Does hospitalization impact survival after lower respiratory infection in nursing home residents?

Pneumonia and Lower Respiratory Infections in Nursing Home Residents: Predictors of Hospitalization and Mortality

OBJECTIVES

To compare predictors of hospitalization and death in nursing home residents with pneumonia and other lower respiratory infections (LRIs).

DESIGN

A nested cohort study.

SETTING

Nine nursing homes in southern Ontario.

PARTICIPANTS

Three hundred fifty-three nursing home residents with LRIs (enrolled in the control arm of a clinical trial).

MEASUREMENTS

Comorbidities, vaccination status, age, health-related quality of life, functional status, and vital statistics were evaluated as potential predictors of hospitalization and mortality at 30 days.

RESULTS

Moderate to high disease severity score on a practical severity scale was a strong independent predictor of hospitalization (odds ratio (OR)=7.12, P<.001) and mortality (OR=5.04, P=.003). Diagnosis of pneumonia, established using chest radiograph, was also associated with hospitalization (OR=2.43, P=.008) and mortality (OR=2.35, P=.02). Oxygen saturation (<90%) was a strong independent predictor of hospitalization (OR=3.02, P=.004) but was not a significant predictor of mortality in multivariable analyses. Diagnosis of congestive heart failure (OR=2.26, P=.02) was an independent predictor of hospitalization, whereas receipt of pneumococcal vaccine (OR=0.36, P=.01) and greater functional independence (OR=0.92, P=.02) were negatively associated with hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

In nursing home residents with LRI, severity of illness and radiographically confirmed pneumonia are predictive of death and hospitalization.

Should I hospitalize my resident with nursing home-acquired pneumonia?

INTRODUCTION

Pneumonia is the leading cause of mortality, morbidity, and transfers to acute care facilities among residents of nursing homes. With the expected growth of the nursing home population over the next 30 years, the annual incidence of nursing home-acquired pneumonia (NHAP) is expected to reach 1.9 million cases. Yet there is growing evidence to suggest that the transfer of nursing home residents to hospitals with NHAP results in little to no improvement in overall mortality or morbidity when compared with residents treated in the nursing home. Furthermore, recent evidence suggests that nursing home residents admitted to hospitals may be at greater risk for functional decline, delirium, and pressure ulcer formation following hospitalization. The author therefore performed a comprehensive review of the literature to consider the salient issues confronting a clinician faced with the question of whether to transfer a nursing home resident diagnosed with pneumonia to an acute care facility.

METHODOLOGY

A structured literature search was performed relating to the diagnosis, treatment, and triage of residents with nursing home pneumonia. Relevant key words used to conduct this search included: pneumonia, long-term care facility, nursing home, nursing home-acquired pneumonia, triage, treatment, and hospitalization. References in English dated from 1966 to the present day were considered.

RESULTS

One prospective observational study and 2 retrospective, case control studies have directly compared the 30-day mortality rates of residents with NHAP who are hospitalized versus those who are treated in the nursing home. A second, prospective, observational study evaluated the mortality rate in residents with any form of infection who were transferred to acute care hospitals. These studies all suggest that mortality rates are similar or reduced when residents are treated in the nursing home. Studies also suggest that considerable cost savings can be incurred when residents are treated in the nursing home. Additional literature reviews were conducted to evaluate important factors that need to be considered before making triage decisions on nursing home residents diagnosed with pneumonia. These factors include the ease of making the diagnosis of NHAP, the availability and use of antibiotics, relevant cost issues, and barriers to providing adequate care in the nursing home environment.

CONCLUSION

There is growing evidence to suggest that hospitalization for residents with NHAP is not required and may result in increased cost, morbidity, and mortality. To date, studies show that residents may benefit from hospitalization if their respiratory rate is over 40. Otherwise, if appropriate treatment can be initiated expeditiously in the nursing home, resident mortality and morbidity may decrease. Numerous barriers to treating acutely ill residents in the nursing home exist, including a difficulty in obtaining antibiotics quickly, inadequate staffing, and poor documentation of a resident's wishes for hospitalization. More studies need to be conducted to further identify these barriers to nursing home care.

Predictors of mortality for lower respiratory infections in nursing home residents with dementia were validated transnationally

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Generalizability of clinical predictors for mortality from lower respiratory infection (LRI) in nursing home residents has not been assessed for residents with dementia.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

In prospective cohort studies of LRI in 61 nursing homes in the Netherlands (n = 541) and 36 nursing homes in Missouri, USA (n = 564), we examined 14-day and 1- and 3-month mortality in residents with dementia who were treated with antibiotics.

