DOCSLIB.ORG

Aspects of Uptake, Use and Effectiveness of Ehealth Interventions for Self-Management Support and Patient-Provider Communication

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Aspects of Uptake, Use and Effectiveness of Ehealth Interventions for Self-Management Support and Patient-Provider Communication Aspects of uptake, use and effectiveness of eHealth interventions for self-management support and patient-provider communication Elin Børøsund, RN, MSc Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo Center for Shared Decision Making and Collaborative Care Research, Department of Medicine, Oslo University Hospital 2014 © Elin Børøsund, 2015 Series of dissertations submitted to the Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo No. 1951 ISBN 978-82-8264-975-9 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without permission. Cover: Hanne Baadsgaard Utigard. Printed in Norway: AIT Oslo AS. Produced in co-operation with Akademika Publishing. The thesis is produced by Akademika Publishing merely in connection with the thesis defence. Kindly direct all inquiries regarding the thesis to the copyright holder or the unit which grants the doctorate. Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................................... III SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................................... V ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................................................ VIII LIST OF PAPERS ............................................................................................................................................... IX 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 SPECIFIC AIMS ................................................................................................................................................... 2 2. BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................................................. 4 2.1 ELECTRONIC SYMPTOM ASSESSMENT AND COMMUNICATION TOOLS ............................................................................. 5 2.2 WEB-BASED SELF-MANAGEMENT SUPPORT ............................................................................................................. 6 2.3 UPTAKE OF EHEALTH INTERVENTIONS IN ROUTINE CARE............................................................................................. 8 2.3.1 Barriers to technology adoption and maintenance .............................................................................. 9 2.3.2 Facilitators and incentives for technology adoption and maintenance .............................................. 10 2.4 USER CHARACTERISTICS AND USE PATTERN OF EHEALTH INTERVENTIONS ..................................................................... 11 2.4.1 User characteristics and use patterns of Web-based self-management support ............................... 12 2.5 CONTRIBUTORS TO EFFECTIVENESS OF WEB-BASED SELF-MANAGEMENT SUPPORT ........................................................ 13 2.5.1 Components and relations to effectiveness ........................................................................................ 13 2.5.2 Dose of use and relations to effectiveness .......................................................................................... 15 2.6 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ................................................................................................................................ 16 2.61 The RE-AIM framework ........................................................................................................................ 16 2.6.2 Additional theories and models .......................................................................................................... 18 2.7 SUMMARY...................................................................................................................................................... 18 3. METHODS ................................................................................................................................................... 21 3.1 INTERVENTIONS STUDIED ................................................................................................................................... 23 3.1.1 Choice ................................................................................................................................................. 23 3.1.2 WebChoice 1.0 .................................................................................................................................... 25 3.1.3 WebChoice 2.0 .................................................................................................................................... 27 3.2 OVERVIEW OF THE STUDIES IN THE THESIS ............................................................................................................. 29 3.3 STUDY I ......................................................................................................................................................... 30 3.3.1 Design ................................................................................................................................................. 30 3.3.2 Participants ......................................................................................................................................... 