Search
Search Results
-
Quality of life for social care centre clients
11-13Views:68Introduction:
There are approximately 60 million people over 60 years of age in the world. The United Nations predicts that by 2050 the number of people aged 60 years and older could be around 2 billion (Zaļkalns, 2015). In Latvia, every fourth inhabitant is a pensioner. Given Latvia's socio-economic situation, social and health care options for older, lonely people are becoming increasingly less accessible. A large part of the population of Latvia cannot provide themselves with quality of life in old age. If there is no family or, due to various circumstances, relatives cannot take care of the elderly, the only option is social care institutions (Slokenbeka, Zepa, 2013). The quality of life of an elderly person remains an issue when he or she is in a social care centre. Quality of life is a complex, interacting set of objective and subjective indicators in different areas of life. The World Health Organisation defines quality of life as “the perception of an individual's personal life position in the context of the cultural and value system in which the individual lives in relation to the individual's goals, expectations, standards and concerns. It is a broad concept that is influenced in complex ways by a person's physical health, psychological state, personal beliefs, social relationships and key environmental factors” (Scester, 2012).The Aim of the study:
To analyse the quality of life for social care centre clients.
Materials and methods:
Quantitative research method was chosen to obtain the results. A questionnaire with 25 questions was developed. The participants of the research were clients of two social care centres (hereafter SAC) (SAC “X”, n = 50; SAC “Y”, n = 50).Results:
The majority of SAC respondents have lived in the institution for more than four years (SAC “X” = 54%; SAC “Y” = 70%). In both groups, the predominant reason for being in SAC is “I am lonely, I cannot take care of myself” (SAC "X" = 62%; SAC "Y" = 58%). On the questions about the frequency of meals and the quality of food in the SAC, the data show that 78% of clients in SAC “X” and 94% in SAC “Y” are satisfied with the frequency of meals, while on the quality of food the dominant answer is “the food is satisfactory” (SAC “X” = 54%; SAC “Y” = 32%). The questions on living conditions show that SAC clients live both alone and in pairs (mainly spouses). The relationship with the roommate is described by 52% in SAC “X” and 38% in SAC “Y” with the phrase “we get along peacefully, without quarrels”. 26% of respondents in both groups describe their relationship as “very good and friendly”. SAC clients describe their financial situation as “modest”. Emotional support is received from other residents, staff and family members/relatives. Emotional uplift is also provided by various activities in the SAC and by doing things that they enjoy and find interesting, e.g., handicrafts, crossword puzzles. SAC clients note that they try to attend all events organised by the SAC, especially concerts by amateur groups and famous artists. The “feeling of security” in the SAC is prevalent in both groups of respondents (SAC “X” = 56%; SAC “Y” = 70%). Although there is a feeling of security, both groups of respondents report that they “miss the feeling of home” when living in SAC (SAC “X” = 24%; SAC “Y” = 34%).Conclusions:
Clients in the social care centre are satisfied with the quality of life in the physical and social spheres, but are partially satisfied or dissatisfied with the quality of life in the emotional and area of independence. The participants often feel lonely and sad and experience longing and anticipation. Respondents in both social care centres never or rarely experience feelings such as love, joy and happiness. Respondents indicate a lack of independence, acknowledging that they have limited autonomy and that they cannot be who they are because they have to adapt to the existing regime.Bibliography:
1. Zaļkalns J. (2015). Novecošana – aktualitātes un problemātika. Retrieved 25 January 2017 from http://www.afonds.lv/editor/uploads/files/prezentacijas/1_Zalkalns_Novecosana_aktualitates_ problematika.ppt
2. Slokenbeka A., Zepa D. (2013). Vecums – liktenis, izaicinājums, dāvana. Rīga: RAKUS Atbalsta fonds. 96 lpp
3. Šķestere, I. (2012). Pētījums par dzīves kvalitātes izvērtējuma metodēm un instrumentiem. Rīga: ES Eiropas Sociālais fonds. 43 lpp. -
Dementia and family. The role of Alzheimer cafe in reducing the burden of caregiving families
34-46.Views:213In the last years, the international researches have turned towards families caring for elderly people with dementia /see the works of Zarit et al. 1985, 2005; Aneshensel et al. 1995; and Kaplan 1996/. The majority of these researchers analysed the stress burden of the caring family member and its consequences, role conflicts, and the tensions in the caregiving family (Zarit et al. 1985; Aneshensel et al. 1995; Kaplan 1996; Zarit et al. 2005). The revelation that in terms of Romania, we know nothing or almost nothing about the burden of families caring for elderly people with dementia and its effect on the primary carer, played was an important factor in the choice of topic. This is why, in a vast empirical analysis, in Transylvania, 50 interviews and questionnaire surveys were made with people caring for elderly with dementia in their own homes and 50 families whose relatives with dementia have been moved to a long-term residential home in the past 12 months from the time of the survey. Gathering data took three years (2015–2017). The research included the inquiry interview with the primary caregiver family member, in which we assessed the functional barriers and the psychosocial difficulties (Szabó 2000). The analysis of the levels of social skills was built upon this, and it unfolded the main characteristics of self-sufficiency, existing social skills, and social adaptation. This survey pointed out the everyday tasks in which the client requires help. With regard to family care, we have also analysed the independent living ability of people with dementia. These three angles offered the guidelines for the assessment of “objective burden” of the caring family member. Reviewing the distribution of caring tasks within the family is based on this, which helps us finding out who the key persons are, the ones undertaking the primary caregiving duties. For analysing the formation of roles within the family, we have devised our own criteria (Szabó–Kiss 2015). Starting from the objective burden, in regard to the “subjective burden”, we have obtained valuable indications about the emotional effect of caregiving family member. The detailed assessment of self-sufficiency through which we have analysed the measure of functional degradation of people living with dementia, was added to the devices of the analysis (Szabó 2000). The internationally approved scale of memory and behavioural problems (Zarit 1985) is connected to this, which measures the distractive attitude of the person living with dementia and its effect on the primary caregiver. The survey of the primary caregiver’s burdening is also connected (Zarit 1985), and so is the assessment of the negative and positive attitude towards the caregiving tasks (Farran et al. 1999). A six-step focus group is added to the devices of the research, in which the primary caregivers, by hearing each other’s cases and following thematic questions, open up more easily about the critical periods of caregiving and the pivotal factors of institutional placement.