Effectiveness of Shower Adaptations (Adults)

A Survey completed by Oxfordshire County Council

Housing Occupational Therapists

Recipe for success?

• Take 6 Housing OT’s

• Add 1 very enthusiastic OT Service Manager and a pinch of grants officers

• Sprinkle with a little Maria and Frances

• Mix thoroughly and bake in a slow oven for 2 years!

Why was a new recipe needed?

• Evidence to support:– keeping people at home cost effective.– housing adaptations produce savings to health and social care

budgets.

• No specific research completed in area of interest (the effectiveness of shower adaptations/satisfaction levels).

• Local evidence required by commissioners in Oxfordshire.

Aims of Study• Investigate effectiveness of shower adaptations

• Identify if adaptations were cost effective

• Find out if installation of a shower enabled disabled people to better manage personal hygiene

• Establish people’s level of satisfaction• Ease of use• Materials used

Methodology

• Postal questionnaire

• Piloted

• Questionnaire modified

• Sent to 701 participants who had shower adaptation completed within 2 chosen years – 2007 and 2010.

Over to you!

Key Findings

Overall Satisfaction:

Satisfaction level out of 10One

Two

Three

Four

Five

Six

Seven

Eight

Nine

Ten

Key Findings

Overall Impact

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

1

Overall Impact

Pe

rce

nta

ge

I can keep my self clean

I feel safer

I am less worried about falling

My family worry less about me

I have been able to stay in my home

I need less help

I have a more positive outlook

I fall less frequently

I socialise more

Other

It has not made any difference to me

I need more help

I wish that I had never had the showerfitted

Key FindingsOverall impact – keeping clean

Key FindingsOverall impact - safety

I don’t worry about falling in or out of the bath as I did before. It’s totally

changed my life” 

Key FindingsOverall impact – staying put

“I feel more confident about being in my own flat”

“Being independent and being able to stay in my own

home”

Key FindingsImpact on need for care

"I don't need support now with the shower. I needed someone here every time I

had a bath" 

"I don't need support now with the shower. I needed someone here every time I

had a bath" 

"I could not get in and out of a bath without help.

The shower allows me to be independent"

 

"I could not get in and out of a bath without help.

The shower allows me to be independent"

 

"Before the wet room my wife was having to help me step in and out of the bath as I have M.S, but she is also disabled

herself". 

Key Findings

• Carers needs• 142 respondents received help to use shower.• 13 reported carer had some difficulties supporting them

to use shower.• 2 – non-specific• 5 - possible poor design• 4 – issues related to medical conditions/disability• 2 – falls/fear of falling

Key Findings

Potential cost savings on care provision

• Average cost of a shower adaptation- £5K • Average cost of a care package of 2 hours per week to help with

strip washing - £1976.00 per year per person. • Potential saving of public funds over a 4 year period = £2900 per

person who might otherwise have required care.

• 126 (88%) needing less help - potential saving on care costs of £248,976.00 per year

Key Findings

Type of help required:

I have help getting to the showerroom

I have help getting into the shower

I have help undressing/dressing

I have help with washing my hair

I have help with washing my body

I have help using the showercontrols

I have help with drying

Other

Key Findings

Repairs and maintenance•2007 – 51% reported need for repairs/maintenance.•2010 – 33% reported need for repairs/maintenance.

•5 highest components needing repair:

Shower ComponentTotal number needing repair or maintenance

Percentage of all respondents

Shower unit 48 14Extractor Fan 45 13Shower Head 41 12

Flooring 32 9Shower Curtains 29 8

Limitations of survey

• Possible under reporting of dissatisfaction due to concerns adaptation might be removed.

• Over reliance on respondents recall especially regarding repairs and amount of help required.

• Question about floor level of adaptation would have been useful.

Limitations of survey

• Cost savings are potentials based on assumptions of amount of care person may have required (without shower).

• Some questions too open to interpretation.• Survey did not identify whether changes in level of care

due to changes in medical conditions or as result of shower adaptation.

• Data only available post 2007.

What have we done since?

• In conjunction with technical officers Housing OT’s have started to carry out local research to find out whether – there are other drainage pump options.– there are other shower traps that are easier to manage– There are alternative (quieter) extractor fans that could be used.

• In process of compiling an information leaflet.

• Recommendation made to update Oxfordshire OT Toolkit to include criteria regarding provision of body driers.

Iced…… but no cherry!

• Survey results published within Oxfordshire.

• Presentation to Oxfordshire OT Professional Forum.

• Abstract sent to BJOT.

• Presentation at COTSSH conference!

Personal Reflections

Personal Reflections

What else have we learnt

• A new word:

And Finally!!