31 3.3.3 Procedure for data collection.............................................................................................................. 31 3.3.4 Analyses .............................................................................................................................................. 32 3.4 STUDY II ........................................................................................................................................................ 34 3.4.1 Design ................................................................................................................................................. 34 3.4.2 Participants ......................................................................................................................................... 34 i 3.4.3 Procedure for data collection.............................................................................................................. 34 3.4.4 Self-report assessments ...................................................................................................................... 35 3.4.5 Analyses .............................................................................................................................................. 36 3.5 STUDY III ....................................................................................................................................................... 37 3.5.1 Design ................................................................................................................................................. 37 3.5.2 Study sites ........................................................................................................................................... 38 3.5.3 Participants and sample ..................................................................................................................... 38 3.5.4 Study procedures ................................................................................................................................ 39 3.5.5 Procedure for data collection.............................................................................................................. 41 3.5.6 Self-report assessments ...................................................................................................................... 42 3.5.7 Support and surveillance .................................................................................................................... 43 3.5.8 Analyses .............................................................................................................................................. 44 3.6 ETHICAL ASPECTS ............................................................................................................................................. 45 3.7 SECURITY ....................................................................................................................................................... 46 4. RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................................... 47 4.1 STUDY I ......................................................................................................................................................... 47 4.2 STUDY II ........................................................................................................................................................ 48 4.3. STUDY III ...................................................................................................................................................... 49 5. DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................................................ 51 5.1 MAIN RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................ 51 5.1.1 Reach .................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Norwegian Journal of Epidemiology Årgang 27, Supplement 1, Oktober 2017 Utgitt Av Norsk Forening for Epidemiologi
    1 Norsk Epidemiologi Norwegian Journal of Epidemiology Årgang 27, supplement 1, oktober 2017 Utgitt av Norsk forening for epidemiologi Redaktør: Trond Peder Flaten EN NORSKE Institutt for kjemi, D 24. Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet, 7491 Trondheim EPIDEMIOLOGIKONFERANSEN e-post: [email protected] For å bli medlem av Norsk forening for TROMSØ, epidemiologi (NOFE) eller abonnere, send e-post til NOFE: [email protected]. 7.-8. NOVEMBER 2017 Internettadresse for NOFE: http://www.nofe.no e-post: [email protected] WELCOME TO TROMSØ 2 ISSN 0803-4206 PROGRAM OVERVIEW 3 Opplag: 185 PROGRAM FOR PARALLEL SESSIONS 5 Trykk: NTNU Grafisk senter Layout og typografi: Redaktøren ABSTRACTS 9 Tidsskriftet er åpent tilgjengelig online: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS 86 www.www.ntnu.no/ojs/index.php/norepid Også via Directory of Open Access Journals (www.doaj.org) Utgis vanligvis med to regulære temanummer pr. år. I tillegg kommer supplement med sammendrag fra Norsk forening for epidemiologis årlige konferanse. 2 Norsk Epidemiologi 2017; 27 (Supplement 1) The 24th Norwegian Conference on Epidemiology Tromsø, November 7-8, 2017 We would like to welcome you to Tromsø and the 24th conference of the Norwegian Epidemiological Association (NOFE). The NOFE conference is an important meeting point for epidemiologists to exchange high quality research methods and findings, and together advance the broad research field of epidemiology. As in previous years, there are a diversity of topics; epidemiological methods, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer, nutrition, female health, musculo-skeletal diseases, infection and behavioral epidemiology, all within the framework of this years’ conference theme; New frontiers in epidemiology. The conference theme reflects the mandate to pursue methodological and scientific progress and to be in the forefront of the epidemiological research field.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Remdesivir and Hydroxychloroquine on Viral Clearance in Covid-19 Patients: Results from the NOR-Solidarity Randomised Trial
