Predictors of care coordination versus social visitation with long-term care facility residents

TL;DR

This study explores what influences family members to engage in care coordination or social visits with long-term care residents, finding that communication comfort and travel time are key factors.

Contribution

The study distinguishes between care coordination and social visitation, identifying unique predictors for each type of engagement.

Findings

Shorter travel time and communication comfort are strong predictors of both care coordination and social visitation.

Resident communication abilities and LTC facility type do not significantly predict visitation involvement.

Emotional experiences during communication influence visitation more than resident functionality.

Abstract

Most studies to date have assessed visitation between family and residents via the overall frequency of in-person visits. This approach fails to account for 2 different types of involvement included in visitation: care coordination and social visitation. This study aimed to identify facilitators and barriers of care coordination distinct from social visitation with a specific focus on long-term care (LTC) site characteristics and resident functionality.

One hundred and seventy-five adult participants in the United States with a close friend or relative residing in a LTC facility completed an online survey regarding their care coordination and social visitation in LTC facilities, LTC facility characteristics, and residents’ functionality.

Shorter travel time and visitors’ experiences communicating with the resident (e.g., comfort, frustration) emerged as the strongest predictors of both care coordination involvement and social visitation. Both greater comfort communicating with the resident and greater frustration predicted greater care coordination involvement, whereas only comfort communicating with the resident predicted social visitation. Resident length of stay, type of LTC facility, and resident communication factors (e.g., verbal abilities, recognition of visitors) were not significant predictors of care coordination involvement nor social visitation.

Logistical barriers and visitors’ emotional experiences when communicating with residents may have a stronger influence on visitor engagement compared to resident’s functional abilities and LTC facility characteristics. Interventions targeting the identified facilitators of visitation may help to facilitate and support family involvement with residents of LTC facilities.