RESULTS

A logistic model predicting 14-day mortality derived from Dutch data included eating dependency, elevated pulse, decreased alertness, respiratory difficulty, insufficient fluid intake, high respiratory rate, male gender, and pressure sores. After adjusting coefficients with the heuristic shrinkage factor, the 14-day model showed good discrimination and calibration in both datasets. The apparent c-statistic for the original Dutch model was 0.80 (after correction for optimism, it was 0.75); the c-statistic was 0.74 in the U.S. validation population. The models predicting 1- and 3-month mortality showed moderate performance. A scoring system for estimating 14-day mortality performed equally well as the original model.

CONCLUSION

We identified a set of credible clinical predictors that are easily assessed and demonstrated validity in identifying residents at low risk of dying from LRI across different nursing home populations. This tool should inform decision-making for families and doctors.

A cross-cultural study of physician treatment decisions for demented nursing home patients who develop pneumonia

PURPOSE

We wanted to explore factors that influence Dutch and US physician treatment decisions when nursing home patients with dementia become acutely ill with pneumonia.

METHODS

Using a qualitative semistructured interview study design, we collected data from 12 physicians in the Netherlands and 12 physicians in North Carolina who care for nursing home patients. Our main outcome measures were perceptions of influential factors that determine physician treatment decisions regarding care of demented patients who develop pneumonia.

RESULTS

Several themes emerged from the study. First, physicians viewed their patient care roles differently. Dutch physicians assumed active, primary responsibility for treatment decisions, whereas US physicians were more passive and deferential to family preferences, even in cases when they considered families' wishes for care as inappropriate. These family wishes were a second theme. US physicians reported a perceived sense of threat from families as influencing the decision to treat more aggressively, whereas Dutch physicians revealed a predisposition to treat based on what they perceived was in the best interest of the patient. The third theme was the process of decision making whereby Dutch physicians based decisions on an intimate knowledge of the patient, and American physicians reported limited knowledge of their nursing home patients as a result of lack of contact time.

CONCLUSION

Physician-perceived care roles regarding treatment decisions are influenced by contextual differences in physician training and health care delivery in the United States and the Netherlands. These results are relevant to the debate about optimal care for patients with poor quality of life who lack decision-making capacity.

A clinical pathway for treating pneumonia in the nursing home: part II: the administrators' perspective and how it differs from nurses' views

OBJECTIVES

This paper examines the utility and sustainability of a clinical pathway for treating nursing home residents with pneumonia from the perspective of nursing administrators and medical directors in Ontario, Canada. The discussion includes a comparison of the perspectives of the administrators and the nursing staff (reported in part I of this article).

DESIGN

A qualitative case study design was used.

SETTING

Data were collected from 6 nursing homes in Southern Ontario that were drawn from a larger randomized controlled trial of a clinical pathway to help identify, diagnose, and manage cases of nursing home-acquired pneumonia.

PARTICIPANTS

Six interviews were conducted with nursing administrators and 2 with medical directors (1 per facility). Key themes were identified in the interview data using the template style of analysis described by Miller and Crabtree.

FINDINGS

Administrators were in favor of using a clinical pathway for identifying and treating pneumonia in nursing home residents. Participants thought that during the study residents with pneumonia received better and more timely care, and that nurses' clinical skills, knowledge, and confidence had improved. In comparison with views expressed by nurses and medical directors in the same facilities, nursing administrators tended to report less clinical training and staff support were required to successfully implement the pathway.

CONCLUSIONS

Even though nurses and administrators strongly support the use of a pneumonia clinical pathway in nursing homes, implementation plans should be tailored to individual facilities and be informed by the perspectives of both administrators and staff.

A clinical pathway for treating pneumonia in the nursing home: part I: the nursing perspective

OBJECTIVES

This paper examines nursing staff's perspectives on the utility and sustainability of a clinical pathway for treating nursing home residents with pneumonia.

DESIGN

A qualitative (case study) design was used.

SETTING

Data were collected from 6 nursing homes in Southern Ontario (5 from metro regions and 1 from a nonmetro region). Nursing homes were drawn from a larger randomized controlled trial of a clinical pathway for nursing home-acquired pneumonia conducted between 2001 and 2005. The clinical pathway was designed to assist in the identification, diagnosis, and management of pneumonia, including a decision tool for determining the appropriate location of treatment (hospital versus nursing home).

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 7 focus groups and 1 one-on-one interview were conducted between February 2003 and May 2004. Interview data were analyzed using the template style, described by Miller and Crabtree, to identify key themes.

