Young people in aged care: progress of the current national program
Dianne F. Winkler A D , Louise J. Farnworth B , Sue M. Sloan C and Ted Brown BA Summer Foundation Ltd, PO Box 208, Blackburn, VIC 3130, Australia.
B Department of Occupational Therapy, Monash University, Peninsula Campus, PO Box 527, Frankston, VIC 3199, Australia. Email: louise.farnworth@monash.edu; ted.brown@monash.edu
C Osborn Sloan & Associates, PO Box 2191, Kew, VIC 3101, Australia. Email: sue@osbornsloan.com.au
D Corresponding author. Email: di.winkler@summerfoundation.org.au
Australian Health Review 35(3) 320-326 https://doi.org/10.1071/AH10889
Submitted: 19 February 2010 Accepted: 4 January 2011 Published: 25 August 2011
Journal Compilation © AHHA 2011
Abstract
Objective. The aim of this paper is to examine the progress and effect of the current 5-year $244 million national Young People in Residential Aged Care program on the reduction of young people in aged care.
Method. Semi-structured telephone interviews with 20 service providers, 10 advocacy organisations and 6 public servants across Australia actively involved in the implementation of the program.
Results. The development of new accommodation options has been slow. The 5-year program aims to move 689 young people out of nursing homes; in the first 4 years of the initiative only 139 people had moved out. The lives of those who have been helped by the program have been enormously improved.
Conclusions. This study highlights the challenges of achieving a long-term reduction in the number of young people in residential aged care, including the challenge of achieving systemic change to prevent new admissions.
Implications. The accommodation options currently being developed for this target group will soon be at capacity. Without sustained investment in developing alternative accommodation options and resources to implement systemic change ~250 people under 50 are likely to continue to be admitted to aged care each year in Australia.
What is known about the topic? Prior to the current 5-year, $244 million, national Young People in Residential Aged Care program there were more than 1000 Australians under 50 years of age who lived in aged care facilities. Aged care is not designed or resourced to facilitate the active involvement of young people with high clinical needs in everyday activities or support their continued participation in the life of their community.
What does this paper add? In the first 4 years of the national program only 139 people moved out of aged care. The lives of those who have been helped by the program have been enormously improved. The program is unlikely to result in a long-term reduction in the number of young people in aged care.
What are the implications for practitioners? Systemic change and sustained investment in accommodation options is required to resolve the issue of young people in aged care.
Additional keywords: accommodation, disability, housing, support.
References
[1] Lannoo E, Larmuseau D, Van Hoorde W, Eyssen M. Prevalence of young adults with acquired brain injury (ABI) in nursing homes in Belgium: aged care facilities are not the best option. Brain Inj 2008; 22 1–127.| Prevalence of young adults with acquired brain injury (ABI) in nursing homes in Belgium: aged care facilities are not the best option.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[2] McMillan TM, Laurie M. Young adults with acquired brain injury in nursing homes in Glasgow. Clin Rehabil 2004; 18 132–8.
| Young adults with acquired brain injury in nursing homes in Glasgow.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2c7lvFejtA%3D%3D&md5=0affdc144fe6ce4b402bcfe861e6de0aCAS |
[3] Soulsby G. Returning to the community – issues in placing people with complex care needs following brain injury in their own homes. Brain Inj 2008; 22 129–217.
| Returning to the community – issues in placing people with complex care needs following brain injury in their own homes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[4] Winkler D, Farnworth L, Sloan S. People under 60 living in aged care facilities in Victoria. Aust Health Rev 2006; 30 100–8.
[5] Colantonio A, Howse D, Patel J. Young adults with traumatic brain injury in nursing homes: a population based study. Brain Impair 2010; 11 31–6.
| Young adults with traumatic brain injury in nursing homes: a population based study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[6] Persson DI, Ostwald SK. Younger residents in nursing homes. J Gerontol Nurs 2009; 35 22–31.
| Younger residents in nursing homes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[7] Healy P. Nursing homes face challenge as the young fill beds. New York Times. 10 December 2003. Available at http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/10/nyregion/nursing-homes-face-challenge-as-the-young-fill-the-beds.html [verified 15 July 2011].
[8] Fries BE, Wodchis WP, Blaum C, Buttar A, Drabek J, Morris JN. A national study showed that diagnoses varied by age group in nursing home residents under 65. J Clin Epidemiol 2005; 58 198–205.
| A national study showed that diagnoses varied by age group in nursing home residents under 65.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[9] Weingarden SI, Graham P. Young spinal cord injured patients in nursing homes: rehospitalisation issues and outcomes. Paraplegia 1992; 30 828–33.
| Young spinal cord injured patients in nursing homes: rehospitalisation issues and outcomes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaK3s7msFehtQ%3D%3D&md5=0cd7eff79fbd43d30f4dafa914f3d43aCAS |
[10] Mehdizadeh S, Applebaum R. A review of nursing home resident characteristics in Ohio: tracking changes from 1994–2004. Miami, FL: Scripps Gerontology Center, Miami University 2005.
[11] Jennett B, Snoek J, Bond MR, Brooks N. Disability after severe head injury: observations on the use of the Glasgow Outcome Scale. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1981; 44 285–93.
| Disability after severe head injury: observations on the use of the Glasgow Outcome Scale.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaL3M3hslCqtA%3D%3D&md5=a8cdc6060f854372a3673ebb763aa459CAS |
[12] Younger People with Disability in Residential Aged Care Program. Canberra, ACT: Australian Government, Department of Families Housing Community Services and Indigenous Affairs; 2009.
