OBJECTIVE: To meet a growing demand for direct care workers (DCWs) in the United States, structural, organizational, and policy-related solutions are needed. Unionization of the workforce may be one such mechanism; however, its impact on outcomes remains poorly understood. To examine the impact of unionization on DCWs\' financial well-being and employment attitudes, as well as patient outcomes.
METHODS: A systematic search of AgeLine, CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from database inception through June 20, 2024. We included peer-reviewed empirical studies that used observational, quasi-experimental, and experimental designs.
METHODS: Studies pertained to DCWs who provided care in the home and long-term care settings. We focused on studies that illustrated the financial outcomes of DCWs (wages, compensation, benefits), employment outcomes (job satisfaction, turnover), and health-related outcomes of DCWs and their patients.
METHODS: Covidence was used to screen studies for inclusion criteria. Study characteristics were abstracted manually by prespecified domains. The Downs and Black tool was used for quality assessment. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline was followed.
RESULTS: A total of 19 studies met inclusion criteria; they were predominantly observational (94%), with local (50%) and national (50%) samples. Three studies focused on compensation and all found that unionization was associated with higher wages and benefits among DCWs. Seven studies focused on employment, finding that unionization was associated with greater job satisfaction, quality, and retention, particularly among nursing home staff and home health aides. Unionized workplaces reported better care quality and safety, including fewer injuries and better equipment provision. Unionization\'s impact on patient outcomes showed mixed results, particularly among nursing home residents. Overall, the quality of the research studies varied, with limitations in methodology and sampling affecting reliability.
CONCLUSIONS: Unionization among DCWs was generally associated with higher wages, benefits, and job satisfaction, as well as reduced turnover; however, its impact on worker and patient outcomes varied across studies. The overall quality of the studies was fair to poor, highlighting the need for more rigorous research in this area.

BACKGROUND: Long-term care (LTC) homes face the challenges of increasing care needs of residents and a shortage of health care providers. Literature suggests that artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled robots may solve such challenges and support person-centered care. There is a dearth of literature exploring the perspectives of health care providers, which are crucial to implementing AI-enabled robots.
OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to explore this scant body of literature to answer two questions: (1) what barriers do health care providers perceive in adopting AI-enabled robots in LTC homes? (2) What strategies can be taken to overcome these barriers to the adoption of AI-enabled robots in LTC homes?
METHODS: We are a team consisting of 3 researchers, 2 health care providers, 2 research trainees, and 1 older adult partner with diverse disciplines in nursing, social work, engineering, and medicine. Referring to the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology, our team searched databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, ProQuest, and Google Scholar) for peer-reviewed and gray literature, screened the literature, and extracted the data. We analyzed the data as a team. We compared our findings with the Person-Centered Practice Framework and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to further our understanding of the findings.
RESULTS: This review includes 33 articles that met the inclusion criteria. We identified three barriers to AI-enabled robot adoption: (1) perceived technical complexity and limitation; (2) negative impact, doubted usefulness, and ethical concerns; and (3) resource limitations. Strategies to mitigate these barriers were also explored: (1) accommodate the various needs of residents and health care providers, (2) increase the understanding of the benefits of using robots, (3) review and overcome the safety issues, and (4) boost interest in the use of robots and provide training.
CONCLUSIONS: Previous literature suggested using AI-enabled robots to resolve the challenges of increasing care needs and staff shortages in LTC. Yet, our findings show that health care providers might not use robots because of different considerations. The implication is that the voices of health care providers need to be included in using robots.
UNASSIGNED: RR2-doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2023-075278.

BACKGROUND: First language care is critical for older immigrant adults with limited English proficiency, especially in long-term care settings where most residents require staff assistance and experience complex chronic conditions, resulting in multiple communication interactions where language poses a barrier. Although there are a myriad of cultural-language translation apps and devices available, there is a gap in both research and practice on the acceptability and feasibility of these digital resources within the context of long-term care and community settings for older immigrant adults, from a cultural relevance and digital health equity perspective. Our paper outlines a scoping review protocol to examine the state of the literature on the extent to which cultural-language translation apps are used in long-term care settings and community-based elder care. We will also examine the extent to which such apps bridge or further gaps in equitable, accessible and acceptable care for older immigrant adults with limited English language proficiency.
METHODS: This scoping review protocol will employ an adapted five-stage framework outlined by Arksey and O\'Malley guided by enhancements recommended by Levac et al and Colquhoun et al. Using the Joanna Briggs Institute\'s population, concept and context framework, we defined the scope of the scoping review by identifying the target population, concepts for investigation and the context within which the research is situated. We will conduct a search of the literature from 2005 to 2024 using five bibliographic databases from health sciences (Healthstar OVID, MEDLINE OVID and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) EBSCO), engineering (Engineering Village Elsevier) and a cross-disciplinary database (Web of Science Clarivate). The research team will adopt a critical, equity-focused approach for the scoping review by integrating Richardson et al\'s framework for Digital Health Equity into our analysis of the findings. This will ensure that health and social equity perspectives are integrated within our methodology and analytical lens. Our analysis will specifically examine selected studies for their engagement with health equity and their ability to address issues such as ageism, ableism and the digital divide within geriatric care.
BACKGROUND: Ethics approval is not required for this scoping review as it involves secondary analysis of published works and no primary data collection involving human subjects. Findings of the review will be shared with community partners and disseminated through publications, conferences and peer-reviewed publications.

