Characteristics of Nursing Homes : Adopting Environmental Transformation
A. Tesh,K. Mcnutt,N. Courts,B. Barba
Abstract:During the past few years, many nursing homes in North Carolina have formulated plans to transform or enhance their environments to make the facilities more desirable places to live and work. The purpose of this study was to compare characteristics of facilities adopting one specific model for environmental transformation. The Eden Alternative; with those adopting other environmental transformations or making no changes. Surveys were mailed to administrators of all (n = 378) certified nursing facilities in NC. A total of 167 surveys were returned, for a return rate of 44%. Of these, almost three fourths were planning or implementing some sort of environmental transformation. Thirty-seven facilities (22%) indicated they were currently adopting the Eden Alternative, and 47 (28%) were planning to adopt it. Twenty-six facilities (16%) reported they were currently adopting an environmental transformation other than the Eden Alternative, and another 9 (5%) were planning to adopt another environmental transformation. The facilities adopting or planning environmental transformation other than the Eden Alternative reported adopting (or planning to adopt) various components of the Eden Alternative. Forty-six facilities (28%) indicated they had no plans for environmental transformation. Facilities making environmental transformations were found to be similar to those making no changes on most variables examined, supporting the conclusion that environmental transformation is feasible for facilities with a wide range of characteristics. Article: Most people are reluctant to live in nursing homes, or to have their loved ones admitted to nursing homes. Many people even find visiting nursing homes to be depressing. Staff turnover in nursing homes is high, suggesting that nursing homes are not highly desirable places to work. During the past few years, many nursing homes in North Carolina and across the nation have formulated plans to transform or enhance their environments. Motivation for these changes may range from a desire to improve the quality of life of residents and staff to a desire to improve a home's public image or to save money by decreasing staff turnover and absenteeism. The Eden Alternatives, developed by Harvard-educated physician Dr. William Thomas (1996; 1998) is the most comprehensive model available for environmental transformation of nursing homes. The Eden Alternative is intended to transform the physical, interpersonal, psychosocial, and spiritual environments of a facility, as well as the organizational culture. Research conducted in facilities pioneering the Eden Alternative suggests that, in addition to improving quality of life, implementing the Eden model may provide a variety of more tangible benefits, such as decreases in medication use, infection rates, incidents, pressure ulcer rates, and staff turnover (Ransom, 1998; Thomas, 1996). Implementing any environmental transformation requires commitment of facility resources and staff time. Implementing the Eden Alternative requires additional commitments. To use the trademarked Eden Alternative name, the administrator and select members of the staff must be trained as Eden Alternative Associates, and the changes implemented must be consistent with the Eden Alternative model. Eden Alternative facilities are periodically assessed by a regional coordinator, listed in a registry (http://www.edenalt.com, 2001, May 15), and recognized with a plaque (Thomas, 1998). Problem Statement and Purpose Prior to the trademarking of the Eden Alternative name and development of the registry, some facilities used the Eden Alternative name without recognition by or communication with the Eden Alternative organization. Currently, facilities may adopt parts of the model, or other environmental transformation, at will. Facilities that join the registry receive formative evaluation, information, recognition, and the opportunity to interact with other facilities adopting the model. However, facilities may choose not to join the registry or use the trademarked Eden Alternative name for a variety of reasons, including cost or the desire to make changes not consistent with the model. Anecdotal reports and inquiries made to the North Carolina Eden Coalition and the Eden Alternative Region II coordinator suggested that many facilities in North Carolina were implementing environmental transformations. The purpose of this study was to compare characteristics of facilities adopting the Eden Alternative with those planning or adopting other environmental transformations or making no changes. Figure 1. Numbers and percentages of facilities currently adopting the Eden Alternative (EA Adopters), planning to adopt the Eden Alternative (EA Planners), planning or adopting other environmental transformation (Other Change), or having no plans for environmental transformation (No Change). Conceptual Framework The Thriving Theory, described elsewhere in this issue (Haight, Barba, Tesh, & Courts, 2002) recognizes human thriving to be a process of interactions between individuals and their human and nonhuman environments. The nursing home facility and staff comprise a huge proportion of a nursing home resident's world. According to the Thriving Theory, transformation of nursing homes from rigid, hierarchical, sterile environments modeled after hospitals into richer, more dynamic environments with increased interaction between residents and staff and between residents and the nonhuman environment, would promote and support thriving of both residents and staff. However, not all facilities are eager to adopt this innovation. Rogers' (1995) model of the Diffusion of Innovations posits that several factors influence the decision to adopt an innovation. These factors include unique characteristics of the organizations considering adopting the change, the social systems of the organizations, the nature of the innovation, and the channels by which the innovation is communicated. Rogers' model also describes five categories of adopters, based on their "innovativeness" or relative willingness to adopt new ideas. These are innovators, early adopters, early majority adopters, late majority adopters, and laggards. Using Rogers' model, Castle (2001) found characteristics such as larger bed capacity, chain membership, and a high percentage of private-pay residents to be associated with early adoption of the innovations of special care units and subacute care services. Rogers' model supports examining the characteristics of nursing homes choosing to adopt environmental transformations, and those choosing not to make changes, to determine possible attributes affecting this decision-making process. Methods A survey was mailed to administrators of all (n = 378) certified nursing facilities in North Carolina. The survey addressed plans for environmental transformation and selected characteristics of the facility. An expert panel consisting of nursing home administrators, the Eden Alternative Region II coordinator, and personnel from the state Division of Licensure and Certification and the Health Care Facilities Administration, endorsed content validity and clarity of the instrument. Initially, telephone follow-up with nonrespondents was attempted. This strategy ultimately was abandoned because it was not possible to reach most nonrespondent administrators directly by phone. For comparison of demographic characteristics, the facilities were categorized based on their plans for environmental transformation. Because the number of facilities planning other transformation programs was small, they were grouped with those currently adopting other transformation programs. The four groups resulting from this categorization were: Those currently adopting the Eden Alternative (EA Adopters). Those planning to adopt the Eden Alternative (EA Planners). Those planning or adopting other transformations (Other Change). Those with no plans for transformation (No Change). Characteristics of the four groups were compared using chi-square tests of association (for nominal-level variables) and one-way analysis of variance (for ratio-level variables.) A Type-I error rate (alpha) of 0.05 was used in these exploratory analyses. Results A total of 167 surveys were returned, for a return rate of 44%. Of these, almost three fourths were planning or implementing some sort of environmental transformation. (Figure 1.) Forty-six facilities (28%) indicated that they had no plans for environmental transformation. Thirty-seven facilities (22%) indicated they were currently adopting the Eden Alternative, and 47 (28%) were planning to adopt it. Twenty-six facilities (16%) reported they were currently adopting an environmental transformation program other than the Eden Alternative, and another 9 (5%) were planning to adopt another environmental transformation program. Facilities planning or adopting other environmental transformation programs were asked to describe their programs. These descriptions invariably proved to be subcomponents or variants of the Eden Alternative. Seven administrators responded that their facilities were "doing the Eden Alternative, just without using the name." Several (n = 14) reported incorporation of plants and gardening. Sixteen reported some inclusion of animals, most often on a nonresident basis. Four reported incorporating children into the daily routines of the facilities. Only one of these facilities specifically reported organizational restructuring or engaging in staff empowerment. Facilities within each of the four groups were diverse (Table 1). All four groups included facilities with and facilities without private affiliations. Slightly more than half of facilities were in rural settings. Most were not adjacent to a hospital, and none reported sharing staff with a hospital. In all four groups, more than 70% of residents were White and more than 15% were Black. The numbers of other ethnic groups were s