Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T00:45:47.480Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Creating possibilities for action in the presence of environmental barriers in the process of ‘ageing in place’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 December 2008

KARIN JOHANSSON ,
STAFFAN JOSEPHSSON  and
MARGARETA LILJA
KARIN JOHANSSON*
Affiliation:
Department of Neurobiology, Caring Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
STAFFAN JOSEPHSSON
Affiliation:
Department of Neurobiology, Caring Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
MARGARETA LILJA
Affiliation:
Department of Neurobiology, Caring Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
*
Address for correspondence: Karin Johansson, Department of Neurobiology, Caring Sciences and Society, Division of Occupational Therapy, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The need for an understanding of ‘ageing in place’ as a progressive process has emerged among researchers in the field of environmental gerontology. The aim of this study was to explore this process, in relation to home modification services. Four older adults who had applied for home modification services in one Swedish municipality were included. Data were collected by open interviews with the participants in their homes on subsequent occasions, from before the modification had been installed until recognised stability in the situation relating to the home modification. In the analysis, the concept of place integration was used as a tool to explore the active relations that connect people and context over time. The main findings show that the participants used creativity and initiative to direct future situations towards increased possibilities for action. This indicates that services aiming to support people ‘ageing in place’ should be directed towards increasing possibilities for action rather than only facilitating activity performance. Furthermore, it can be concluded that if the service-users' creativity and efforts are recognised as resources in design and provision of services, services that aim to support individuals who are ageing in place have the potential to be empowering.

Keywords

agencyempowermenthome modificationplace integrationservice delivery
Type
Research Article
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 29 , Issue 1 , January 2009 , pp. 49 - 70
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agich, G. J. 1995. Actual autonomy and long-term care decision-making. In McCullough, L. B. and Wilson, N. L. (eds), Long-term Care Decisions: Ethical and Conceptual Dimensions. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, 113–36.Google Scholar
Allen, D., Griffiths, L. and Lyne, P. 2004. Accommodating health and social care needs: routine resource allocation in stroke rehabilitation. Sociology of Health and Illness, 26, 4, 411–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andrews, G. J. 2002. Towards a more place-sensitive nursing research: an invitation to medical and health geography. Nursing Inquiry, 9, 4, 221–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arman, R. and Lindahl, L. 2005. Nyttan och värdet av bostadsanpassningar ur olika perspektiv. Delrapport 1 [The Usefulness and Merits of Home Modifications from Various Perspectives. Interim Report 1.] Forskning och Utveckling i Väst, Gothenburg, Sweden.Google Scholar
Bleiklie, I. 1997. Service Regimes in Public Welfare Administration: Case Studies of Street-level Bureaucrats and Professionals as Decision Makers. Tano-Aschehough, Oslo.Google Scholar
Borglin, G. 2005. The experience of quality of life among older people. Journal of Aging Studies, 19, 2, 201–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists 2002. Enabling Occupation: An Occupational Therapy Perspective. Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists, Ottawa.Google Scholar
Cardol, M., De Jong, B. A. and Ward, C. D. 2002. On autonomy and participation in rehabilitation. Disability & Rehabilitation, 24, 18, 970–74.Google Scholar
Christiansen, C. and Townsend, E. 2004. Introduction to Occupation: The Art and Science of Living. Pearson Education Inc, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Clemens, E., Wetle, T., Feltes, M., Crabtree, B. and Dubitzky, D. 1994. Contradictions in case management: client-centered theory and directive practice with frail elderly. Journal of Aging and Health, 6, 1, 70–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cutchin, M. P. 1999. Qualitative explorations in health geography: using pragmatism and related concepts as guides. Professional Geographer, 51, 12, 265–74.Google Scholar
Cutchin, M. P. 2003. The process of mediated aging-in-place: a theoretically and empirically based model. Social Science and Medicine, 57, 6, 1077–90.Google Scholar