    Evaluation of remdesivir and hydroxychloroquine on viral clearance in Covid-19 patients: Results from the NOR-Solidarity Randomised Trial Andreas Barratt-Due1,2,9,*, Inge Christoffer Olsen3, Katerina Nezvalova Henriksen4,5, Trine Kåsine1,9, Fridtjof Lund-Johansen2,6, Hedda Hoel7,9,10, Aleksander Rygh Holten8,9, Anders Tveita11, Alexander Mathiessen12, Mette Haugli13, Ragnhild Eiken14, Anders Benjamin Kildal15, Åse Berg16, Asgeir Johannessen9,17, Lars Heggelund18,19, Tuva Børresdatter Dahl1,10, Karoline Hansen Skåra10, Pawel Mielnik20, Lan Ai Kieu Le21, Lars Thoresen22, Gernot Ernst23, Dag Arne Lihaug Hoff24, Hilde Skudal25, Bård Reiakvam Kittang26, Roy Bjørkholt Olsen27, Birgitte Tholin28, Carl Magnus Ystrøm29, Nina Vibeche Skei30, Trung Tran2, Susanne Dudman9,39, Jan Terje Andersen9,31, Raisa Hannula32, Olav Dalgard9,33, Ane-Kristine Finbråten7,34, Kristian Tonby9,35, Bjorn Blomberg36,37, Saad Aballi38, Cathrine Fladeby39, Anne Steffensen9, Fredrik Müller9,39, Anne Ma Dyrhol-Riise9,35, Marius Trøseid9,40 and Pål Aukrust9,10,40 on behalf of the NOR-Solidarity study group# 1Division of Critical Care and Emergencies, Oslo University Hospital, 0424 Oslo, Norway 2Division of laboratory Medicine, Dept. of Immunology, Oslo University Hospital, 0424 Oslo, Norway 3Department of Research Support for Clinical Trials, Oslo University Hospital, 0424 Oslo, Norway 4Department of Haematology, Oslo University Hospital, 0424 Oslo, Norway 5Hospital Pharmacies, South-Eastern Norway Enterprise, 0050 Oslo, Norway 6ImmunoLingo Covergence Centre, University
    [Show full text]
  • Improving Ambulance Coverage in a Mixed
    Delft University of Technology Improving ambulance coverage in a mixed urban-rural region in Norway using mathematical modeling van den Berg, Pieter L.; Fiskerstrand, Peter; Aardal, Karen; Einerkjær, Jørgen; Thoresen, Trond; Røislien, Jo DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0215385 Publication date 2019 Document Version Final published version Published in PLoS ONE Citation (APA) van den Berg, P. L., Fiskerstrand, P., Aardal, K., Einerkjær, J., Thoresen, T., & Røislien, J. (2019). Improving ambulance coverage in a mixed urban-rural region in Norway using mathematical modeling. PLoS ONE, 14(4), 1-14. [e0215385]. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215385 Important note To cite this publication, please use the final published version (if applicable). Please check the document version above. Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons. Takedown policy Please contact us and provide details if you believe this document breaches copyrights. We will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. This work is downloaded from Delft University of Technology. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to a maximum of 10. RESEARCH ARTICLE Improving ambulance coverage in a mixed urban-rural region in Norway using mathematical modeling 1 2 3,4 2 Pieter L. van den BergID *, Peter Fiskerstrand
    [Show full text]
  • Optique in Patient Safety
    The project has been defined as a strategic innovation project. Optique Summit IV, Sept. 15th 2016,@ University of Oxford South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority (HSØ) Health regions are 100% state owned trusts with full legal and financial responsibilities, their own board and their own CEO/management 10 hospital trusts Akershus University Hospital Trust, Ahus Oslo University Hospital Trust Innlandet Hospital Trust Sunnaas Hospital Trust Sørlandet Hospital Trust Ahus Telemark Hospital Trust Vestfold Hospital Trust Vestre Viken Hospital Trust Østfold Hospital Trust HSØ-area • 2.9 mill inhabitants • Budget: 79 billion NOK/ 8,5 billion € for hospital health care pr year Norway (totaly): • 78 000 employees in business • 5.2 mill inhabitants 2 Source: McKinsey analysis Akershus University Hospital (Ahus) Ahus is a Complete urban hospital – large share of immigrant population - A full service hospital – emergency, planned assistance – Serving all inhabitants of the catchment area - from newly born to geriatrics Ahus is Norway’s largest and most modern emergency assistance provider Ahus is a university hospital with fruitful research and development activities Ahus Area • 520,000 Inhabitants • 62,700 Inpatient stays, • 27,500 Day patient care • Budget: 7.5 billion NOK/ 0,95 billion € for hospital health care pr year • 9,250 employees in business Human touch and empathy – with professional skill UiO HSØ Optique in Healthcare is growing Health South-East has awarded strategic innovation funds to Akershus University Hospital (Ahus), by the Division Director Ivar Thor Jonsson for the project “Development of a semantic IT solution and ontology for clinical use in health care”. The project has been awarded 2MNOK and is defined as a strategic innovation project.
