Evaluates a new care delivery framework and engagement index for enhancing dementia care quality, suggesting improved operational monitoring.
The measurement of care quality in residential dementia settings operates almost entirely at governance cadence: quality-indicator dashboards aggregate quarterly, incident data captures failure rather than the presence of quality, and validated quality-of-life instruments are designed for research and audit rather than daily operational use. Between the organisational dashboard and the ward floor, there is no structured signal of whether person-centred care was actually delivered on a given shift. This paper presents a two-part architecture developed to close that gap. The Care Delivery Framework (CDF) organises each shift around four anchoring moments — opening, sequence, rounding, and handover — derived from extended observation of care delivery on a dementia ward. The Engagement Index (EI) is its measurement companion: a binary, observable-indicator system with three collection streams (ward-level supervisor observation, resident-level carer self-report, and a separate weekly family instrument), producing a per-shift Staff Practice Score, a weekly Family Relational Quality Score, and a weighted weekly composite. The architecture is positioned within Donabedian's process domain and Kitwood's account of person-centred care, and its family stream is designed as a deliberate response to the documented validity problems of proxy quality-of-life rating: families are asked only what they can directly observe, never to rate their relative's quality of life. The framework is unpiloted; it is presented here for methodological scrutiny, with a pilot protocol and known limitations stated. The paper's contribution is architectural: a shift-level process measurement system for person-centred dementia care, requiring no additional headcount, equipment or budget, with a structurally independent family observation stream.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Francisco Chicas (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: