大河原 啓文

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of severe natural disasters has been increasing worldwide. The residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are particularly vulnerable to such events. Therefore, promoting disaster preparedness among LTCF stakeholders is urgent. However, the optimal preparedness process remains unclear. To close this gap, we use a realist review (RR) to promote an understanding of under what circumstances and what works for promoting the disaster preparedness among LTCF stakeholders and develop theories for the process. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: RR will be guided by the Realist and Meta-Narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standard. The following five steps will be employed: (1) literature review and search for evidence, (2) study selection, (3) data extraction, (4) data synthesis and (5) development of the initial programme theory (IPT). Evidence will be searched using MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Scopus and ICHUSHI (a Japanese database). Grey literature and citation tracking will also be used. Documents of any design or publication type will be included. The study selection, coding and synthesis will be conducted independently by two authors. An IPT will be developed in the Context-Mechanism-Outcome configuration to understand how to promote disaster preparedness among LTCF stakeholders. The developed IPT will be verified by experts or stakeholders to enhance its validity. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval will not be required because this is a review of published literature. The results will be disseminated at scientific conferences and peer-reviewed journals. The developed IPT will be used in subsequent research and iteratively tested or refined to better explain under what circumstances and what works for promoting disaster preparedness among LTCF stakeholders. REGISTRATION DETAILS: This protocol has been registered at the Open Science Framework https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/J4TU6.

INTRODUCTION: In long-term care (LTC) facilities, nurses play a key role in detecting changes in residents' health conditions and preventing avoidable emergency transfers and hospitalisations through multidisciplinary collaboration. This study aimed to explore how nurses detect changes that indicate the deterioration in LTC residents' conditions. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 23 nurses from 14 LTC facilities. Data from these interviews were qualitatively analysed using coding and constant comparison methods. RESULTS: The three main categories were 'preparing', 'assessing' and 'judging'. Nurses worked closely with care workers who spent a considerable amount of time with the residents, and by sharing information, the nurses could rapidly respond to changes in the residents' conditions. They also evaluated the risk of residents experiencing changes by leveraging their clinical experience. CONCLUSION: This study found that LTC nurses should collaborate with care workers to enhance their health assessment skills, enabling them to detect changes in residents' conditions. Findings from this study can be used to promote collaboration between nurses and care workers and to develop effective educational interventions to improve nursing practice in LTC facilities. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study underscores the necessity of nurses' ability to identify early deterioration in LTC residents. The findings reveal key symptoms and warning signs that nurses should prioritize in their assessments. By leveraging clinical experience and close observation, nurses can make timely and effective decisions to address residents' health changes, preventing further deterioration and enhancing their quality of life.

OBJECTIVES: Interventions to address psychosocial healthcare issues in older adults are increasing. Realist evaluation (RE) helps us understand how these interventions work for their issues. It is significant to obtain implications for further developing such research. We aimed to identify the characteristics of studies using RE to assess interventions that address psychosocial healthcare issues in older adults by mapping relevant literature. DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ICHUSHI (a Japanese database) and Google Scholar were used for searches between 5 January 2022 and 4 January 2024. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: (1) Showing that most of the participants were older adults or their stakeholders; (2) stating in the research background or aim sections that the target interventions aimed at addressing older adults' psychosocial healthcare issues and (3) using RE to assess these interventions. DATA EXTRACTION: Data on country of origin, type of research, study design, qualitative data collection and analysis methods, desirable items for RE and intervention aims and purposes were extracted and summarised using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Fifty-four studies were analysed. Most studies were conducted in the UK (54.5%). Mixed methods were used in 28 studies (51.9%), while only qualitative methods were used in 25 studies (46.2 %). Fourteen intervention aims and purposes were identified: improving dementia care, avoiding emergency admissions, preventing social isolation and promoting family involvement in the care of older adults. CONCLUSION: RE is useful for promoting an understanding of how interventions work for addressing psychosocial healthcare issues in older adults. RE also promotes the updating of plausible theories that lead to improving interventions. Our findings show the implications of managing time and resources to address the challenge of RE's time and resource intensiveness and carefully considering the data collection methods to reduce burdens on older adults.

PURPOSE: To explore the needs of family caregivers (FCs) and how these are addressed in long-term care facilities (LTCFs). METHOD: A descriptive qualitative study was performed, using semi-structured interviews with 23 FCs from seven LTCFs in Japan. RESULTS: Inductive content analysis revealed three main themes: Coexistent Needs Related to Residents' and FCs' Own Well-Being, Means by Which FCs Promote Residents' and Their Own Well-Being, and Managing Conflicting Needs by Prioritizing and Compromising. FCs recognized that their needs relate to the well-being of residents and themselves, and both needs coexist. To address these multifaceted needs, FCs engaged in various activities while seeking support. However, limited availability of means often made it challenging to meet multiple needs simultaneously, leading FCs to manage these conflicting needs by prioritizing or compromising. CONCLUSION: The current study underscores the significance of comprehensive support that simultaneously addresses FCs' conflicting needs, rather than approaching each need separately. [Research in Gerontological Nursing, xx(x), xx-xx.].

Globally, residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) often experience adverse events (AEs) and corresponding lawsuits that result in suffering among the residents, their families, and the facilities. Hence, we conducted a study to clarify the factors related to the facilities' liabilities for damages for the AEs that occur at LTCFs in Japan. We analyzed 1,495 AE reports from LTCFs in one Japanese city. A binomial logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with liability for damages. The independent variables were classified as: residents, organizations, and social factors. In total, 14% of AEs resulted in the facility being liable for damages. The predictors of liability for damages were as follows: for the resident factors, the increased need for care had an adjusted odds ratio (AOR) of 2.00 and care levels of 2-3; and AOR of 2.48 and care levels of 4-5. The types of injuries, such as bruises, wounds, and fractures, had AORs of 3.16, 2.62, and 2.50, respectively. Regarding the organization factors, the AE time, such as noon or evening, had an AOR of 1.85. If the AE occurred indoors, the AOR was 2.78, and if it occurred during staff care, the AOR was 2.11. For any follow-ups requiring consultation with a doctor, the AOR was 4.70, and for hospitalization, the AOR was 1.76. Regarding the type of LTCF providing medical care in addition to residential care, the AOR was 4.39. Regarding the social factors, the reports filed before 2017 had an AOR of 0.58. The results of the organization factors suggest that liability tends to arise in situations where the residents and their family expect high quality care. Therefore, it is imperative to strengthen organizational factors in such situations to avoid AEs and the resulting liability for damages.