Search

Randomized controlled trials are considered the most rigorous research design in efficacy and effectiveness research; however, such trials present numerous challenges that limit their applicability in real‐world settings. As a consequence, pragmatic trials are increasingly viewed as a research design that overcomes some of these barriers with the potential to produce findings that are more reproducible. Although pragmatic methodology in long‐term care is receiving increasing attention as an approach to improve successful dissemination and implementation, pragmatic trials present complexities of their own. To address these complexities and related issues, experts with experience conducting pragmatic trials, developing nursing home policy, participating in advocacy efforts, and providing clinical care in long‐term care settings participated in a virtual consensus conference funded by the National Institute on Aging in Spring 2021. Participants identified 4 cross‐cutting principles key to dissemination and implementation of pragmatic trial interventions: (1) stakeholder engagement, (2) diversity and inclusion, (3) organizational strain and readiness, and (4) learn from adaptations. Participants emphasized that implementation processes must be grounded in the perspectives of the people who will ultimately be responsible for implementing the intervention once it is proven to be effective. In addition, messaging must speak to long‐term care staff and all others who have a stake in its outcomes. Although our understanding of dissemination and implementation strategies remains underdeveloped, this article is designed to guide long‐term care researchers and community providers who are increasingly aware of the need for pragmatism in disseminating and implementing evidence‐based care interventions. See related editorial by Zimmerman et al. and Special Articles by Gurwitz et al. and Resnick et al. in this issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Physician burnout is a critical factor influencing the quality of care delivered in various healthcare settings. Although the prevalence and consequences of burnout have been well documented for physicians in various jurisdictions, no studies to date have reported on burnout in the postacute and long-term care setting. In this exploratory study, we sought to quantify the prevalence of burnout among 3 cohorts of physicians, each practicing in nursing homes in the United States (US), Canada, or The Netherlands. International comparisons were solicited to highlight cultural and health system factors potentially impacting burnout levels. Using standard survey techniques, a total of 721 physicians were solicited to participate (Canada 393; US 110; The Netherlands 218). Physicians agreeing to participate were asked to complete the “Maslach Burnout Inventory” using the Survey Monkey platform. A total of 118 surveys were completed from The Netherlands, 59 from Canada, and 65 from the US for response rates of 54%, 15%, and 59%, respectively. While US physicians demonstrated more negative scores in the emotional exhaustion subscale compared with their counterparts in Canada and The Netherlands, there were no meaningful differences on the depersonalization and personal accomplishments subscales. Factors explaining these differences are explored as well as approaches to future research on physician burnout in postacute and long-term care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Heart failure (HF) is highly prevalent among older patients in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). HF outcomes for SNF patients suffer because of many factors, including staff training, lack of physician availability, and failure to implement evidence-based care. AMDA – The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine has recently updated the Clinical Practice Guidelines for Heart Failure Management in SNFs. This review supplements the Guidelines with a robust focus on best practices for transitional care, symptom management, treatment and monitoring, and palliative care in patients with HF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: The role of interdisciplinary interventions in the nursing home (NH) setting remains unclear. We conducted a systematic evidence review to study the benefits of interdisciplinary interventions on outcomes of NH residents. We also examined the interdisciplinary features of successful trials, including those that used formal teams. Data Sources: Medline was searched from January 1990 to August 2011. Search terms included residential facilities, long term care, clinical trial, epidemiologic studies, epidemiologic research design, comparative study, evaluation studies, meta-analysis and guideline. Study Selection: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of interdisciplinary interventions conducted in the NH setting. Measurements: We used the Cochrane Collaboration tools to appraise each RCT, and an RCT was considered positive if its selected intervention had a significant positive effect on the primary outcome regardless of its effect on any secondary outcome. We also extracted data from each trial regarding the participating disciplines; for trials that used teams, we studied the reporting of various team elements, including leadership, communication, coordination, and