In-reach specialist nursing teams for residential care homes : uptake of services, impact on care provision and cost-effectiveness

Background: A joint NHS-Local Authority initiative in England designed to provide a dedicated nursing and physiotherapy in-reach team (IRT) to four residential care homes has been evaluated.The IRT supported 131 residents and maintained 15 'virtual' beds for specialist nursing in these care homes. Methods: Data captured prospectively (July 2005 to June 2007) included: numbers of referrals; reason for referral; outcome (e.g. admission to IRT bed, short-term IRT support); length of stay in IRT; prevented hospital admissions; early hospital discharges; avoided nursing home transfers; and detection of unrecognised illnesses. An economic analysis was undertaken. Results: 733 referrals were made during the 2 years (range 0.5 to 13.0 per resident per annum)resulting in a total of 6,528 visits. Two thirds of referrals aimed at maintaining the resident's independence in the care home. According to expert panel assessment, 197 hospital admissions were averted over the period; 20 early discharges facilitated; and 28 resident transfers to a nursing home prevented. Detection of previously unrecognised illnesses accounted for a high number of visits. Investment in IRT equalled £44.38 per resident per week. Savings through reduced hospital admissions, early discharges, delayed transfers to nursing homes, and identification of previously unrecognised illnesses are conservatively estimated to produce a final reduction in care cost of £6.33 per resident per week. A sensitivity analysis indicates this figure might range from a weekly overall saving of £36.90 per resident to a 'worst case' estimate of £2.70 extra expenditure per resident per week. Evaluation early in implementation may underestimate some cost-saving activities and greater savings may emerge over a longer time period. Similarly, IRT costs may reduce over time due to the potential for refinement of team without major loss in effectiveness. Conclusion: Introduction of a specialist nursing in-reach team for residential homes is at least cost neutral and, in all probability, cost saving. Further benefits include development of new skills in the care home workforce and enhanced quality of care. Residents are enabled to stay in familiar surroundings rather than unnecessarily spending time in hospital or being transferred to a higher dependency nursing home setting

Acute hospital admissions among nursing home residents: a population-based observational study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Nursing home residents are prone to acute illness due to their high age, underlying illnesses and immobility. We examined the incidence of acute hospital admissions among nursing home residents versus the age-matched community dwelling population in a geographically defined area during a two years period. The hospital stays of the nursing home population are described according to diagnosis, length of stay and mortality. Similar studies have previously not been reported in Scandinavia.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The acute hospitalisations of the nursing home residents were identified through ambulance records. These were linked to hospital patient records for inclusion of demographics, diagnosis at discharge, length of stay and mortality. Incidence of hospitalisation was calculated based on patient-time at risk.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The annual hospital admission incidence was 0.62 admissions per person-year among the nursing home residents and 0.26 among the community dwellers. In the nursing home population we found that dominant diagnoses were respiratory diseases, falls-related and circulatory diseases, accounting for 55% of the cases. The median length of stay was 3 days (interquartile range = 4). The in-hospital mortality rate was 16% and 30 day mortality after discharge 30%.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Acute hospital admission rate among nursing home residents was high in this Scandinavian setting. The pattern of diagnoses causing the admissions appears to be consistent with previous research. The in-hospital and 30 day mortality rates are high.</p

The burden of respiratory infections among older adults in long-term care:a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Respiratory infections among older adults in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are a major global concern, yet a rigorous systematic synthesis of the literature on the burden of respiratory infections in the LTCF setting is lacking. To address the critical need for evidence regarding the global burden of respiratory infections in LTCFs, we assessed the burden of respiratory infections in LTCFs through a systematic review of the published literature. METHODS: We identified articles published between April 1964 and March 2019 through searches of PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Experimental and observational studies published in English that included adults aged ≥60 residing in LTCFs who were unvaccinated (to identify the natural infection burden), and that reported measures of occurrence for influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), or pneumonia were included. Disagreements about article inclusion were discussed and articles were included based on consensus. Data on study design, population, and findings were extracted from each article. Findings were synthesized qualitatively. RESULTS: A total of 1451 articles were screened for eligibility, 345 were selected for full-text review, and 26 were included. Study population mean ages ranged from 70.8 to 90.1 years. Three (12%) studies reported influenza estimates, 7 (27%) RSV, and 16 (62%) pneumonia. Eighteen (69%) studies reported incidence estimates, 7 (27%) prevalence estimates, and 1 (4%) both. Seven (27%) studies reported outbreaks. Respiratory infection incidence estimates ranged from 1.1 to 85.2% and prevalence estimates ranging from 1.4 to 55.8%. Influenza incidences ranged from 5.9 to 85.2%. RSV incidence proportions ranged from 1.1 to 13.5%. Pneumonia prevalence proportions ranged from 1.4 to 55.8% while incidence proportions ranged from 4.8 to 41.2%. CONCLUSIONS: The reported incidence and prevalence estimates of respiratory infections among older LTCF residents varied widely between published studies. The wide range of estimates offers little useful guidance for decision-making to decrease respiratory infection burden. Large, well-designed epidemiologic studies are therefore still necessary to credibly quantify the burden of respiratory infections among older adults in LTCFs, which will ultimately help inform future surveillance and intervention efforts

Observational Evidence of For-Profit Delivery and Inferior Nursing Home Care: When Is There Enough Evidence for Policy Change?

This research was financially supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council