    [Show full text]
  • Hjerteforum Suppl
    hjerteforum Suppl. 2/ 2015 / 28. årgang IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW ECHOCARDIOGRAPHIC MODALITIES IN ROUTINE PRACTICE IN A GENERAL HOSPITAL – POCKET-SIZE CARDIAC ULTRASOUND AND 3 DIMENSIONAL ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY. Studies on feasibility and diagnostic accuracy VIDAR DE BOURG RUDDOX Thesis for the degree of Philosophiae Doctor Department of Cardiology, Vestfold Hospital Trust & University of Oslo, Faculty of Medicine Oslo 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................ 4 2 Synopsis ...............................................................................................................5 3 Scientific environment ...................................................................................... 6 4 List of Papers .......................................................................................................7 Paper I ..................................................................................................................................................7 Paper II ................................................................................................................................................7 Paper III ..............................................................................................................................................7 Paper IV ...............................................................................................................................................7 5 Abbreviations and Acronyms ...........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • National Microbiota Conference Program 2017 Oct12 Medposters
    Invitation 4th National Microbiota Conference Radisson Blu Scandinavia Hotel Holbergs plass, Thursday, November 9, 2017 We are very happy to welcome you to the fourth national meeting on microbiota in health and disease, once more in Oslo City Centre In addition to invited speakers, open abstract sessions will once again provide an arena for gut microbiota-related research in Norway. Register here: https://epay.uio.no/pay/shop/order-create.html?projectStepId=5204365 Johannes Espolin Roksund Hov and Marius Trøseid The organizing committee Preliminary program Thursday, November 9 Startup 0930- Registration, coffee, mounting of posters Johannes R. Hov and Marius Trøseid, 1000 Introduction and welcome Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet and University of Oslo Keynote lectures 1005-1115 1005 Population-based approach to human Professor Cisca Wijmenga, metagenomics Department of Genetics, University of Groningen, the Netherlands 1050 From microbiota to metagenomics in clinical Johannes R. Hov, Oslo University studies Hospital and University of Oslo Coffee break and poster viewing 1115-1200 Open abstract session 1200-1300 1200 HUNT One Health – the world’s first large-scale Arne Holst-Jensen, Norwegian population-wide study of human and animal Veterinary Institute, Oslo, Norway health interactions 1215 Breast milk concentrations of environmental Nina Iszatt, Department of contaminants are associated with gut Environmental Exposure and microbiota composition and short-chain fatty Epidemiology, Norwegian Institute of acids in infants one
    [Show full text]
  • Årsmøte 2015 Stavanger, 19
    1 Årsmøte 2015 Stavanger, 19. - 20. mars Kursnr. 29175 2 Velkommen til årsmøte 2015! 3 Program Torsdag 19. mars 2015, klokken 10.00 10.00 – 10.05: Velkommen Aktuelt faglig nytt fra faggruppene, 15 + 5 min. 10.05 – 10.25 (20 min): Mammapatologi v/Lars Akslen 10.25 – 10.45 (20 min): Gynekologisk patologi v/Ben Davidson 10.45 – 11.05 (20 min): Hematopatologi v/Lars Helgeland 11.05 – 11.15: Presentasjon av postere v/ordstyrer 11.15 – 11.30: Presentasjon av utstillere 11.30 – 12.30: Lunsj, håndmat i utstillingsområdet Aktuelt faglig nytt fra faggruppene, 15 + 5 min. 12.30 – 12.50 (20 min): Molekylærpatologi v/Hege Russnes 12.50 – 13.10 (20 min): Cytologisk patologi v/ Hans Kristian Haugland 13.10 – 13.30 (20 min): Perinatal og placentapatologi v/ Gitta Turowski 13.30 – 13.50 (20 min): Gastrointestinal patologi v/Solveig Norheim Andersen 13.30 – 13.50 (20 min): Ikke fastsatt ennå (uro eller lunge) 13.50 – 14.30: Pause med postere, kaffe og utstilling, serveres i utstillingsområdet 14.30 – 18.00 Årsmøte i DNP 19.00: Festmiddag v/ Gaffel og Karaffel, Øvre Holmegate 20, 4006 Stavanger (Særskilt påmelding nødvendig) 4 Fredag 20.mars, klokken 09.00 09.00 – 10.00: Snittseminar, 7 + 3 min. 1. Påskeegg 1, Ok Målfrid Mangrud, Lillehammer 2. Påskeegg 2, Linda Hatleskog, Stavanger 3. Påskeegg 3, Pavla Sustova, Stavanger 4. Påskeegg 4, Ruth Schwienbacher, Tromsø 5. Påskeegg 5, Dordi Lea, Stavanger 6. Påskeegg 6, Matthias Lammert, Oslo, Rikshospital 10.00 – 10.20: Kaffepause, serveres i utstillingsområdet 10.20 – 11.00: Snittseminar fortsetter 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Single-Centre, Triple-Blinded, Randomised, 1-Year, Parallel-Group, Superiority Study to Compare the Effects of Roux-En-Y Gastric
