Organisation and governance of infection prevention and control in Australian residential aged care facilities: A national survey

Protocol to establish standards for the elements infection prevention and control programs and competencies for infection control professionals in Australian residential aged care homes

The COVID-19 pandemic elucidated the importance of infection prevention and control (IPC) in residential aged care homes (RACHs), both on the health and wellbeing of its residents, and the staff and clinicians who care for them. While considerable efforts have been made in Australia to improve IPC both during and in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, many of these resources remain reliant on evidence originating from hospitals and acute healthcare settings. This research aims to establish the core minimum components that will populate standards for IPC programs and governance (Stream A) and for professional practice and competencies (Stream B) in RACHs. This research will be completed using a sequential three-phase design. In Phase 1, two integrative literature reviews will be completed to synthesise the elements of current global IPC programs and professional competencies in RACHs. In Phase 2, a qualitative analysis of IPC programs and professional practice in Australian RACHs using a combination of surveys and interviews will be completed. Finally, in Phase 3, an e-Delphi will be conducted to collate expert opinion and generate consensus on the minimum components of the IPC program and professionals who administer them in RACHs. The final standards and resources will be collaboratively designed with aged care partners, industry leaders, professional bodies and key Australian health policymakers. These standards seek to empower IPC and aged care staff, not only by ensuring that they are well-equipped with the knowledge and skills to implement effective IPC programs themselves, but also that the organisation is adequately prepared to provide the resources and governance systems.

Infection Prevention and Control Response and Escalation Framework: Evaluation and application beyond a pandemic

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in constant changes to Infection Prevention and Control (IPAC) recommendations, impacting clinician capacity to stay up to date. The COVID-19 IPAC Response and Escalation Framework (IPAC Framework), rarely reported or evaluated was developed to provide scalable IPAC guidance during the pandemic to health care in New South Wales (NSW), Australia.

METHODS

Using a thematic analysis approach, a qualitative study using an online, cross-sectional survey comprising 27 questions was sent to 248 key stakeholders. Participants were health workers with broad clinical and system representation with responsibilities for risk assessment, communicating, implementing, or monitoring the IPAC Framework.

RESULTS

The IPAC Framework provided a useful IPAC tool for the management of COVID-19 as perceived by 93% of respondents. The overwhelming majority (91%) reported the Framework provided enough information on IPAC strategies needed for COVID-19 that were aligned with transmission risk. Resources supporting the IPAC Framework were reported by most respondents (84%) as being widely accepted as the authoritative guidance.

CONCLUSIONS

An IPAC Framework is perceived as invaluable by clinicians and administrators to manage IPAC requirements in health care during a pandemic. The IPAC Framework can be applied more generally to support ongoing IPAC requirements.

Are quality of care instruments inclusive of older people living with dementia? A scoping review in long-term care settings

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.

Assessing infection prevention and control programs in residential aged care in Australia: A multi-methods cross-sectional study

AIM

To assess infection prevention and control programs in residential aged care facilities.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey and structured interviews from 10 residential aged care facilities in Victoria, Australia, were used. Infection prevention and control nurse leads from each facility completed a purpose-built survey based on best practice infection prevention control program core components, including staff training, policies and procedures, governance, and surveillance. Follow-up interviews with residential aged care staff, residents and family visitors were carried out to elaborate and verify survey data.

RESULTS

Surveys from all 10 facilities were received and 75 interviews carried out. All facilities had an infection prevention and control lead nurse who had undergone additional training, and 60% of facilities had an infection prevention and control lead position description. All facilities had a committee to oversee their infection prevention and control program, and all had policies and procedures for standard and transmission-based precautions. One facility did not have a policy on healthcare-associated infection surveillance, and two facilities did not have an antimicrobial stewardship policy. All facilities provided staff training in hand hygiene and personal protective equipment use, but not all routinely assessed competency in these.

CONCLUSIONS

The residential aged care facilities' infection prevention and control programs were generally in a strong position, although there were some areas that require improvement. Further assessment of the quality of infection prevention and control program components, such as content of education and training, and policies and procedures, and ongoing evaluation of programs is recommended. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2024; 24: 358-363.

Exploring what matters to residents of Australian aged care facilities with the Happy Life Index: comparison of qualitative responses between pre- and mid-Covid-19 pandemic time points

PURPOSE

This study analysed data from a national survey of people living in Australian Residential Aged Care Facilities (RACFs) reporting on what is the best thing about where they live and suggestions for improvement. Data from prior to the Covid-19 pandemic were compared with data during the Covid-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Qualitative data from the Happy Life Index Survey were analysed using summative content analysis to code the responses in the data sets and then organise them into categories. Once categorised, the pre-Covid-19 and mid-Covid-19 data sets were compared using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

A total of 4745 residents, from over 100 RACFs, provided 8512 open-text responses to at least one of the two survey questions. Pre-Covid-19 responses were compared with mid-Covid-19 responses and those trending towards relevance (5-10% change) were identified. There were both positive and negative relevant percent changes for staff number, food (general comments), and friendliness. A trending positive percentage change was observed for staff quality and the internal environment. There was a trending negative relevant percentage change for lifestyle activities, staff generally, level of contentedness, the general environment, general choice, and general views about the service.

