Effects of applying a standardized assessment and evaluation protocol in housing adaptation implementation - Results from a quasi-experimental study

Forskningsoutput: TidskriftsbidragArtikel i vetenskaplig tidskrift

Standard

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of applying a standardized assessment and evaluation protocol in housing adaptation implementation - Results from a quasi-experimental study

AU - Malmgren Fänge, A.

AU - Carlsson, G.

AU - Axmon, A.

AU - Thordardottir, B.

AU - Chiatti, C.

AU - Nilsson, M. H.

AU - Ekstam, L.

PY - 2019/11/4

Y1 - 2019/11/4

N2 - Background: Standardized, research-based strategies to guide the implementation and evaluate the effects of housing adaptations (HA) on client outcomes are rare. We hypothesized that, compared to ordinary practice, a standardized assessment and evaluation protocol for HA implementation would better maintain or improve client outcomes over 1 year. Method: Using a cluster design, South Swedish municipalities were recruited to an intervention or control group. Data on activities of daily living, usability of the home, health related quality of life, and participation frequency and satisfaction were collected at home visits 1 month before the HA (baseline; T1), and at 3 (T2), 6 (T3) and 12 (T4) months after. In the intervention group (n = 112) data were collected according to a standardized protocol while in the control group (n = 129) ordinary routines were applied. Changes from baseline to subsequent time points were categorized as no deterioration (i.e. improvement or no change) or deterioration, for each outcome item separately. Differences in "no deterioration" between the groups were assessed using logistic regression. Results: Little effect of using the standardized protocol was detected. For activities of daily living, statistically significant differences between the groups were found for toileting (T1-T4; OR 3.14), dressing (T1-T4; OR2.89) and cooking (T1-T3 and T1-T4; OR 3.14). For usability of the home differences were found in personal hygiene (T1-T2; OR 2.32) using a wheelchair (T1-T2 and T1-T3; OR 9.50), picking up the mail (T1-T3; OR 4.06), and in participation, helping others (T1-T3 and T1-T4; OR 2.33 and 3.36). Conclusion: The applied standardized protocol for HA implementation did not show any convincing effect, possibly due to the complexity of the intervention itself, and the implementation process. A process evaluation might generate in-depth knowledge about the reasons behind the findings. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT01960582.

AB - Background: Standardized, research-based strategies to guide the implementation and evaluate the effects of housing adaptations (HA) on client outcomes are rare. We hypothesized that, compared to ordinary practice, a standardized assessment and evaluation protocol for HA implementation would better maintain or improve client outcomes over 1 year. Method: Using a cluster design, South Swedish municipalities were recruited to an intervention or control group. Data on activities of daily living, usability of the home, health related quality of life, and participation frequency and satisfaction were collected at home visits 1 month before the HA (baseline; T1), and at 3 (T2), 6 (T3) and 12 (T4) months after. In the intervention group (n = 112) data were collected according to a standardized protocol while in the control group (n = 129) ordinary routines were applied. Changes from baseline to subsequent time points were categorized as no deterioration (i.e. improvement or no change) or deterioration, for each outcome item separately. Differences in "no deterioration" between the groups were assessed using logistic regression. Results: Little effect of using the standardized protocol was detected. For activities of daily living, statistically significant differences between the groups were found for toileting (T1-T4; OR 3.14), dressing (T1-T4; OR2.89) and cooking (T1-T3 and T1-T4; OR 3.14). For usability of the home differences were found in personal hygiene (T1-T2; OR 2.32) using a wheelchair (T1-T2 and T1-T3; OR 9.50), picking up the mail (T1-T3; OR 4.06), and in participation, helping others (T1-T3 and T1-T4; OR 2.33 and 3.36). Conclusion: The applied standardized protocol for HA implementation did not show any convincing effect, possibly due to the complexity of the intervention itself, and the implementation process. A process evaluation might generate in-depth knowledge about the reasons behind the findings. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT01960582.

KW - Activities of daily living

KW - Complex intervention

KW - Disability

KW - Evaluation

KW - Health related quality of life

KW - Home modification

KW - Occupational therapy

KW - Participation

KW - Usability

U2 - 10.1186/s12889-019-7815-9

DO - 10.1186/s12889-019-7815-9

M3 - Article

C2 - 31684916

AN - SCOPUS:85074545275

VL - 19

JO - BMC Public Health

JF - BMC Public Health

SN - 1471-2458

IS - 1

M1 - 1446

ER -