RNRCTClinical nursing research2021

A Description of Staff-resident Interactions in Assisted Living.

Anju Paudel, Elizabeth Galik, Barbara Resnick and 3 others

PMID 33238730

WHAT IT FOUND

In assisted living, 705 observed staff-resident interactions were mostly positive: 92.4% involved conversation or companionship, and 75.8% were positive during care.

About 21% were neutral, 3.2% were negative protective, and 1.1% were negative restrictive.

Key findings

01In 705 observed staff-resident interactions, 92.4% were coded positive social and 75.8% were coded positive care.

02Neutral interactions were coded in 20.7% of the 705 interactions, negative protective in 3.2%, and negative restrictive in 1.1%.

03The mean Quality of Interaction Schedule score was 6.3 on a 0 to 7 scale, where higher scores indicate more positive interaction.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The findings come from residents in relatively large assisted living facilities in only three states, so they may not represent all assisted living settings. Participants were mostly white, female, and non-Hispanic, which limits generalisability. Staff may have behaved more positively because they were being observed, so neutral or negative interactions could be more common outside observation. This was a baseline descriptive analysis from a larger implementation study, not a test of an intervention, so it cannot show what improves interactions. Some enrolled residents were excluded because their recorded interactions did not involve staff, which may affect what was observed.

Declared interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest.

The easy way to misread this

Do not read the high positive interaction rates as proof that assisted living staff-resident care is adequate or that communication training works. This was a descriptive baseline observation, not a test of an intervention, and neutral or negative interactions were still recorded.

Read it on PubMed →