kukla H, Vennedey V, Stock S. What matters to people aged 80 and over regarding ambulatory care? A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies. Eur J Ageing. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-021-00633-7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

90.

Kwan I, Rutter D, Anderson B, Stansfield C. Personal care and practical support at home: a systematic review of older people’s views and experiences. WWOP. 2019;23:87–106. https://doi.org/10.1108/WWOP-01-2019-0002.CrossRef

91.

Ljungholm L, Klinga C, Edin-Liljegren A, Ekstedt M. What matters in care continuity on the chronic care trajectory for patients and family carers?—A conceptual model. J Clin Nurs 2021:jocn15989. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15989.

92.

Nilsen ER, Hollister B, Söderhamn U, Dale B. What matters to older adults? Exploring person-centred care during and after transitions between hospital and home. J Clin Nurs 2021:jocn15914. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15914.

93.

Sanerma P, Paavilainen E, Åstedt-Kurki P. Home care services for older persons. The views of older persons and family members: a realistic evaluation. Int J Older People Nurs. 2020;15. https://doi.org/10.1111/opn.12281.

94.

Soares CC, Marques AM, Clarke P, Klein R, Koskinen L, Krasuckiene D, et al. Older people’s views and expectations about the competences of health and social care professionals: a european qualitative study. Eur J Ageing. 2019;16:53–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-018-0466-3.CrossRefPubMed

95.

Strandås M, Wackerhausen S, Bondas T. The nurse-patient relationship in the New Public Management era, in public home care: a focused ethnography. J Adv Nurs. 2019;75:400–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13850.CrossRefPubMed

96.

Tehranineshat B, Rakhshan M, Torabizadeh C, Fararouei M. Compassionate care in Healthcare Systems: a systematic review. J Natl Med Assoc. 2019;111:546–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnma.2019.04.002.CrossRefPubMed

97.

Watz S, Ingstad K. Keeping calm on a busy day—an interpersonal skill home care patients desire in health workers: hermeneutical phenomenological method. BMC Nurs. 2022;21:49. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-022-00825-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

98.

Zolnierek CD. An integrative review of knowing the patient: knowing the patient. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2014;46:3–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12049.CrossRefPubMed

Title: Stakeholder perspectives on the preferred service ecosystem for senior citizens living at home: a qualitative interview study
Authors: Christophe Eward Kattouw
Karina Aase
Petter Viksveen
Publication date: 01-12-2023
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: BMC Geriatrics / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2318
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-023-04303-4

Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Reserve your place

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin

Prof. Florian Limbourg

Prof. Anoop Chauhan

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

Well-being of professional older adults’ caregivers in Alberta’s assisted living and long-term care facilities: a cross-sectional study

What are the effects of animals on the health and wellbeing of residents in care homes? A systematic review of the qualitative and quantitative evidence

Status and associated factors of gerontological nurse specialists’ core competency: a national cross-sectional study

Multidimensional interventions to increase life-space mobility in older adults ranging from nursing home residents to community-dwelling: a systematic scoping review

Prevalence of visual impairment in older people living with dementia and its impact: a scoping review

The impact of elective total hip and knee arthroplasty on physical performance in orthogeriatric patients: a prospective intervention study

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

At a glance: The STEP trials