IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0229579.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An evaluation study of caregiver perceptions of the Ontario’s Health Links program

Author

Listed:
  • Ruta K Valaitis
  • Maureen Markle-Reid
  • Jenny Ploeg
  • Michelle L Butt
  • Rebecca Ganann
  • Nancy Murray
  • Sue Bookey-Bassett
  • Laurie Kennedy
  • Claudia Yousif

Abstract

Introduction: In 2012, the Ontario government launched Health Links (HL), which was designed to integrate care for patients with multimorbidity and complex needs who are high users of health services. This study evaluated perceptions of family and friend caregivers of patients enrolled in the HL program. Research questions included: What are (a) characteristics of caregivers of patients enrolled in HL (b) caregivers’ perceptions of the program in relation to HL’s guiding principles (patient and family-centred care, accessibility, coordination of services, and continuity of care and care provider) and (c) caregivers’ perceptions of the impact of HL on themselves and their care recipient? Methods: This study involved a survey and qualitative, semi-structured interviews. HL guiding principles (patient and family-centered care, accessibility, coordination of services, and continuity) guided the analysis. Results: Twenty-seven surveys and 16 qualitative interviews were completed. Caregivers reported high levels of strain [Modified Caregiver Strain Index (MCSI) 15.5 (SD 7.03)], mild anxiety [Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD 7), 9.6 (SD 6.64)] and depression [Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D 10), 11.9 (SD 8.72)]. Regarding the guiding principles, most caregivers had a copy of the HL patient’s care plan, although some caregivers noted that their needs were not included in the plan, nor were they asked for input. Caregivers found the program’s home and phone visits accessible. Despite minimum wait times for community-based services, other access barriers persisted, (i.e., out-of-pocket costs). HL provided well-coordinated patient services, although some perceived that there was poor team communication. Caregiver perceptions varied on the quality of care provided. Provider continuity provided caregiver relief and patient support: A lack of continuity was related to changes in care coordinators and weekend staff and attrition. Conclusions: Caregivers of HL patients appreciated patient- and family-centred, accessible, consistent, coordinated and team-based approaches in care. Providers and decision-makers are urged to ensure that programs aimed at high system users address these core concepts while addressing caregivers’ needs.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruta K Valaitis & Maureen Markle-Reid & Jenny Ploeg & Michelle L Butt & Rebecca Ganann & Nancy Murray & Sue Bookey-Bassett & Laurie Kennedy & Claudia Yousif, 2020. "An evaluation study of caregiver perceptions of the Ontario’s Health Links program," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-21, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0229579
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229579
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0229579
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0229579&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0229579?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Janice Keefe & Jacques Légaré & Yves Carrière, 2007. "Developing New Strategies to Support Future Caregivers of Older Canadians with Disabilities: Projections of Need and their Policy Implications," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 33(s1), pages 65-80, January.
    2. Megan Thornton & Shirley S. Travis, 2003. "Analysis of the Reliability of the Modified Caregiver Strain Index," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 58(2), pages 127-132.
    3. Camilla Anker‐Hansen & Kirsti Skovdahl & Brendan McCormack & Siri Tønnessen, 2018. "The third person in the room: The needs of care partners of older people in home care services—A systematic review from a person‐centred perspective," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(7-8), pages 1309-1326, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Beni Gómez-Zúñiga & Rafael Pulido & Modesta Pousada & Manuel Armayones, 2021. "The Role of Parent/Caregiver with Children Affected by Rare Diseases: Navigating between Love and Fear," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-20, April.
    2. Chang-Yu Wu & Yu-Ying Li & Maurice J. Lyver, 2022. "Elderly Caregiving Quality Improvement: A Pilot Study of the Burdens of Vietnamese Caregivers in Taiwan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-20, May.
    3. David Feligreras-Alcalá & María del Pilar Cazalilla-López & Rafael del-Pino-Casado & Antonio Frías-Osuna, 2021. "Validity and Reliability of the Caregiver Strain Index Scale in Women during the Puerperium in Spain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-11, March.
    4. Ashley Kable & Dimity Pond & Amanda Baker & Alyna Turner & Christopher Levi, 2018. "Evaluation of discharge documentation after hospitalization for stroke patients discharged home in Australia: A cross‐sectional, pilot study," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 24-30, March.
    5. Tsiotsou, Rodoula H. & Boukis, Achilleas, 2022. "In-home service consumption: A systematic review, integrative framework and future research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 49-64.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0229579. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.