    Open access Protocol BMJ Open: first published as 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024573 on 4 June 2019. Downloaded from Single-centre, triple-blinded, randomised, 1-year, parallel-group, superiority study to compare the effects of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy on remission of type 2 diabetes and β-cell function in subjects with morbid obesity: a protocol for the Obesity surgery in Tønsberg (Oseberg) study Heidi Borgeraas,1 Jøran Hjelmesæth,1,2 Kåre Inge Birkeland,3 Farhat Fatima,1,2 John Olav Grimnes,4 Hanne L Gulseth,2 Erling Halvorsen,4 Jens Kristoffer Hertel,1 Tor Olav Widerøe Hillestad,4 Line Kristin Johnson,1 Tor-Ivar Karlsen,1,5 To cite: Borgeraas H, Ronette L Kolotkin,6,7 Nils Petter Kvan,4 Morten Lindberg,8 Jolanta Lorentzen,1,2 Hjelmesæth J, Birkeland KI, 1,9 1,10 1,2 11 et al. Single-centre, triple- Njord Nordstrand, Rune Sandbu, Kathrine Aagelen Seeberg, Birgitte Seip, 1,2 12 1 blinded, randomised, 1-year, Marius Svanevik, Tone Gretland Valderhaug, Dag Hofsø parallel-group, superiority study to compare the effects of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy on ABSTRACT remission of type 2 diabetes and Strengths and limitations of this study β-cell function in subjects with Introduction Bariatric surgery is increasingly recognised http://bmjopen.bmj.com/ morbid obesity: a protocol for as an effective treatment option for subjects with type ► Study design—randomised, triple-blinded superior- the Obesity surgery in Tønsberg 2 diabetes and obesity; however, there is no conclusive ity trial. (Oseberg) study. BMJ Open evidence on the superiority of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass ► Numerous clinically relevant secondary endpoints 2019;9:e024573.
    [Show full text]
  • Adoption of Routine Telemedicine in Norway: the Current Picture
    Global Health Action æ ORIGINAL ARTICLE Adoption of routine telemedicine in Norway: the current picture Paolo Zanaboni1*, Undine Knarvik1 and Richard Wootton1,2 1Norwegian Centre for Integrated Care and Telemedicine, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway; 2Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Tromsø, Tromsø, Norway Background: Telemedicine appears to be ready for wider adoption. Although existing research evidence is useful, the adoption of routine telemedicine in healthcare systems has been slow. Objective: We conducted a study to explore the current use of routine telemedicine in Norway, at national, regional, and local levels, to provide objective and up-to-date information and to estimate the potential for wider adoption of telemedicine. Design: A top-down approach was used to collect official data on the national use of telemedicine from the Norwegian Patient Register. A bottom-up approach was used to collect complementary information on the routine use of telemedicine through a survey conducted at the five largest publicly funded hospitals. Results: Results show that routine telemedicine has been adopted in all health regions in Norway and in 68% of hospitals. Despite being widely adopted, the current level of use of telemedicine is low compared to the number of face-to-face visits. Examples of routine telemedicine can be found in several clinical specialties. Most services connect different hospitals in secondary care, and they are mostly delivered as teleconsultations via videoconference. Conclusions: Routine telemedicine in Norway has been widely adopted, probably for geographical reasons, as in other settings. However, the level of use of telemedicine in Norway is rather low, and it has significant potential for further development as an alternative to face-to-face outpatient visits.
    [Show full text]
  • Obstetrics Healthcare Atlas
    Obstetrics Healthcare Atlas The use of obstetrics healthcare services in Norway during the period 2015–2017 April 2019 Helseatlas SKDE report Num. 6/2019 Authors Hanne Sigrun Byhring, Lise Balteskard, Janice Shu, Sivert Mathisen, Linda Leivseth, Arnfinn Hykkerud Steindal, Frank Olsen, Olav Helge Førde and Bård Uleberg Professional contributor Pål Øian Editor Barthold Vonen Awarding authority Ministry of Health and Care Services, and Northern Norway Regional Health Authority Date (Norwegian version) April 2019 Date (English version) August 2019 Translation Allegro (Anneli Olsbø) Version August 26, 2019 Front page photo: Colourbox ISBN: 978-82-93141-41-9 All rights SKDE. Foreword, Northern Norway RHA Norwegian antenatal and maternity care is of high international quality. Considerable efforts have gone into developing a comprehensive maternity care since the submission of Report No 12 to the Storting (2008–2009) - En gledelig begivenhet (‘A happy event’ - in Norwegian only) and the publication of the Norwegian Directorate of Health’s guide Et trygt fødetilbud (‘Safe maternity services’ - in Norwegian only). The guide and the subsequent regional discipline plans have provided a basis for developing even better described and more predictable maternity care. The quality requirements have been clarified and the requirements that apply to maternity units have been specified. Cooperation between specialist communities across institutional boundaries have helped to develop more uniform and medically documented practices. It is therefore pleasing, and perhaps also expected, that SKDE’s eighth healthcare atlas shows that overall, mothers and babies receive good and equitable health services throughout pregnancy and childbirth. This is primarily important to the women and the babies born, as it allows them to feel safe before the most important event in life.