[13] Residential aged care in Australia 2003–04: a statistical overview. Canberra, ACT: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare; 2005. AIHW Cat. no. AGE 43.
[14] Residential aged care in Australia 2004–05: a statistical overview. Canberra, ACT: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare; 2006. AIHW Cat. no. AGE 43.
[15] Residential aged care in Australia 2006–07: a statistical overview. Canberra, ACT: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare; 2008. AIHW Cat. no. AGE 43.
[16] Residential aged care in Australia 2007–08: a statistical overview. Canberra, ACT: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare; 2009. AIHW Cat. no. AGE 43.
[17] Residential aged care in Australia 2005–06: a statistical overview. Canberra, ACT: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare; 2007. AIHW Cat. no. AGE 43.
[18] Younger people with disability in residential aged care: update from the 2009–10 Minimum Data Set. Canberra, ACT: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare; 2011. Bulletin no. 86. Cat. no. AUS 135.
[19] Creating new opportunities. Responding to the needs of younger people in Victoria’s residential aged care services. Melbourne: Department of Human Services; 2005.
[20] Investigation of support needs and service models for younger people with high clinical care needs. Melbourne: Australian Health Care Associates; 2007.
[21] Stringer K. Study into the accommodation needs for young people requiring nursing home level of care. Melbourne: Melbourne City Mission 1999.
[22] Fyffe C, McCubbery J, Honey K. Young people with ABI less than 65 years requiring nursing home level of care. Melbourne: Grimwood Pty Ltd; 2003.
[23] Reynolds A. Complex care needs - complex issues: the need for collaborative planning. Melbourne: Ecumenical Housing; 2002.
[24] O’Reilly K, Pryor J. Young people with brain injury in nursing homes: not the best option! Aust Health Rev 2002; 25 46–51.
| Young people with brain injury in nursing homes: not the best option!Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[25] Winkler D, Sloan S, Callaway L. Younger people in residential aged care: Support needs, preferences and future directions. Melbourne: Summer Foundation Limited; 2007.
[26] Moylan M, Dey P, McAlpine E. A national research project examining the placement of younger people with a disability in nursing homes for the aged. Data supplement. Sydney: NSW Department of Community Services; 1995.
[27] Cameron C, Pirozzo S, Tooth L. Long-term care of people below age 65 with severe acquired brain injury: Appropriateness of aged care facilities. Aust N Z J Public Health 2001; 25 261–4.
| Long-term care of people below age 65 with severe acquired brain injury: Appropriateness of aged care facilities.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3MvkvFahtA%3D%3D&md5=eef8d24e13bd22805dc87b0424519606CAS |
[28] Quality and equity in aged care. Canberra, ACT: Senate Community Affairs References Committee; 2005.
[29] Ryan R, Lopata T, Yeomans J. Mid-term review. Younger People in Residential Aged Care Program. Sydney, NSW: Urbis; 2010.
[30] Salganik MJ, Heckathorn DD. Sampling and estimation in hidden populations using respondent-driven sampling. Sociol Methodol 2004; 34 193–240.
| Sampling and estimation in hidden populations using respondent-driven sampling.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[31] NVivo 7.0. Melbourne: QSR International Pty Ltd; 2006.
[32] Winkler D, Sloan S, Callaway L, Truscott C. Younger people in residential aged care in Tasmania: characteristics, support needs and preferences. Melbourne: Summer Foundation Limited; 2008.
[33] Bigby C, Fyffe C. Position statement on housing and support for people with intellectual disability and high, complex or changing need. Melbourne: La Trobe University; 2008.
[34] Bigby C. From ideology to reality: Current issues in implementation of intellectual disability policy. Melbourne: La Trobe University; 2006.
[35] Winkler D, Farnworth L, Sloan S, Brown T. Transition of younger people with acquired brain injury from residential aged care to community living: anticipated and actual outcomes. Brain Impair 2006; 7 54–5.
[36] Sloan S, Callaway L, Winkler D, McKinley K, Ziino C, Anson K. The community approach to participation: outcomes following acquired brain injury intervention. Brain Impair 2009; 10 282–94.
| The community approach to participation: outcomes following acquired brain injury intervention.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[37] New P, Lea S, Edwards S, Gilmore N, editors. The Step Down Program: Enhancing therapy and discharge options for patients with severe neurological impairments. 6th World Congress on Brain Injury; 5–8 May 2005; Melbourne: Taylor & Francis; 2005.
[38] Aids and equipment program. Melbourne: Victorian Government Department of Human Services; 2010. Available at http://www.dhs.vic.gov.au/disability/supports_for_people/living_in_my_home/aids_and_equipment_program [verified 25 July 2011].
[39] Morkham B. Shaping the future today national conference. Conference report. Melbourne: Young People in Nursing Homes National Alliance; 2008.
[40] Shorten B. Shaping the future today. Speech: Bill Shorten MP, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Children’s Services. In: Young People in Nursing Homes Conference; 19 August 2008; Melbourne. 2008. Available at http://shapingthefuturetoday.com/content/view/20/1/ [verified 15 July 2011].