conflict resolution. Results: We identified 27 RCTs: 7 had no statistically significant effect on the targeted primary outcome, 2 had a statistically negative effect, and 18 demonstrated a statistically positive effect. Participation of residents’ own primary physicians (all 6 trials were positive) and/or a pharmacist (all 4 trials were positive) in the intervention were common elements of successful trials. For interventions that used formal team meetings, presence of communication and coordination among team members were the most commonly observed elements. Conclusion: Overall interdisciplinary interventions had a positive impact on resident outcomes in the NH setting. Participation of the residents’ primary physician and/or a pharmacist in the intervention, as well as team communication and coordination, were consistent features of successful interventions. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Behavioral and psychological symptoms associated with dementia are common in nursing home residents. Quality indicators (QI) assessing quality of care for these residents are minimally risk adjusted and can provide inaccurate information regarding the quality of care provided by the facility. Objective: Evaluate the performance of a new QI for the incidence of worsening behaviors in nursing home residents with behavioral and psychological symptoms association with dementia. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: A total of 381 Minnesota nursing homes with 26,165 residents. Data Sources: Minimum Data Set records for the first 2 calendar quarters of 2008. Measurements: We calculated incidence of worsening behaviors QI by comparing items from the “behavior” section of the Minimum Data Set records from 2 consecutive quarters and reported the incidence rates by both the residents’ level of cognitive impairment and the presence or absence of special care unit for dementia (SCU). Results: The incidence rates of the worsening behavior QI in SCU ranged from 14% in residents with very severe cognitive impairment (a cognitive performance score = 6) to 30% in those with moderate cognitive impairment (a cognitive performance score = 3). The incidence QI rates among residents residing in conventional unit ranged from 15% among those with very severe cognitive impairment to 20% among those with moderate cognitive impairment. These differences in QI rates between the 2 units were statistically significant with a P value = .001. After risk adjustment for level of cognitive impairment, number of facilities with SCUs that flagged for problem behaviors dropped from 18.4% to 12.4% and the number of conventional units in the low-risk category from 16.8% to 4.7%. Conclusion: Resident cognitive function and the facility utility of SCU are associated with worsening behavior QI and should be adjusted for in any nursing home quality reporting measure. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Our nation's nursing home industry has been in need of overhaul for decades—a situation made all the more evident by COVID-19. AMDA–The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine is dedicated to quality in post-acute and long-term care process and outcomes. This special article presents 5 keys to solving the COVID-19 crisis in post-acute and long-term care, related to policy, collaboration, individualization, leadership, and reorganization. Taking action during this crisis may prevent sinking back into the complacency and habits of our pre-COVID-19 lives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Objectives: Prevention and public reporting of falls have suffered due to inadequate attention given to the association of falls and cognitive impairment (CI) among nursing home (NH) residents. This study examines the relationship between CI, residence on dementia special care units (SCUs) and other resident characteristics and likelihood of residents experiencing new falls in NHs. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting and Participants: A total of 21,587 residents from 381 Minnesota NHs. Measurements: The NH Minimum Data Set (MDS) for 21,587 residents from 381 Minnesota NHs in the first calendar quarter of 2008 were analyzed. New falls, (fall noted on a current MDS assessment but not on a prior assessment); cognitive status, (as defined by Cognitive Performance Scale); residence on an SCU, and health and functional status covariates were recorded. A random effects logistic regression model was used to examine relationships between new falls and the resident''s cognitive status, type of unit, and covariates. Results: The likelihood of a new fall had a nonlinear association with CI. Compared with residents with normal or mild CI, the likelihood of a new fall was significantly higher among residents with moderate CI (OR = 1.43). The risk decreased slightly (OR = 1.34) for residents with more advanced CI, whereas the presence of severe CI was not significantly associated with new falls. Overall the likelihood of new falls was significantly higher for residents on SCUs compared with those on conventional units (OR = 1.27). Conclusions: Severity of CI and residence on SCU impact fall incidence and should be accounted for in future fall- prevention interventions and quality-reporting indicators and measures. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]