How Residents’ Quality of Life are Represented in Long-Term Care Policy: A Novel Method to Support Policy Analysis

Context: In one’s final years, quality of life (QoL) is a fundamental desire. In Canada, a publicly-funded long-term care (LTC) system is governed provincially through multiple policies about housing and care provision. A pan-Canadian research team investigated federal and provincial policies’ influence on the QoL of older people living in residential LTC in four provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. Objective(s): This paper describes a novel method of policy analysis developed by the authors to analyse the inclusion of QoL domains within these LTC policies, and assess implications for residents, their families, and staff. Method(s): Within the novel method mentioned there were four stages in the method that consisted of an iterative and collaborative approach to understanding the relationships between LTC regulations and resident QoL domains through four perspectives (resident, staff, family, volunteer). At first, inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied to select appropriate policies, and secondly, policy texts were to coded according to Kane’s (2001) QoL domains. The third stage involved assigning a level of regulatory power, with the final stage interrogating the policy categorisation data from four perspectives: residents, families, volunteers and workers. Findings: The outcome revealed a dominant discourse of safety, security, and order over other domains such as dignity, privacy, and spirituality. Limitations: Policies dictate regulatory and guiding principles, and are only one part of the story. How these policies are implemented is beyond the scope of our research, but we recognize that understanding these implementation practices are essential to fully capture the experiences of residents, their families, and staff. Implications: This novel method is useful in exploring how QoL is supported across a high number of complex cross-jurisdictional policies. We conclude that our approach to policy analysis enables a re-examination of policies affecting LTC and assesses whether these policies reflect the values of the residents and society at large. Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Deanne Taylor [verfasserIn] Janice Keefe [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2021

Schlagwörter:	Long-term care policy Quality of Life policy analysis nursing homes late life Canada

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: Journal of Long-Term Care - LSE Press, 2021, (2021), 2021
Übergeordnetes Werk:	year:2021 ; number:2021

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ09195424X

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ09195424X
003	DE-627
005	20240413154814.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	240412s2021 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ09195424X
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJfeff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
100	0		\|a Deanne Taylor \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a How Residents’ Quality of Life are Represented in Long-Term Care Policy: A Novel Method to Support Policy Analysis
264		1	\|c 2021
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a Context: In one’s final years, quality of life (QoL) is a fundamental desire. In Canada, a publicly-funded long-term care (LTC) system is governed provincially through multiple policies about housing and care provision. A pan-Canadian research team investigated federal and provincial policies’ influence on the QoL of older people living in residential LTC in four provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. Objective(s): This paper describes a novel method of policy analysis developed by the authors to analyse the inclusion of QoL domains within these LTC policies, and assess implications for residents, their families, and staff. Method(s): Within the novel method mentioned there were four stages in the method that consisted of an iterative and collaborative approach to understanding the relationships between LTC regulations and resident QoL domains through four perspectives (resident, staff, family, volunteer). At first, inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied to select appropriate policies, and secondly, policy texts were to coded according to Kane’s (2001) QoL domains. The third stage involved assigning a level of regulatory power, with the final stage interrogating the policy categorisation data from four perspectives: residents, families, volunteers and workers. Findings: The outcome revealed a dominant discourse of safety, security, and order over other domains such as dignity, privacy, and spirituality. Limitations: Policies dictate regulatory and guiding principles, and are only one part of the story. How these policies are implemented is beyond the scope of our research, but we recognize that understanding these implementation practices are essential to fully capture the experiences of residents, their families, and staff. Implications: This novel method is useful in exploring how QoL is supported across a high number of complex cross-jurisdictional policies. We conclude that our approach to policy analysis enables a re-examination of policies affecting LTC and assesses whether these policies reflect the values of the residents and society at large.