Cutchin, M. P. 2004. Using Deweyan philosophy to rename and reframe adaptation-to-environment. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 58, 3, 303–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cutchin, M. P. 2007. John Dewey's metaphysical ground-map and its implications for geographical inquiry. Geoforum doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.01.014.Google Scholar
Duncan, R. 1998. Blueprint for action: the National Home Modifications Action Coalition. Technology and Disability, 8, 1/2, 85–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunér, A. and Nordström, M. 2005. Intentions and strategies among elderly people: coping in everyday life. Journal of Aging Studies, 19, 4, 437–51.Google Scholar
Fänge, A. and Iwarsson, S. 2005 a. Changes in accessibility and usability in housing: an exploration of the housing adaptation process. Occupational Therapy International, 12, 1, 44–59.Google Scholar
Fänge, A. and Iwarsson, S. 2005 b. Changes in ADL dependence and aspects of usability following housing adaptation: a longitudinal perspective. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 59, 3, 296–304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geertz, C. 1983. Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology. Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
Gitlin, L. N. 2003. Conducting research on home environments: lessons learned and new directions. The Gerontologist, 43, 5, 628–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gitlin, L. N., Hauck, W. W., Winter, L., Dennis, M. P. and Schulz, R. 2006. Effect of an in-home occupational and physical therapy intervention on reducing mortality in functionally vulnerable older people: preliminary findings. Journal of American Geriatric Society, 54, 6, 950–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gitlin, L. N., Mann, W., Tomit, M. and Marcus, S. M. 2001. Factors associated with home environmental problems among community-living older people. Disability and Rehabilitation, 23, 17, 777–87.Google ScholarPubMed
Golant, S. M. 2003. Conceptualizing time and behavior in environmental gerontology: a pair of old issues deserving new thought. The Gerontologist, 43, 5, 638–48.Google Scholar
Griffiths, L. 2001. Categorising to exclude: the discursive construction of cases in community mental health teams. Sociology of Health and Illness, 23, 5, 678–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffiths, L. 2003. Making connections: studies of the social organisation of healthcare. Sociology of Health and Illness, 25, 2, 155–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gustavsson, A. 2000. Tolkning och tolkningsteori 1. Introduktion [Interpretation and Interpretation Theory 1. Introduction.] Pedagogiska Institutionen, Stockholms Universitet, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Haak, M., Fänge, A., Iwarsson, S. and Ivanoff, S. D. 2007. Home as a signification of independence and autonomy: experiences among very old Swedish people. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 14, 1, 16–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heywood, F. 2004 a. The health outcomes of housing adaptations. Disability and Society, 19, 2, 129–43.Google Scholar
Heywood, F. 2004 b. Understanding needs: A starting point for quality. Housing Studies, 19, 5, 709–26.Google Scholar
Heywood, F., Oldman, C. and Means, R. 2002. Housing and Home in Later Life. Open University Press, Buckingham, UK.Google Scholar
Iwarsson, S. 2005. A long-term perspective on person-environment fit and ADL dependence among older Swedish adults. The Gerontologist, 45, 3, 327–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johansson, K., Lilja, M., Petersson, I. and Borell, L. 2007. Performance of activities of daily living in a sample of applicants for home modification services. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 14, 1, 44–53.Google Scholar
Kielhofner, G. 2002. Model of Human Occupation. Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, Maryland.Google Scholar
Law, M., Cooper, B., Strong, S., Stewart, D., Rigby, P. and Letts, L. 1996. The person-environment-occupation model: a transactive approach to occupational performance. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 63, 1, 9–23.Google Scholar
Lawton, M. P. and Nahemov, L. E. 1973. Ecology and the aging process. In Eisdorfer, C. and Lawton, M. P. (eds), The Psychology of Adult Development and Aging. American Psychological Association, Washington DC, 619–74.Google Scholar
Lilja, M. and Borell, L. 1997. Elderly people's daily activities and need for mobility support. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences 11, 2, 73–80.Google Scholar