    [Show full text]
  • Malnutrition Among Patients in Nursing Homes and Its Association with Dementia
    FAGFELLEVURDERT MALNUTRITION AMONG PATIENTS IN NURSING HOMES Malnutrition among patients in nursing homes and its association with dementia TEKST Rosanna Echano Major, RNa, Maria Krogseth, MD, PhD b,c,d. a Tjølling Nursing Home, Municipality of Larvik, Norway b Oslo Delirium Research Group, Geriatric Department, Oslo University Hospital. Norway. c Old Age Psychiatry Research Network, Telemark Hospital Trust and Vestfold Hospital Trust, 3710 Skien, Norway. d University of South-Eastern Norway. Abstract Aim: To reveal the prevalence of malnutrition of risk for malnutrition was 68%, 28% and 35% among patients in nursing facilities using the scree- using MNA, MUST and NJ respectively. Using three ning tools Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), categories, the prevalence of high risk for malnutri- Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), tion was 13%, 11% and 16% using MNA, MUST, and Nutritional Journal (NJ). The agreement bet- and NJ respectively. There was a positive associa- ween the tools, and the correlation between mal- tion between dementia severity and worse nutritio- nutrition and severity of dementia, were explored. nal status using MNA (p<0.001). This association was not significant using NJ (p=0.223), nor MUST Methods: 97 patients living in nursing facilities were (p=0.303). included. The patients’ nutritional status was assessed using MNA, MUST, and NJ. Severity of dementia was Conclusion: The prevalence of malnutrition among determined using Clinical Dementia Rating Scale patients living in nursing facilities varies according (CDR). to screening tool applied, and how the result is pre- sented. Risk of malnutrition increases parallel to the Result: When classifying patients’ nutritional status severity of dementia regardless of the screening into two categories (normal vs.
    [Show full text]
  • A Full Life - All Your Life a Quality Reform for Older Persons
    A full life - all your life A Quality Reform for Older Persons Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services LIVE YOUR WHOLE LIFE CONTENTS Preface . 5 Summery . 7 1 Goals and target group . 13 2 Background and history . 14 3 Implementation and methods . 16 4 National programme for an age-friendly Norway . 19 5 Activity and socialisation . 22 6 Food and meals . 29 7 Healthcare . 35 8 Coherence . 41 9 Basis for the reform . 42 LIVE YOUR WHOLE LIFE 3 4 LIVE YOUR WHOLE LIFE LIVE YOUR WHOLE LIFE LIVE YOUR WHOLE LIFE A Quality Reform for Older Persons Recommendation by the Ministry of Health and Care Services on 04 May 2018, approved at the cabinet meeting the same day. (Solberg government) LIVE YOUR WHOLE LIFE 5 6 LIVE YOUR WHOLE LIFE LIVE YOUR WHOLE LIFE LIVE YOUR WHOLE LIFE 7 Most older persons in Norway live good ensures security and dignity for the lives . They have an impact on their own senior years? One idea is to offer all daily lives . They are active and older persons at least one hour of participate in the social community . They activity per day based on their own have good health and care services that interests and wishes . Another is for are available when needed . They health and care services to establish a contribute with their own resources at community contact person to mobilise work, and to family and friends in their volunteer efforts. A third is to provide community . older persons with more opportunities to choose what they want to eat and to All older persons should be able to have a good meal in the company of continue enjoying their daily lives, even others .
    [Show full text]