650		4	\|a Long-term care policy
650		4	\|a Quality of Life
650		4	\|a policy analysis
650		4	\|a nursing homes
650		4	\|a late life
650		4	\|a Canada
653		0	\|a Medicine
653		0	\|a R
653		0	\|a Social Sciences
653		0	\|a H
700	0		\|a Janice Keefe \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t Journal of Long-Term Care \|d LSE Press, 2021 \|g (2021), 2021 \|w (DE-627)1757900446 \|w (DE-600)3064274-7 \|x 25169122 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g year:2021 \|g number:2021
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/feff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://account.journal.ilpnetwork.org/index.php/lse-j-jltc/article/view/79 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/2516-9122 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|j 2021 \|e 2021

Indexfelder

author_variant	d t dt j k jk
matchkey_str	article:25169122:2021----::orsdnsultolfaeersneilntrcrplcaoemt
hierarchy_sort_str	2021
publishDate	2021
allfields	(DE-627)DOAJ09195424X (DE-599)DOAJfeff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Deanne Taylor verfasserin aut How Residents’ Quality of Life are Represented in Long-Term Care Policy: A Novel Method to Support Policy Analysis 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Context: In one’s final years, quality of life (QoL) is a fundamental desire. In Canada, a publicly-funded long-term care (LTC) system is governed provincially through multiple policies about housing and care provision. A pan-Canadian research team investigated federal and provincial policies’ influence on the QoL of older people living in residential LTC in four provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. Objective(s): This paper describes a novel method of policy analysis developed by the authors to analyse the inclusion of QoL domains within these LTC policies, and assess implications for residents, their families, and staff. Method(s): Within the novel method mentioned there were four stages in the method that consisted of an iterative and collaborative approach to understanding the relationships between LTC regulations and resident QoL domains through four perspectives (resident, staff, family, volunteer). At first, inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied to select appropriate policies, and secondly, policy texts were to coded according to Kane’s (2001) QoL domains. The third stage involved assigning a level of regulatory power, with the final stage interrogating the policy categorisation data from four perspectives: residents, families, volunteers and workers. Findings: The outcome revealed a dominant discourse of safety, security, and order over other domains such as dignity, privacy, and spirituality. Limitations: Policies dictate regulatory and guiding principles, and are only one part of the story. How these policies are implemented is beyond the scope of our research, but we recognize that understanding these implementation practices are essential to fully capture the experiences of residents, their families, and staff. Implications: This novel method is useful in exploring how QoL is supported across a high number of complex cross-jurisdictional policies. We conclude that our approach to policy analysis enables a re-examination of policies affecting LTC and assesses whether these policies reflect the values of the residents and society at large. Long-term care policy Quality of Life policy analysis nursing homes late life Canada Medicine R Social Sciences H Janice Keefe verfasserin aut In Journal of Long-Term Care LSE Press, 2021 (2021), 2021 (DE-627)1757900446 (DE-600)3064274-7 25169122 nnns year:2021 number:2021 https://doaj.org/article/feff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267 kostenfrei https://account.journal.ilpnetwork.org/index.php/lse-j-jltc/article/view/79 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2516-9122 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2021 2021
spelling	(DE-627)DOAJ09195424X (DE-599)DOAJfeff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Deanne Taylor verfasserin aut How Residents’ Quality of Life are Represented in Long-Term Care Policy: A Novel Method to Support Policy Analysis 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Context: In one’s final years, quality of life (QoL) is a fundamental desire. In Canada, a publicly-funded long-term care (LTC) system is governed provincially through multiple policies about housing and care provision. A pan-Canadian research team investigated federal and provincial policies’ influence on the QoL of older people living in residential LTC in four provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. Objective(s): This paper describes a novel method of policy analysis developed by the authors to analyse the inclusion of QoL domains within these LTC policies, and assess implications for residents, their families, and staff. Method(s): Within the novel method mentioned there were four stages in the method that consisted of an iterative and collaborative approach to understanding the relationships between LTC regulations and resident QoL domains through four perspectives (resident, staff, family, volunteer). At first, inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied to select appropriate policies, and secondly, policy texts were to coded according to Kane’s (2001) QoL domains. The third stage involved assigning a level of regulatory power, with the final stage interrogating