Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
AimsAging populations require adapting healthcare systems for older adult's specific needs. Numerous initiatives to improve older‐patient care have emerged, but the field lacks a unified framework. The current study aims to provide a systematic concept analysis of ‘age‐friendly healthcare’, examining its characteristics, components and structure.DesignRodger's evolutionary concept analysis.Data SourcesSearches were conducted in ProQuest, CINAHL, PubMed and Scopus databases between November 2022 and October 2023, utilising the PRISMA 2020 reporting checklist.MethodsA literature search using specific terms relevant to age‐friendly healthcare retrieved 1407 articles. After screening for duplicates and relevance, 140 articles were examined for eligibility based on inclusion criteria for age‐friendly care, language and full‐text availability. Following full‐text screening, 65 articles were included for data extraction by multiple researchers to synthesise theoretical, methodological and design elements.ResultsOur findings highlight key attributes of age‐friendly healthcare: Respect for older adults' autonomy and needs; leadership and organisational knowledge and support; Proactive policies and processes of care; holistic care environments; and communication and follow‐up with awareness of challenges and barriers as well as prioritisation of continuity‐of‐care.ConclusionThe concept of age‐friendly healthcare is still developing, with much research focused on development and implementation rather than evaluation of real‐world patient and health‐system outcomes. Our analysis of the concept may help unify the field and clarify future research directions through identification of areas requiring further study and enable development of improved practices and policies for implementing age‐friendly healthcare in a variety of settings.No Patient or Public ContributionThis concept analysis did not include any patient or public involvement.Reporting MethodThis study utilised the PRISMA reporting checklist.
AimsAging populations require adapting healthcare systems for older adult's specific needs. Numerous initiatives to improve older‐patient care have emerged, but the field lacks a unified framework. The current study aims to provide a systematic concept analysis of ‘age‐friendly healthcare’, examining its characteristics, components and structure.DesignRodger's evolutionary concept analysis.Data SourcesSearches were conducted in ProQuest, CINAHL, PubMed and Scopus databases between November 2022 and October 2023, utilising the PRISMA 2020 reporting checklist.MethodsA literature search using specific terms relevant to age‐friendly healthcare retrieved 1407 articles. After screening for duplicates and relevance, 140 articles were examined for eligibility based on inclusion criteria for age‐friendly care, language and full‐text availability. Following full‐text screening, 65 articles were included for data extraction by multiple researchers to synthesise theoretical, methodological and design elements.ResultsOur findings highlight key attributes of age‐friendly healthcare: Respect for older adults' autonomy and needs; leadership and organisational knowledge and support; Proactive policies and processes of care; holistic care environments; and communication and follow‐up with awareness of challenges and barriers as well as prioritisation of continuity‐of‐care.ConclusionThe concept of age‐friendly healthcare is still developing, with much research focused on development and implementation rather than evaluation of real‐world patient and health‐system outcomes. Our analysis of the concept may help unify the field and clarify future research directions through identification of areas requiring further study and enable development of improved practices and policies for implementing age‐friendly healthcare in a variety of settings.No Patient or Public ContributionThis concept analysis did not include any patient or public involvement.Reporting MethodThis study utilised the PRISMA reporting checklist.
Identifying perceived ageism is a critical step in eliminating ageism. This hybrid concept analysis aims to describe the concept of perceived ageism in health care. In the theoretical phase, a scoping review was conducted. In the field phase, semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine community-dwelling older adults. In the final analytical phase, results from the theoretical phase were integrated with those from the fieldwork phase. The perceived ageism in health care includes four dimensions: self-internalization (self-denial, a sense of unease, and passivity of behavior in seeking health care), interpersonal interaction (perceived negative perceptions, neglected attitudes, and unfair care behaviors), organization system (perceived strangeness caused by unfamiliar technology, unsupportive environment, and inadequate resources), and procedure policy (perceived uniformity of healthcare process and lack of targeted practice policies). Research related to this concept has contributed to developing measurement tools for assessing perceived ageism in healthcare practice and subsequent research.
Background: The Ghanaian elderly population is increasing at the fastest rate and this has become a burden as the rate is not proportional to the investment in health to meet their deteriorating health needs. This creates discrepancies and inequalities in healthcare access and coupled with poor healthcare provider services, the inequalities widen. Poor care services are related to poor knowledge and bad attitudes of care providers hence this study seeks to explore the health practitioners’ level of knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) toward geriatric care. Methods: The study used a cross-sectional survey design with a simple stratified random technique to select study participants. Out of 257 participants who were sampled for the study, 215 responses were received, representing 83.6% response rate. However, 200 questionnaires were complete (93%) and valid for analysis, which consisted of 166 nurses, representing 83% valid responses, and 34 medical officers, physician assistants, and other allied health care providers, representing 17% valid responses from these professionals. A structured questionnaire was used to assess KAP using the knowledge about Older Patients Quiz (KOP-Q) and Kogan’s Attitudes toward Old People Scale (KAOP). Using a mean score of 80%, knowledge, attitude, and practice were dichotomized into good or bad. The Kruskal-Wallis H test was used to compare mean rank across health professionals’ knowledge, attitude, and practice of geriatric care. Results: It shows that the majority (94%) of participants have low levels of knowledge in geriatric care. The majority (84%) of participants do not practice good geriatric care. Differences in knowledge exist among health providers and were statistically significant ( P = .045). Doctors had the lowest mean knowledge score (78.61). Nurses (100.27) and physician assistants (106.15) had moderate mean knowledge score ranks. Although not statistically significant, the rank order for practice scores from highest to lowest was: physician assistants (112.95), nurses (99.19), and doctors (79.21). There were however no statistically significant differences between professions in practice scores ( P = .067), or attitude scores ( P = .097). Conclusion: Health care providers have low knowledge and, bad attitude toward aged care and this may be related to their service delivery which may affect the aged patronage of healthcare services. This is a wake-up call for authorities to organize continuous professional development to enable care providers to improve their service delivery.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.