CONCLUSION

People living in RACFs notice the changes in staffing levels and visitors during restrictions imposed during infectious outbreaks. During these times, they appreciate the quality of the staff attending to their needs and the quality of their food. Further exploration is needed of the value of lifestyle activities and strategies to promote feelings of contentedness and general wellbeing during times of restriction.

IMpleMenting Effective infection prevention and control in ReSidential aged carE (IMMERSE): protocol for a multi-level mixed methods implementation study

BACKGROUND

Older people living in residential aged care facilities are at high risk of acquiring infections such as influenza, gastroenteritis, and more recently COVID-19. These infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality among this cohort. Quality infection prevention and control practice in residential aged care is therefore imperative. Although appointment of a dedicated infection prevention and control (IPC) lead in every Australian residential aged care facility is now mandated, all people working in this setting have a role to play in IPC. The COVID-19 pandemic revealed inadequacies in IPC in this sector and highlighted the need for interventions to improve implementation of best practice.

METHODS

Using mixed methods, this four-phase implementation study will use theory-informed approaches to: (1) assess residential aged care facilities' readiness for IPC practice change, (2) explore current practice using scenario-based assessments, (3) investigate barriers to best practice IPC, and (4) determine and evaluate feasible and locally tailored solutions to overcome the identified barriers. IPC leads will be upskilled and supported to operationalise the selected solutions. Staff working in residential aged care facilities, residents and their families will be recruited for participation in surveys and semi-structured interviews. Data will be analysed and triangulated at each phase, with findings informing the subsequent phases. Stakeholder groups at each facility and the IMMERSE project's Reference Group will contribute to the interpretation of findings at each phase of the project.

DISCUSSION

This multi-site study will comprehensively explore infection prevention and control practices in residential aged care. It will inform and support locally appropriate evidence-based strategies for enhancing infection prevention and control practice.

Education and training in infection prevention and control: Exploring support for national standards

BACKGROUND

Effective infection prevention and control (IPC) programmes comprise a hierarchy of preventive measures, one of which is appropriate use of personal protective equipment (PPE). A poor understanding of the role of PPE and sub-optimal use may fail to prevent or even increase pathogen transmission during routine care or an infectious disease outbreak. Variability in delivery and content of IPC and PPE education and training across organisations can lead to confusion, unsafe practice, and lack of confidence among clinicians. In a national survey we explored the perspectives of Australian and New Zealand IPC professionals on the value and feasibility of a national IPC training and monitoring programme to improve and standardise PPE practice and raise the profile of IPC.

METHODS

A population-based online survey that examined hospital PPE training programmes was distributed to members of three major Australasian organisations representing IPC professionals. Quantitative results of the survey have been reported previously. This paper is a qualitative analysis of responses to two open-ended questions about a national approach to training in IPC and the use of PPE.

RESULTS

Most respondents agreed that standardising IPC and PPE training could achieve more consistent practice nationally, supported through the provision of educational resources. Including competency in the use of PPE in mandatory IPC standards would assist in improving the practice and raising the profile of IPC more generally.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that that there is support for national programmes and standards for use of PPE in Australia and New Zealand.

Scope of practice and educational needs of infection prevention and control professionals in Australian residential aged care facilities

BACKGROUND

Healthcare-associated infections are serious and significant complications present across healthcare services, including residential aged care facilities. Although ensuring high quality personal and clinical care delivered to older people residing in these facilities is a high national priority, there is a paucity of evidence published about outbreaks, governance and education programs held for healthcare workers within Australian residential aged care facilities. The aim of this study is to examine the scope of practice of Infection Prevention and Control professionals within Australian residential aged care facilities and the types of infection prevention and control education and training delivered.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted inviting all Australian residential aged care facilities to participate in an online survey.

RESULTS

A total of 134 residential aged care facilities completed the survey. The majority (88.1%) reported having a designated Infection Prevention and Control professional responsible for surveillance and educational activities. Hand hygiene (94%), personal protective equipment (PPE) (79.9%) and environmental cleaning (70.1%) were some of the available Infection Prevention and Control programs. The lack of access to Infection Prevention and Control education (69.5%) and lack of Infection Prevention and Control expert advice (67.2%) were also reported by some Residential aged care facilities.

CONCLUSION

Australian residential aged care facilities recognise the importance of Infection Prevention and Control training programs to manage infection surveillance and outbreaks. Considerable activities are carried out to increase knowledge on breaking the chain of infection. Yet, more support and resources are needed to assist these efforts.