the policy categorisation data from four perspectives: residents, families, volunteers and workers. Findings: The outcome revealed a dominant discourse of safety, security, and order over other domains such as dignity, privacy, and spirituality. Limitations: Policies dictate regulatory and guiding principles, and are only one part of the story. How these policies are implemented is beyond the scope of our research, but we recognize that understanding these implementation practices are essential to fully capture the experiences of residents, their families, and staff. Implications: This novel method is useful in exploring how QoL is supported across a high number of complex cross-jurisdictional policies. We conclude that our approach to policy analysis enables a re-examination of policies affecting LTC and assesses whether these policies reflect the values of the residents and society at large. Long-term care policy Quality of Life policy analysis nursing homes late life Canada Medicine R Social Sciences H Janice Keefe verfasserin aut In Journal of Long-Term Care LSE Press, 2021 (2021), 2021 (DE-627)1757900446 (DE-600)3064274-7 25169122 nnns year:2021 number:2021 https://doaj.org/article/feff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267 kostenfrei https://account.journal.ilpnetwork.org/index.php/lse-j-jltc/article/view/79 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2516-9122 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2021 2021
allfields_unstemmed	(DE-627)DOAJ09195424X (DE-599)DOAJfeff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Deanne Taylor verfasserin aut How Residents’ Quality of Life are Represented in Long-Term Care Policy: A Novel Method to Support Policy Analysis 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Context: In one’s final years, quality of life (QoL) is a fundamental desire. In Canada, a publicly-funded long-term care (LTC) system is governed provincially through multiple policies about housing and care provision. A pan-Canadian research team investigated federal and provincial policies’ influence on the QoL of older people living in residential LTC in four provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. Objective(s): This paper describes a novel method of policy analysis developed by the authors to analyse the inclusion of QoL domains within these LTC policies, and assess implications for residents, their families, and staff. Method(s): Within the novel method mentioned there were four stages in the method that consisted of an iterative and collaborative approach to understanding the relationships between LTC regulations and resident QoL domains through four perspectives (resident, staff, family, volunteer). At first, inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied to select appropriate policies, and secondly, policy texts were to coded according to Kane’s (2001) QoL domains. The third stage involved assigning a level of regulatory power, with the final stage interrogating the policy categorisation data from four perspectives: residents, families, volunteers and workers. Findings: The outcome revealed a dominant discourse of safety, security, and order over other domains such as dignity, privacy, and spirituality. Limitations: Policies dictate regulatory and guiding principles, and are only one part of the story. How these policies are implemented is beyond the scope of our research, but we recognize that understanding these implementation practices are essential to fully capture the experiences of residents, their families, and staff. Implications: This novel method is useful in exploring how QoL is supported across a high number of complex cross-jurisdictional policies. We conclude that our approach to policy analysis enables a re-examination of policies affecting LTC and assesses whether these policies reflect the values of the residents and society at large. Long-term care policy Quality of Life policy analysis nursing homes late life Canada Medicine R Social Sciences H Janice Keefe verfasserin aut In Journal of Long-Term Care LSE Press, 2021 (2021), 2021 (DE-627)1757900446 (DE-600)3064274-7 25169122 nnns year:2021 number:2021 https://doaj.org/article/feff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267 kostenfrei https://account.journal.ilpnetwork.org/index.php/lse-j-jltc/article/view/79 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2516-9122 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2021 2021
allfieldsGer	(DE-627)DOAJ09195424X (DE-599)DOAJfeff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Deanne Taylor verfasserin aut How Residents’ Quality of Life are Represented in Long-Term Care Policy: A Novel Method to Support Policy Analysis 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Context: In one’s final years, quality of life (QoL) is a fundamental desire. In Canada, a publicly-funded long-term care (LTC) system is governed provincially through multiple policies about housing and care provision. A pan-Canadian research team investigated federal and provincial policies’ influence on the QoL of older people living in residential LTC in four provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. Objective(s): This paper describes a novel method of policy analysis developed by the authors to analyse the inclusion of QoL domains within these LTC policies, and assess implications for residents, their families, and staff. Method(s): Within the novel method mentioned there