Comparing quality of care outcomes between assisted living and nursing homes before and during the COVID‐19 pandemic

Author:

Hoben Matthias12,Hogan David B.3,Poss Jeffrey W.4,Gruneir Andrea56,McGrail Kim7,Griffith Lauren E.8ORCID,Chamberlain Stephanie A.2ORCID,Estabrooks Carole A.2,Maxwell Colleen J.469ORCID

Affiliation:

1. School of Health Policy and Management, Faculty of Health York University Toronto Ontario Canada

2. Faculty of Nursing, College of Health Sciences University of Alberta Edmonton Alberta Canada

3. Division of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine University of Calgary Calgary Alberta Canada

4. School of Public Health Sciences University of Waterloo Waterloo Ontario Canada

5. Department of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, College of Health Sciences University of Alberta Edmonton Alberta Canada

6. ICES Toronto Ontario Canada

7. Centre for Health Services and Policy Research, School of Population and Public Health University of British Columbia Vancouver British Columbia Canada

8. Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences McMaster University Hamilton Ontario Canada

9. School of Pharmacy University of Waterloo Waterloo Ontario Canada

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundWhile assisted living (AL) and nursing home (NHs) residents in share vulnerabilities, AL provides fewer staffing resources and services. Research has largely neglected AL, especially during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Our study compared trends of practice‐sensitive, risk‐adjusted quality indicators between AL and NHs, and changes in these trends after the start of the pandemic.MethodsThis repeated cross‐sectional study used population‐based resident data in Alberta, Canada. Using Resident Assessment Instrument data (01/2017–12/2021), we created quarterly cohorts, using each resident's latest assessment in each quarter. We applied validated inclusion/exclusion criteria and risk‐adjustments to create nine quality indicators and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs): potentially inappropriate antipsychotic use, pain, depressive symptoms, total dependency in late‐loss activities of daily living, physical restraint use, pressure ulcers, delirium, weight loss, urinary tract infections. Run charts compared quality indicators between AL and NHs over time and segmented regressions assessed whether these trends changed after the start of the pandemic.ResultsQuarterly samples included 2015–2710 AL residents and 12,881–13,807 NH residents. Antipsychotic use (21%–26%), pain (20%–24%), and depressive symptoms (17%–25%) were most common in AL. In NHs, they were physical dependency (33%–36%), depressive symptoms (26%–32%), and antipsychotic use (17%–22%). Antipsychotic use and pain were consistently higher in AL. Depressive symptoms, physical dependency, physical restraint use, delirium, weight loss were consistently lower in AL. The most notable segmented regression findings were an increase in antipsychotic use during the pandemic in both settings (AL: change in slope = 0.6% [95% CI: 0.1%–1.0%], p = 0.0140; NHs: change in slope = 0.4% [95% CI: 0.3%–0.5%], p < 0.0001), and an increase in physical dependency in AL only (change in slope = 0.5% [95% CI: 0.1%–0.8%], p = 0.0222).ConclusionsQIs differed significantly between AL and NHs before and during the pandemic. Any changes implemented to address deficiencies in either setting need to account for these differences and require monitoring to assess their impact.

Funder

Canadian Institutes of Health Research

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Geriatrics and Gerontology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3