0–Section F. The goal was to interview newly admitted residents within 24 hours of admission.
This would enable staff to address preferences from the beginning of the resident’s stay. Sites were asked to interview long stay residents shortly before the individual’s care planning conference. The next step was to conduct the Preference Satisfaction portion of the interview, ideally within 5 to 7 days after the initial preference interview for short stay residents. Long stay resident preference and satisfaction interviews could be see more conducted on the same day, or 5 to 7 days apart. Providers were given several options for the choice of interviewer for the preference and satisfaction portions of the interview. Guidelines recommended that the staff member who actually delivers the care should conduct the preference interview; however, to encourage residents to share forthright opinions, a different staff member could be assigned to ask preference satisfaction questions. Among the possible options, communities could (1) use a volunteer or personnel other than a certified nursing assistant (CNA) or activity therapist
to Epigenetic activity conduct preference satisfaction interviews; (2) have the CNA and activity therapist switch interview categories (ie, CNA asks questions about activity preferences, and activity therapist asks about personal care); or (3) deploy licensed nurses or social workers from a neighboring unit or floor to conduct preference satisfaction interviews.23 Staff from pilot sites entered responses from resident preference acetylcholine and satisfaction interviews into the revised Excel spreadsheet that automatically calculates a preference congruence percentage for each resident. Reports can be generated for each individual resident (for an example, Figure 1), or in aggregate for a household
of residents (Figure 2). As care planning conferences took place, staff members also noted whether the resident, family members or close friends and direct care staff, such as CNAs, attended the meetings and entered this data into the spreadsheet, which calculated participation rates. Pilot sites were asked to fax their NH’s 4 aggregate quality indicator results to the research team (for an example, Figure 3). Individual resident-level information was not shared with researchers. Project coordinators identified by each site were asked to complete a questionnaire (93 items) regarding staff experiences using the new toolkit. The evaluation form asked about the PCC spreadsheet’s functionality and content, the webinar training experience, the resident interview process, challenges in implementing PCC, and overall satisfaction with the toolkit. Responses for most questions used a 5-point Likert scale, with a range from “completely agree” to “completely disagree.” Also, several open-ended questions provided a qualitative perspective on these topics.