were four stages in the method that consisted of an iterative and collaborative approach to understanding the relationships between LTC regulations and resident QoL domains through four perspectives (resident, staff, family, volunteer). At first, inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied to select appropriate policies, and secondly, policy texts were to coded according to Kane’s (2001) QoL domains. The third stage involved assigning a level of regulatory power, with the final stage interrogating the policy categorisation data from four perspectives: residents, families, volunteers and workers. Findings: The outcome revealed a dominant discourse of safety, security, and order over other domains such as dignity, privacy, and spirituality. Limitations: Policies dictate regulatory and guiding principles, and are only one part of the story. How these policies are implemented is beyond the scope of our research, but we recognize that understanding these implementation practices are essential to fully capture the experiences of residents, their families, and staff. Implications: This novel method is useful in exploring how QoL is supported across a high number of complex cross-jurisdictional policies. We conclude that our approach to policy analysis enables a re-examination of policies affecting LTC and assesses whether these policies reflect the values of the residents and society at large. Long-term care policy Quality of Life policy analysis nursing homes late life Canada Medicine R Social Sciences H Janice Keefe verfasserin aut In Journal of Long-Term Care LSE Press, 2021 (2021), 2021 (DE-627)1757900446 (DE-600)3064274-7 25169122 nnns year:2021 number:2021 https://doaj.org/article/feff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267 kostenfrei https://account.journal.ilpnetwork.org/index.php/lse-j-jltc/article/view/79 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2516-9122 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2021 2021
allfieldsSound	(DE-627)DOAJ09195424X (DE-599)DOAJfeff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Deanne Taylor verfasserin aut How Residents’ Quality of Life are Represented in Long-Term Care Policy: A Novel Method to Support Policy Analysis 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Context: In one’s final years, quality of life (QoL) is a fundamental desire. In Canada, a publicly-funded long-term care (LTC) system is governed provincially through multiple policies about housing and care provision. A pan-Canadian research team investigated federal and provincial policies’ influence on the QoL of older people living in residential LTC in four provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. Objective(s): This paper describes a novel method of policy analysis developed by the authors to analyse the inclusion of QoL domains within these LTC policies, and assess implications for residents, their families, and staff. Method(s): Within the novel method mentioned there were four stages in the method that consisted of an iterative and collaborative approach to understanding the relationships between LTC regulations and resident QoL domains through four perspectives (resident, staff, family, volunteer). At first, inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied to select appropriate policies, and secondly, policy texts were to coded according to Kane’s (2001) QoL domains. The third stage involved assigning a level of regulatory power, with the final stage interrogating the policy categorisation data from four perspectives: residents, families, volunteers and workers. Findings: The outcome revealed a dominant discourse of safety, security, and order over other domains such as dignity, privacy, and spirituality. Limitations: Policies dictate regulatory and guiding principles, and are only one part of the story. How these policies are implemented is beyond the scope of our research, but we recognize that understanding these implementation practices are essential to fully capture the experiences of residents, their families, and staff. Implications: This novel method is useful in exploring how QoL is supported across a high number of complex cross-jurisdictional policies. We conclude that our approach to policy analysis enables a re-examination of policies affecting LTC and assesses whether these policies reflect the values of the residents and society at large. Long-term care policy Quality of Life policy analysis nursing homes late life Canada Medicine R Social Sciences H Janice Keefe verfasserin aut In Journal of Long-Term Care LSE Press, 2021 (2021), 2021 (DE-627)1757900446 (DE-600)3064274-7 25169122 nnns year:2021 number:2021 https://doaj.org/article/feff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267 kostenfrei https://account.journal.ilpnetwork.org/index.php/lse-j-jltc/article/view/79 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2516-9122 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2021 2021
language	English
source	In Journal of Long-Term Care (2021), 2021 year:2021 number:2021
sourceStr	In Journal of Long-Term Care (2021), 2021 year:2021 number:2021
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Long-term care policy Quality of Life policy analysis nursing homes late life Canada Medicine R Social Sciences H
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Journal of Long-Term Care