McCullough, L. B. and Wilson, N. L.(eds) 1995. Long-term Care Decisions: Ethical and Conceptual Dimensions. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland.Google Scholar
Means, R., Richards, S. and Smith, R. 2003. Community Care. Policy and Practice. Palgrave Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar
Ministry of Health and Social Affairs 1992. Lag om Bostadsanpassning [The Home Modification Legislation]. Ministry of health and Social Affairs, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Olaison, A. and Cedersund, E. 2006. Assessment for home care: negotiating solutions for individual needs. Journal of Aging Studies, 20, 4, 367–80.Google Scholar
Patton, M. Q. 2002. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Sage, Newbury Park, California.Google Scholar
Petersson, I., Lilja, M., Hammel, J. and Kottorp, A. 2007. Impact of home modification services on ability in daily life for people ageing with disabilities. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine doi:10.2340/16501977-0160.Google Scholar
Phillipson, C. 2003. Globalisation and the future of ageing: developing a critical gerontology. Sociological Research Online, 8, 4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, S. 2000. Bridging the divide: elders and the assessment process. British Journal of Social Work, 30, 1, 37–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowles, G. D., Oswald, F. and Hunter, E. G. 2003. Interior living environments in old age. In Wahl, H.-W., Scheidt, R. J. and Windley, P. G. (eds), Annual Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics. Focus on Aging in Context: Socio-Physical Environment. Vol. 23. Springer Publishing Company, New York, New York. 167–94.Google Scholar
Statistics Sweden 2005. Sveriges framtida befolkning 2005–2050 [Sweden's Future Population 2005–2050] Statistics Sweden, Stockholm.Available on line athttp://www.scb.se/Statistik/BE/BE0401/2005A01/BE0401_2005A01_SM_BE18SM0501.pdf [Accessed 10 March 2008].Google Scholar
Scheidt, R. J. and Norris-Baker, C. 2003. The general ecological model revisited: evolution, current status, and continuing challenges. In Wahl, H.-W., Scheidt, R. J. and Windley, P. G. (eds), Annual Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics. Focus on Aging in Context: Socio-Physical Environment. Vol. 23. Springer Publishing Company, New York, New York. 34–58.Google Scholar
Seltzer, M., Kullberg, C., Olesen, S. P. and Rostila, I.(eds) 2001. Listening to the Welfare State. Ashgate, Aldershot, Hampshire.Google Scholar
Stark, S. 2004. Removing environmental barriers in the homes of older adults with disabilities improves occupational performance. OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 24, 1, 32–39.Google Scholar
The National Board of Health and Welfare 2001. Äldres rehabiliteringsbehov i hemmiljö [The Need of Rehabilitation for Older People in Their Home Environment]. The National Board of Heath and Welfare, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Torres, S. 2006. Different ways of understanding the construct of successful aging: Iranian immigrants speak about what aging well means to them. Journal of Cross Cultural Gerontology, 21, 1–2, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
US Census Bureau 2008. IDB Population Pyramids [website]. US Census Bureau, Washington DC. Available on line at: http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/ [Accessed 10 March 2008].Google Scholar
Wahl, H.-W. and Lang, F. R. 2003. Aging in context across the adult life course: integrating physical and social environmental research perspectives. In Wahl, H.-W., Scheidt, R. J. and Windley, P. G. (eds), Annual Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics. Focus on Aging in Context: Socio-Physical Environment. Vol. 23. Springer Publishing Company, New York, New York. 1–33.Google Scholar
Wahl, H.-W., Scheidt, R. J. and Windley, P. G. (eds) 2003. Annual Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics. Focus on Aging in Context: Socio-Physical Environment. (Vol. 23). Springer Publishing Company, New York, New York.Google Scholar
Vassy, C. 2001. Categorisation and micro-rationing: access to care in a French emergency department. Sociology of Health and Illness, 23, 5, 615–32.Google Scholar
Vik, K. 2008. Older adults' participation in occupation in the context of home-based rehabiliation. [Thesis]. Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Wiles, J. 2005. Conceptualizing place in the care of older people: the contributions of geographical gerontology. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 14, 8B, 100–8.Google Scholar
Wray, S. 2003. Connecting ethnicity, agency and ageing. Sociological Research Online, 8, 4.Google Scholar
Wray, S. 2004. What constitutes agency and empowerment for women in later life? Sociological Review, 52, 1, 22–38.Google Scholar