4.3 Review

Toileting Disability in Older People Residing in Long-term Care or Assisted Living Facilities A Scoping Review of the Literature

Journal

JOURNAL OF WOUND OSTOMY AND CONTINENCE NURSING
Volume 46, Issue 5, Pages 424-433

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/WON.0000000000000575

Keywords

Activities of daily living; Fecal incontinence; Frail; Institutionalized; Long-term care; Older; Scoping review; Toileting; Toileting disability; Urinary incontinence

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

For purposes of this review, we defined toileting disability as a result of practices, procedures, or conditions that result in an individual requiring assistance using the bathroom. This scoping review synthesizes existing knowledge of extrinsic and/or intrinsic factors that might lead to or be associated with toileting disability and identified knowledge gaps related to toileting disability in older adults residing in long-term care or assisted living facilities. A search of 9 electronic databases and the gray literature identified 3613 articles. After exclusions and screening of the full text of 71 articles, 7 remaining eligible articles mapped research activity and identified knowledge gaps in this area. Only 1 study used toileting disability as the primary outcome; it was present in 15% of older adults without dementia living in long term-care facilities (a subgroup that comprised 34% of all residents). The other 6 articles examined factors and treatment of overall activities of daily living (ADL) performance as their primary outcome; in these, toileting disability was added to other difficulties, yielding a summary ADL outcome score. No study reported the incidence, distribution, or factors that affect toileting disability in long-term care; findings of this scoping review suggest a rich research agenda for future investigation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available