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Deanne Taylor @@aut@@ Janice Keefe @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2021-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	1757900446
id	DOAJ09195424X
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ09195424X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240413154814.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">240412s2021 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ09195424X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJfeff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Deanne Taylor</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">How Residents’ Quality of Life are Represented in Long-Term Care Policy: A Novel Method to Support Policy Analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Context: In one’s final years, quality of life (QoL) is a fundamental desire. In Canada, a publicly-funded long-term care (LTC) system is governed provincially through multiple policies about housing and care provision. A pan-Canadian research team investigated federal and provincial policies’ influence on the QoL of older people living in residential LTC in four provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. Objective(s): This paper describes a novel method of policy analysis developed by the authors to analyse the inclusion of QoL domains within these LTC policies, and assess implications for residents, their families, and staff. Method(s): Within the novel method mentioned there were four stages in the method that consisted of an iterative and collaborative approach to understanding the relationships between LTC regulations and resident QoL domains through four perspectives (resident, staff, family, volunteer). At first, inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied to select appropriate policies, and secondly, policy texts were to coded according to Kane’s (2001) QoL domains. The third stage involved assigning a level of regulatory power, with the final stage interrogating the policy categorisation data from four perspectives: residents, families, volunteers and workers. Findings: The outcome revealed a dominant discourse of safety, security, and order over other domains such as dignity, privacy, and spirituality. Limitations: Policies dictate regulatory and guiding principles, and are only one part of the story. How these policies are implemented is beyond the scope of our research, but we recognize that understanding these implementation practices are essential to fully capture the experiences of residents, their families, and staff. Implications: This novel method is useful in exploring how QoL is supported across a high number of complex cross-jurisdictional policies. We conclude that our approach to policy analysis enables a re-examination of policies affecting LTC and assesses whether these policies reflect the values of the residents and society at large.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Long-term care policy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Quality of Life</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">policy analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">nursing homes</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">late life</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Canada</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Medicine</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">R</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Social Sciences</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">H</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Janice Keefe</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of Long-Term Care</subfield><subfield code="d">LSE Press, 2021</subfield><subfield code="g">(2021), 2021</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)1757900446</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)3064274-7</subfield><subfield code="x">25169122</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/feff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://account.journal.ilpnetwork.org/index.php/lse-j-jltc/article/view/79</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2516-9122</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">2021</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Deanne Taylor
spellingShingle	Deanne Taylor misc Long-term care policy misc Quality of Life misc policy analysis misc nursing homes misc late life misc Canada misc Medicine misc R misc Social Sciences misc H How Residents’ Quality of Life are Represented in Long-Term Care Policy: A Novel Method to Support Policy Analysis
authorStr	Deanne Taylor
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)1757900446
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	25169122
topic_title	How Residents’ Quality of Life are Represented in Long-Term Care Policy: A Novel Method to Support Policy Analysis Long-term care policy Quality of Life policy analysis nursing homes late life Canada
topic	misc Long-term care policy misc Quality of Life misc policy analysis misc nursing homes misc late life misc Canada misc Medicine misc R misc Social Sciences misc H
topic_unstemmed	misc Long-term care policy misc Quality of Life misc policy analysis misc nursing homes misc late life misc Canada misc Medicine misc R misc Social Sciences misc H
topic_browse	misc Long-term care policy misc Quality of Life misc policy analysis misc nursing homes misc late life misc Canada misc Medicine misc R misc Social Sciences misc H
