Search

Background: Medically complex vulnerable older adults often face social challenges that affect compliance with their medical care plans, and thus require home and community-based services (HCBS). This study describes how non-medical social needs of homebound older adults are assessed and addressed within home-based primary care (HBPC) practices, and to identify barriers to coordinating HCBS for patients., Methods: An online survey of members of the American Academy of Home Care Medicine (AAHCM) was conducted between March through November 2016 in the United States. A 56-item survey was developed to assess HBPC practice characteristics and how practices identify social needs and coordinate and evaluate HCBS. Data from 101 of the 150 surveys received were included in the analyses. Forty-four percent of respondents were physicians, 24% were nurse practitioners, and 32% were administrators or other HBPC team members., Results: Nearly all practices (98%) assessed patient social needs, with 78% conducting an assessment during the intake visit, and 88% providing ongoing periodic assessments. Seventy-four percent indicated 'most' or 'all' of their patients needed HCBS in the past 12 months. The most common needs were personal care (84%) and medication adherence (40%), and caregiver support (38%). Of the 86% of practices reporting they coordinate HCBS, 91% followed-up with patients, 84% assisted with applications, and 83% made service referrals. Fifty-seven percent reported that coordination was 'difficult.' The most common barriers to coordinating HCBS included cost to patient (65%), and eligibility requirements (63%). Four of the five most frequently reported barriers were associated with practices reporting it was 'difficult' or 'very difficult' to coordinate HCBS (OR from 2.49 to 3.94, p-values < .05)., Conclusions: Despite the barriers to addressing non-medical social needs, most HBPC practices provided some level of coordination of HCBS for their high-need, high-cost homebound patients. More efforts are needed to implement and scale care model partnerships between medical and non-medical service providers within HBPC practices.

Background: Due to the demographic ageing process and the increasing number of pre-frail and frail individuals, new lifestyle interventions to enhance the quality of life (QoL) in community-dwelling older adults are necessary. Therefore, we performed a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to compare effects of a lay-led home-based physical and nutritional intervention programme with social support alone on different QoL domains in community-dwelling pre-frail and frail older adults., Methods: In this analysis within a RCT (12 weeks), lay volunteers visited one-on-one pre-frail or frail older adults at home twice a week. Participants in the physical training and nutritional intervention (PTN) group performed six strength exercises and discussed main nutritional issues during each visit. The social support (SOSU) group received home visits twice a week for social exchanges. The QoL was assessed with the WHOQOL-BREF and the WHOQOL-OLD instruments. Analyses of covariance (ANCOVA) were used to examine differences between groups with baseline values as the covariate. Changes within groups were assessed with paired t-tests., Results: Eighty participants (n = 39 in the PTN group and n = 41 in the SOSU group) were included. No significant differences were found between the two groups except in past, present and future activities domain [β = 3.66 (95% confidence interval 0.13 to 7.18)] in favour of the PTN group. However, there was some evidence of greater within group improvements in the PTN group particularly in overall QoL, social relations and social participation. In the SOSU group, no significant effect was observed in any QoL domain., Conclusion: A combination of a home-based physical and nutritional intervention was not more effective compared to social support alone, on QoL in community-dwelling pre-frail and frail older adults. However, the small but significant improvement within the PTN group suggests that a home-based physical and nutritional intervention delivered by volunteers may influence the QoL in a positive way., Trial Registration: The study protocol was registered on 6 November 2013 at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT01991639 ).

Background: In Japan, there is a large increase in the number of elderly persons who potentially need home-visit nursing services (VNS). However, the number of persons using the VNS has increased only little in comparison to the number of individuals who use home social services, which are also covered by the Long-Term Care Insurance (LTCI) system. This cross-sectional study investigated the predictors of the VNS used under the LTCI system in Japan., Methods: We used 1,580 claim data from all the users of community-based services and 1,574 interview survey data collected in 2001 from the six municipal bodies in Japan. After we merged the two datasets, 1,276 users of community-based services under the LTCI were analyzed. Multiple logistic regression models stratified by care needs levels were used for analysis., Results: Only 8.3% of the study subjects were VNS users. Even among study participants within the higher care-needs level, only 22.0% were VNS users. In the lower care level group, people with a higher care level (OR: 3.50, 95% CI: 1.50-8.93), those whose condition needed long term care due to respiratory or heart disease (OR: 4.31, 95% CI: 1.88-89.20), those whose period of needing care was two years or more (OR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.14-3.48), those whose service plan was created by a medical care management agency (OR: 2.39, 95% CI: 1.31-4.33), those living with family (OR: 1.86, 95% CI: 1.00-3.42), and those who use home-help services (OR: 2.12, 95% CI: 1.17-3.83) were more likely to use the VNS. In the higher care level group, individuals with higher care level (OR: 3.63, 95% CI: 1.56-8.66), those with higher income (OR: 3.79, 95% CI: 1.01-14.25), and those who had regular hospital visits before entering the LTCI (OR: 2.36, 95% CI: 1.11-5.38) were more likely to use the VNS., Conclusions: Our results suggested that VNS use is limited due to management by non-medical care management agencies, due to no caregivers being around or a low income household. The findings of this study provide valuable insight for LTCI policy makers: the present provision of VNS should be reconsidered.