Despite the health benefits of physical activity, many older adults living in long-term care facilities lead sedentary lifestyles and do not meet minimum physical activity recommendations. Determining the behavior change techniques (BCTs) used in physical activity interventions can help us understand the underlying mechanisms by which behavioral change is achieved. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify and evaluate BCTs in physical activity interventions for the elderly residents. Six electronic databases were searched and 15 eligible studies were retained. Nine promising BCTs associated with physical activity promotion among elderly residents were identified: credible source, social support (unspecified), goal setting (outcome), goal setting (behavior), demonstration of the behavior, instruction on how to perform a behavior, self-monitoring of behavior, self-monitoring of outcome(s) of behavior, and adding objects to the environment. Future research is encouraged to select and tailor these BCTs to the specific needs and preferences of the target population.

BACKGROUND: Most older adults wish to remain in their homes and communities as they age. Despite this widespread preference, disparities in health outcomes and access to healthcare and social support may create inequities in the ability to age in place. Our objectives were to synthesise evidence of social inequity in ageing in place among older adults using an intersectional lens and to evaluate the methods used to define and measure inequities.
METHODS: We conducted a mixed studies systematic review. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and AgeLine for quantitative or qualitative literature that examined social inequities in ageing in place among adults aged 65 and older in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) member countries. Results of included studies were synthesised using qualitative content analysis guided by the PROGRESS-Plus framework.
RESULTS: Of 4874 identified records, 55 studies were included. Rural residents, racial/ethnic minorities, immigrants and those with higher socioeconomic position and greater social resources are more likely to age in place. Women and those with higher educational attainment appear less likely to age in place. The influence of socioeconomic position, education and social resources differs by gender and race/ethnicity, indicating intersectional effects across social dimensions.
CONCLUSIONS: Social dimensions influence the ability to age in place in OECD settings, likely due to health inequalities across the lifespan, disparities in access to healthcare and support services, and different preferences regarding ageing in place. Our results can inform the development of policies and programmes to equitably support ageing in place in diverse populations.

More than half of older people in long-term care facilities have dementia. Little is currently known about the methods and instruments which can be used to capture the perspectives of older people, including those with dementia, regarding the quality of care provided in such facilities. The main aims of this scoping review were two-fold. Firstly, to identify quality of care instruments that have been applied in long-term care settings. Secondly, to evaluate how these instruments have been developed and validated, particularly in terms of their applicability among older people with dementia. Seven databases (Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, Ageline, CINHAL and google scholar) were searched for relevant literature without any date limit. We used quality criteria adapted from COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments) guidelines to assess the psychometric properties of the instruments. The search identified 16 quality of care instruments which had been used in long-term care settings. Of which, two (12.5%) were specifically designed for older people with dementia, and three instruments (18.7%) were modified for use with older people with mild to moderate dementia. A variety of methods were used to develop the identified instruments including literature reviews, qualitative interviews, expert panel reviews, pre-testing and piloting with older people. None of the identified instruments had been subjected to comprehensive psychometric assessment. Most instruments for assessing quality of care in long term care settings lack alternative communication techniques tailored to people with dementia. This review highlights the need for more rigorous psychometric testing of existing instruments for assessing quality of care in long-term care settings. Several existing measures show promise and may be taken forward for further testing and development for widespread application with older people, including those living with dementia, in long term care settings.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic wreaked havoc on long-term care facilities (LTCFs). Some LTCFs performed better than others at slowing COVID-19 transmission. Emerging literature has mostly described infection prevention and control strategies implemented by LTCFs during the pandemic. However, there is a need for a comprehensive review of factors that influenced the performance of LTCFs in containing COVID-19 spread to inform public health policy.
OBJECTIVE: To build on the existing literature, we conducted a scoping review of factors that influenced LTCF performance during the COVID-19 pandemic using a multidimensional conceptual framework of performance.
METHODS: We followed the Joanna Briggs Institute\'s methodology for scoping reviews. We queried CINAHL, MEDLINE (Ovid), CAIRN, Science Direct, Scopus, and Web of Science for peer-reviewed literature in English or French published between January 1st, 2020 and December 31st, 2021. Retrieved records were screened for context (COVID-19 pandemic), population (LTCFs), interest (internal and external factors that influenced LTCF performance), and outcomes (dimensions of performance: equity, accessibility, reactivity, safety, continuity, efficacy, viability, efficiency). Descriptive characteristics of included articles were summarized. Dimensions of performance as well as internal (e.g., facility characteristics) and external (e.g., visitors) factors identified to have influenced LTCF performance were presented.
RESULTS: We retained 140 articles of which 68% were classified as research articles, 47% originated in North America, and most covered a period between March and July 2020. The most frequent dimensions of performance were \"efficacy\" (75.7%) and \"safety\" (75.7%). The most common internal factors were \"organizational context\" (72.9%) and \"human resources\" (62.1%), and the most common external factors were \"visitors\" (27.1%) and \"public health guidelines\" (25.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: Our review contributes to a global interest in understanding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on vulnerable populations residing and working in LTCFs. Though a myriad of factors were reported, a lack of randomized controlled trials makes it impossible to establish causality between the identified factors and LTCF performance. The use of a multidimensional framework can be recommended to evaluate healthcare system performance not merely in terms of efficacy and safety, but alongside other critical dimensions such as efficiency and equity.
BACKGROUND: Research Registry ID: researchregistry7026.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic magnified pre-existing socioeconomic, operational, and structural challenges in long-term care across the world. In Canada, the long-term care sector\'s dependence on caregivers as a supplement to care workers became apparent once restrictive visitation policies were employed. We conducted a scoping review to better understand the associations between caregiving and resident, formal and informal caregiver health in long-term care before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.
METHODS: A literature search was performed using MEDLINE, AgeLine, Google Advanced, ArXiv, PROSPERO, and OSF. Pairs of independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts followed by a review of full texts. Studies were included if they reported biological, psychological, or social health outcomes associated with caregiving (or lack thereof).
RESULTS: After screening and reviewing 252 records identified by the search strategy, a total of 20 full-text records were eligible and included in this review. According to our results, research on caregiving increased during the pandemic, and researchers noted restrictive visitation policies had an adverse impact on health outcomes for residents and formal and informal caregivers. In comparison, caregiving in long-term care prior to the pandemic, and once visitation policies became less restrictive, led to mostly beneficial health outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Caregiver interventions, for the most part, appear to promote better health outcomes for long-term care residents and formal and informal caregivers. Suggestions to better support caregiving in long-term care settings are offered.