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Journal of Long-Term Care
hierarchy_parent_id	1757900446
hierarchy_top_title	Journal of Long-Term Care
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)1757900446 (DE-600)3064274-7
title	How Residents’ Quality of Life are Represented in Long-Term Care Policy: A Novel Method to Support Policy Analysis
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ09195424X (DE-599)DOAJfeff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267
title_full	How Residents’ Quality of Life are Represented in Long-Term Care Policy: A Novel Method to Support Policy Analysis
author_sort	Deanne Taylor
journal	Journal of Long-Term Care
journalStr	Journal of Long-Term Care
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2021
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Deanne Taylor Janice Keefe
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Deanne Taylor
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	how residents’ quality of life are represented in long-term care policy: a novel method to support policy analysis
title_auth	How Residents’ Quality of Life are Represented in Long-Term Care Policy: A Novel Method to Support Policy Analysis
abstract	Context: In one’s final years, quality of life (QoL) is a fundamental desire. In Canada, a publicly-funded long-term care (LTC) system is governed provincially through multiple policies about housing and care provision. A pan-Canadian research team investigated federal and provincial policies’ influence on the QoL of older people living in residential LTC in four provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. Objective(s): This paper describes a novel method of policy analysis developed by the authors to analyse the inclusion of QoL domains within these LTC policies, and assess implications for residents, their families, and staff. Method(s): Within the novel method mentioned there were four stages in the method that consisted of an iterative and collaborative approach to understanding the relationships between LTC regulations and resident QoL domains through four perspectives (resident, staff, family, volunteer). At first, inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied to select appropriate policies, and secondly, policy texts were to coded according to Kane’s (2001) QoL domains. The third stage involved assigning a level of regulatory power, with the final stage interrogating the policy categorisation data from four perspectives: residents, families, volunteers and workers. Findings: The outcome revealed a dominant discourse of safety, security, and order over other domains such as dignity, privacy, and spirituality. Limitations: Policies dictate regulatory and guiding principles, and are only one part of the story. How these policies are implemented is beyond the scope of our research, but we recognize that understanding these implementation practices are essential to fully capture the experiences of residents, their families, and staff. Implications: This novel method is useful in exploring how QoL is supported across a high number of complex cross-jurisdictional policies. We conclude that our approach to policy analysis enables a re-examination of policies affecting LTC and assesses whether these policies reflect the values of the residents and society at large.
abstractGer	Context: In one’s final years, quality of life (QoL) is a fundamental desire. In Canada, a publicly-funded long-term care (LTC) system is governed provincially through multiple policies about housing and care provision. A pan-Canadian research team investigated federal and provincial policies’ influence on the QoL of older people living in residential LTC in four provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. Objective(s): This paper describes a novel method of policy analysis developed by the authors to analyse the inclusion of QoL domains within these LTC policies, and assess implications for residents, their families, and staff. Method(s): Within the novel method mentioned there were four stages in the method that consisted of an iterative and collaborative approach to understanding the relationships between LTC regulations and resident QoL domains through four perspectives (resident, staff, family, volunteer). At first, inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied to select appropriate policies, and secondly, policy texts were to coded according to Kane’s (2001) QoL domains. The third stage involved assigning a level of regulatory power, with the final stage interrogating the policy categorisation data from four perspectives: residents, families, volunteers and workers. Findings: The outcome revealed a dominant discourse of safety, security, and order over other domains such as dignity, privacy, and spirituality. Limitations: Policies dictate regulatory and guiding principles, and are only one part of the story. How these policies are implemented is beyond the scope of our research, but we recognize that understanding these implementation practices are essential to fully capture the experiences of residents, their families, and staff. Implications: This novel method is useful in exploring how QoL is supported across a high number of complex cross-jurisdictional policies. We conclude that our approach to policy analysis enables a re-examination of policies affecting LTC and assesses whether these policies reflect the values of the residents and society at large.
