Minute of the 1st Meeting of Task Force
on HPH and Age-friendly Health Care

Date and Time: Stockholm Time 17:00 – 19:00, May 23rd, 2013

Venue: R36, Svenska Mässan, Gothenburg, Sweden

Chair: Dr. Shu-Ti Chiou (STC)

Participants: Dr. Ulrike Sommeregger (US), Mrs. Kjersti Johanne Flotten (KJF), Ms. Ioanna Petroulia (IP), Dr. Belinda Parke (BP), Dr. Barbara Liu (BL), Dr. Marie Boltz (MB), Mr. Herbert Habets (HH), Dr. Yu-Chen Chang (YCC)

In Attendance: Ms. Deborah Brown (DB), Mr. Ken Wong (KW)

BHP Staff: Ms. Yen-Fang Chen (YFC), Ms. Michelle Miauh-Shin Chen (MSC), Ms. Catherine Chen-Yin Kuo (CYK)

Minute summarized by Kai-Yu Chiu (KYC), BHP

I.  Welcome remarks by the Chair
STC first welcomed the members and announced that the Working Group was approved to transfer to Task Force during the 21st HPH General Assembly. The TF will run for four years from 2013 to 2017, at which the completion or extension of the terms of TF will be decided.

II.  Introductions
TF members take turns to briefly introduce themselves

III.  Discussion of the Terms of References for the TF (Annex 1)

1.  The TF appointed Mr. Jeff Svane (Technical Officer of the International HPH Secretariat and TF member) to draft the Manual of HPH and Age-friendly Health Care, and it is expected to be finalized by the end of 2013. (ToR 1)

2.  “Implementing health promotion in hospitals: Manual and self-assessment forms” (the green book) should be circulated to all TF members. (Annex 2)

3.  The TF will collect examples on best evidence practices and label the corresponding standards, e. g. 3.1.4. (ToR 2)

IV.  Discussion on the Results of Content Validity (Annex 3)
STC and YFC briefly introduced the procedure and the result of the content validity: The questionnaire was sent to 16 Working Group members in January, 2013, and the members were asked to rate each measurable item by its Importance, Suitability and Clarity. The ratings are from 1 to 5, with 5 representing the highest. Responses from 13 members were received in March 2013; 12 answered the questionnaire and 1 did not rate the items but provided feedbacks. The result: 51 measurable items scored 4 or above in all 3 criteria, and 9 measurable items had at least 1 criterion scored less than 4. The TF then began to discuss the 9 items scored less than 4.

1.  Item 1.2.6 The hospital honors age-friendly best practices and innovations: STC explained that in the Chinese version, there are further descriptions for each measurable item. This item aims at encouraging hospitals to implement the strategy for selecting innovations or best practices among the hospital staff. After STC’s explanation, TF members agreed that this item is important and should be kept in the framework. STC promised to improve the wording.

2.  Item 1.3.2 A program for quality assessment of the age-friendly policy and its related activities is established. The assessment addresses development of organizational culture and perspectives of the seniors and the providers, as well as development of resources, performance of practices and outcome of care: BHP will provide this item with tools.

3.  Item 2.2.1 The hospital makes every effort to adapt its administrative procedures to the special needs of older persons, including older persons with low educational levels or with cognitive impairments: MB said the term “administrative procedures” is not clear to her. YCC explained that hospital tries to smoothen the whole process, e.g. registration, and his hospital has “priority channels” for seniors to shorten their waiting time. STC also put that this item is adopted from the WHO age-friendly principles. BP suggested the following sentences could be added to this item: The hospital has in place or makes every effort to provide age-sensitive administrative system and procedures that meet the functional abilities (literacy, hearing, seeing, mobility, help them leave home). STC concluded that BP’s sentences could be put in the description part.

4.  Item 2.2.2 The hospital identifies and supports older persons with financial difficulties to receive appropriate care: STC suggested that the wording “the hospital” should be replaced by “the health care organization” as in Taiwan the long term care facilities are also welcomed to apply for the Recognition.

5.  Item 2.2.3 The hospital has volunteer programs to support patients and visitors in reception, navigation, transport, reading, writing, accompanying, or other helps as appropriate in outpatient and inpatient services & 2.2.4 The hospital encourages older persons, including community seniors, patients and their families, to participate in hospital’s volunteer services: Considering some countries do not have volunteer programs or have difficulties in recruiting volunteers in hospitals, the TF members agreed that both 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 should be optional, and 2.2.4 should be reworded as “The health care organization [hospital] has a volunteer program that provides opportunities for older persons, including community seniors, patients and their families, to participate in health care organization’s volunteer services.”

6.  Item 3.2.6 Diagnostic investigations and procedures should reflect age-related changes and abilities: This item is originally from BP, and BP explained that people go to hospital to receive health care as well as undergo diagnostic investigations, ex. x-ray or blood test. It’ll be difficult to ask patients in a wheel walker to stand on a normal bench to get an x-ray. The TF members agreed to reword the item to “Diagnostic investigations and procedures should accommodate age-related changes, tolerance and ability”.

7.  Item 3.3.9 The hospital provides care services to the community elders: STC explained that in Taiwan the hospitals and communities work closely together and there is no gate keeper design, so anyone can go to hospitals to receive outpatient or emergency health care. Hospitals provide the community with good services, e.g. meal delivery service for elders living alone. This suggestion is from the local experts. The TF members agreed that this item should be optional and reworded to “The health care organization provides outreaching care services to the community elders.”

8.  Item 4.1.1 The hospital applies the common principles of Universal Design to its physical environment whenever practical, affordable and possible: STC explained that 4.1.1 is originated from WHO age-friendly principles. The TF members suggested that descriptions and examples should be added to this item for clarity.

V. Other Resolutions
As STC had to leave early for the Gala Dinner, the last item 4.2.2 The hospital with larger premises offers shuttle van was not discussed in the meeting. The final resolutions are as follows:

1.  MB will provide sentences on environment issues (noise and color contrast).

2.  All the content validity comments provided by TF members (WG members then) should be forwarded to all TF members for reference.

3.  The descriptions for the 60 measurable items should be sent to all TF members.

4.  The 2nd TF meeting will take place within 6 months and discuss the following: go through the revised items, discuss TF’s next steps, invite hospitals to join the project, check what tools are available and what should be developed, discuss the timeline to launch the project of international pilot test.

4