Coaching Home Care Clients to Prepare Their Homes for Safe Care Visits: A Mixed-Methods Study to Evaluate a Nurse-Led Educational Intervention Process

Pia K. Markkanen (), Rebecca J. Gore, Susan R. Sama, John E. Lindberg, Catherine J. Galligan and Margaret M. Quinn
Additional contact information
Pia K. Markkanen: Safe Home Care Project, Department of Public Health, Zuckerberg College of Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Lowell (UMASS Lowell), Lowell, MA 01854, USA
Rebecca J. Gore: Safe Home Care Project, Department of Public Health, Zuckerberg College of Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Lowell (UMASS Lowell), Lowell, MA 01854, USA
Susan R. Sama: Safe Home Care Project, Department of Public Health, Zuckerberg College of Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Lowell (UMASS Lowell), Lowell, MA 01854, USA
John E. Lindberg: Safe Home Care Project, Department of Public Health, Zuckerberg College of Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Lowell (UMASS Lowell), Lowell, MA 01854, USA
Catherine J. Galligan: Safe Home Care Project, Department of Public Health, Zuckerberg College of Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Lowell (UMASS Lowell), Lowell, MA 01854, USA
Margaret M. Quinn: Safe Home Care Project, Department of Public Health, Zuckerberg College of Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Lowell (UMASS Lowell), Lowell, MA 01854, USA

IJERPH, 2024, vol. 21, issue 3, 1-21

Abstract: Assuring home care (HC) workers’ safety is challenging because the work environment is a private home. This paper presents the process evaluation for a proof-of-concept safety intervention study to assess whether nurse-led safety coaching, using motivational interviewing and a safety handbook, could enable HC clients to improve safety in their homes. The process evaluation objectives were to (i) document the intervention’s implementation progress and (ii) assess the intervention’s dose delivery, dose reception, and fidelity. Five agencies employing liaisons ( n = 5) and nurse managers (NMs, n = 8) implemented this study’s intervention and control arms. NMs assigned to the intervention arm ( n = 6) coached 34 clients. Process evaluation metrics were assessed with mixed-methods data from (i) surveys completed by NMs during the intervention, (ii) postintervention audio-recorded and transcribed interviews ( n = 6) with NMs and liaisons, and (iii) study progress tracking tools. The delivered dose efficiency was 85%, measured by the distribution of safety handbook copies to clients. About 94% of clients ( n = 32) were considered “engaged” or “maybe engaged” during the safety coaching. Most coached clients ( n = 30) were reachable for follow-up by NMs to assess intervention progress. Despite challenges, the intervention was implemented with good fidelity. Safety coaching can be applied in many HC contexts in larger populations.

Keywords: home care; safety coaching; process evaluation; intervention study; client safety; patient safety; caregiver safety (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/21/3/360/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/21/3/360/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:21:y:2024:i:3:p:360-:d:1359303

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().