abstract_unstemmed	Context: In one’s final years, quality of life (QoL) is a fundamental desire. In Canada, a publicly-funded long-term care (LTC) system is governed provincially through multiple policies about housing and care provision. A pan-Canadian research team investigated federal and provincial policies’ influence on the QoL of older people living in residential LTC in four provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. Objective(s): This paper describes a novel method of policy analysis developed by the authors to analyse the inclusion of QoL domains within these LTC policies, and assess implications for residents, their families, and staff. Method(s): Within the novel method mentioned there were four stages in the method that consisted of an iterative and collaborative approach to understanding the relationships between LTC regulations and resident QoL domains through four perspectives (resident, staff, family, volunteer). At first, inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied to select appropriate policies, and secondly, policy texts were to coded according to Kane’s (2001) QoL domains. The third stage involved assigning a level of regulatory power, with the final stage interrogating the policy categorisation data from four perspectives: residents, families, volunteers and workers. Findings: The outcome revealed a dominant discourse of safety, security, and order over other domains such as dignity, privacy, and spirituality. Limitations: Policies dictate regulatory and guiding principles, and are only one part of the story. How these policies are implemented is beyond the scope of our research, but we recognize that understanding these implementation practices are essential to fully capture the experiences of residents, their families, and staff. Implications: This novel method is useful in exploring how QoL is supported across a high number of complex cross-jurisdictional policies. We conclude that our approach to policy analysis enables a re-examination of policies affecting LTC and assesses whether these policies reflect the values of the residents and society at large.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	2021
title_short	How Residents’ Quality of Life are Represented in Long-Term Care Policy: A Novel Method to Support Policy Analysis
url	https://doaj.org/article/feff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267 https://account.journal.ilpnetwork.org/index.php/lse-j-jltc/article/view/79 https://doaj.org/toc/2516-9122
remote_bool	true
author2	Janice Keefe
author2Str	Janice Keefe
ppnlink	1757900446
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
up_date	2024-07-03T23:14:14.305Z
_version_	1803601528024465408
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ09195424X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240413154814.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">240412s2021 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ09195424X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJfeff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Deanne Taylor</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">How Residents’ Quality of Life are Represented in Long-Term Care Policy: A Novel Method to Support Policy Analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Context: In one’s final years, quality of life (QoL) is a fundamental desire. In Canada, a publicly-funded long-term care (LTC) system is governed provincially through multiple policies about housing and care provision. A pan-Canadian research team investigated federal and provincial policies’ influence on the QoL of older people living in residential LTC in four provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. Objective(s): This paper describes a novel method of policy analysis developed by the authors to analyse the inclusion of QoL domains within these LTC policies, and assess implications for residents, their families, and staff. Method(s): Within the novel method mentioned there were four stages in the method that consisted of an iterative and collaborative approach to understanding the relationships between LTC regulations and resident QoL domains through four perspectives (resident, staff, family, volunteer). At first, inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied to select appropriate policies, and secondly, policy texts were to coded according to Kane’s (2001) QoL domains. The third stage involved assigning a level of regulatory power, with the final stage interrogating the policy categorisation data from four perspectives: residents, families, volunteers and workers. Findings: The outcome revealed a dominant discourse of safety, security, and order over other domains such as dignity, privacy, and spirituality. Limitations: Policies dictate regulatory and guiding principles, and are only one part of the story. How these policies are implemented is beyond the scope of our research, but we recognize that understanding these implementation practices are essential to fully capture the experiences of residents, their families, and staff. Implications: This novel method is useful in exploring how QoL is supported across a high number of complex cross-jurisdictional policies. We conclude that our approach to policy analysis enables a re-examination of policies affecting LTC and assesses whether these policies reflect the values of the residents and society at large.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Long-term care policy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Quality of Life</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">policy analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">nursing homes</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">late life</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Canada</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Medicine</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">R</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Social Sciences</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">H</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Janice Keefe</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of Long-Term Care</subfield><subfield code="d">LSE Press, 2021</subfield><subfield code="g">(2021), 2021</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)1757900446</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)3064274-7</subfield><subfield code="x">25169122</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/feff64d4ee0a4fd086a90f47cebc0267</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://account.journal.ilpnetwork.org/index.php/lse-j-jltc/article/view/79</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2516-9122</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">2021</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.399457

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

How Residents’ Quality of Life are Represented in Long-Term Care Policy: A Novel Method to Support Policy Analysis

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?