UNASSIGNED: Although physical therapy, in particular exercise therapy, is widely used in nursing home residents with dementia, the literature on this topic is relatively scarce. This systematic review aimed to summarize the literature on the characteristics and effectiveness of exercise interventions supervised by physical therapists in nursing home residents with dementia.
UNASSIGNED: Six electronic databases were systematically searched for relevant studies up to August 17, 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing exercise interventions supervised by a physical therapist to any other form of intervention or usual care in nursing home residents with dementia were selected. Data were narratively analyzed and forest plots visualizing exercise effects were created.
UNASSIGNED: From the 1 377 records retrieved and screened, 6 RCTs, reported in 11 papers, met the selection criteria. Included studies used multimodal or aerobic exercise interventions, with the frequency, duration and intensity varying across studies. Three of the 6 studies were at high risk of bias. Due to inconsistency in the findings and variety in outcome measures, results on the effectiveness of the interventions are inconclusive.
UNASSIGNED: Our review emphasizes the need for more robust studies to offer understanding of the efficacy of exercise interventions supervised by physical therapists for nursing home residents with dementia.

UNASSIGNED: As dementia progresses, care needs increase leading many to require 24-h care in care homes. eHealth interventions have the potential to improve care processes of assessment and decision-making for people with dementia. However, little is known on the acceptability and effectiveness in care homes.
UNASSIGNED: To identify and explore the components, acceptability and effectiveness of eHealth interventions for people with dementia, families and staff to support assessment and decision-making in care homes.
UNASSIGNED: A mixed methods systematic review using narrative synthesis. Four databases were searched (Embase, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and CINAHL) from 2000 to July 2021. Quality appraisal used validated assessment tools appropriate for the study design.
UNASSIGNED: Twenty-six studies met eligibility criteria. Study designs and interventions were heterogeneous. Overall quality was high to moderate. Interventions that promoted supportive, practical learning through integrated working and provided staff with language to communicate resident symptoms were favored by staff. We found evidence that indicated residents were willing to use video consultations; however, families preferred face-to-face consultations. Fifteen studies considered effectiveness. Use of eHealth interventions indicates an improvement in resident outcomes in appropriate prescribing and advance care planning. Staff knowledge, confidence, and wellbeing were also improved. Hospitalisations were reduced when a video consultation component was implemented.
UNASSIGNED: Care home staff require support to meet the often multiple and changing care needs of residents with dementia. eHealth interventions can improve outcomes for staff and residents and facilitate integrated working with external professionals to support assessment and management of care. Further work is required to understand acceptability for residents and their families and effectiveness on family outcomes, particularly in non-Western cultures and low-middle income countries.
UNASSIGNED: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=254967, identifier: CRD42021254967.