FINDINGS

Nurses strongly supported the idea of the clinical pathway and believed that providing pneumonia care in the nursing home was better for the resident. As a result of using the clinical pathway, nurses felt that pneumonia was being identified, diagnosed, and treated earlier, resulting in fewer hospitalizations. In addition to the benefits to resident care, the nurses felt that their skills and knowledge also improved. Nurses generally supported the implementation of the pathway although some concern was expressed about the additional responsibility and resources that would entail.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of a clinical pathway for treating pneumonia in nursing homes and quick access to a backup clinician are desired by nurses who also believe it will result in better care and fewer hospitalizations of residents.

Pneumonia care and the nursing home: a qualitative descriptive study of resident and family member perspectives

BACKGROUND

Nursing home residents are frequently sent to hospital for diagnostic tests or to receive acute health care services. These transfers are both costly and for some, associated with increased risks. Although improved technology allows long-term care facilities to deliver more complex health care on site, if this is to become a trend then residents and family members must see the value of such care. This qualitative study examined resident and family member perspectives on in situ care for pneumonia.

METHODS

A qualitative descriptive study design was used. Participants were residents and family members of residents treated for pneumonia drawn from a larger randomized controlled trial of a clinical pathway to manage nursing home-acquired pneumonia on-site. A total of 14 in-depth interviews were conducted. Interview data were analyzed using the editing style, described by Miller and Crabtree, to identify key themes.

RESULTS

Both residents and family members preferred that pneumonia be treated in the nursing home, where possible. They both felt that caring and attention are key aspects of care which are more easily accessible in the nursing home setting. However, residents felt that staff or doctors should make the decision whether to hospitalize them, whereas family members wanted to be consulted or involved in the decision-making process.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that interventions to reduce hospitalization of nursing home residents with pneumonia are consistent with resident and family member preferences.

Nursing Home-Acquired Pneumonia

The management of nursing home-acquired pneumonia (NHAP) continues to be debatable because of the lack of clinical trials and controversy regarding its aetiology. The controversy regarding aetiology stems, in part, from studies that utilised sputum cultures for the diagnosis of NHAP without assessing the quality of the samples. These studies found a high proportion of Gram-negative aerobic bacilli in cultures as well as Staphylococcus aureus. However, in studies that have assessed the reliability of sputum samples, Gram-negative bacilli and S. aureus were isolated infrequently and Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae isolated most commonly. Since Gram-negative aerobic bacilli and S. aureus frequently cause hospital-acquired pneumonia, some authors have considered NHAP to be a variant of this group. Many other studies, however, have considered NHAP as part of the community-acquired pneumonia category. Depending on which categorisation is used for NHAP, the treatment recommendations have varied. There are several factors to consider in the management of NHAP in addition to choice of antibacterial: hospitalisation decision, initial route of administration of antibacterials for treatment in the nursing home, timing of switch from a parenteral to an oral agent and the duration of therapy. These factors, which have not been addressed in published guidelines, are discussed in this review. Recent guidelines recommend a fluoroquinolone (gatifloxacin, levofloxacin or moxifloxacin) or amoxicillin/clavulanic acid plus a macrolide for initial treatment of NHAP in the nursing home. For treatment in the hospital, a parenteral fluoroquinolone (as listed above) or a second- or third-generation cephalosporin plus a macrolide is recommended. A recent guideline for the treatment of healthcare-associated pneumonia (that includes NHAP) recommended an antipseudomonal cephalosporin or a carbapenem or an antipseudomonal penicillin/beta-lactamase inhibitor plus ciprofloxacin plus vancomycin or linezolid for treatment of NHAP based on findings in residents with severe pneumonia who required mechanical ventilation. However, this recommendation does not apply to the majority of residents who are hospitalised with pneumonia and not intubated. Other factors to consider when choosing an empiric regimen include recent antibacterial therapy and prior colonisation with a resistant organism, e.g. methicillin-resistant S. aureus. Recently, a group of studies by investigators in The Netherlands have focused on the concept of withholding antibacterial therapy in nursing home residents with pneumonia who have advanced dementia. These studies are reviewed in some detail because this is an approach to the management of NHAP that is uncommon but deserves more consideration given the terminal status of these people. Future studies of NHAP should focus on development of rapid (molecular) methods to identify aetiological agents, determination of the optimum antimicrobial regimen and duration of therapy, and identification of criteria that can assist physicians and families in making the decision to withhold antimicrobial therapy in residents with advanced dementia and pneumonia.

Antibiotic treatment and survival of nursing home patients with lower respiratory tract infection: a cross-national analysis

PURPOSE

Although lower respiratory tract infections are a leading cause of death in frail elderly patients, few studies have compared treatments and outcomes. We assessed the effects of different antibiotic treatment strategies on survival of elderly nursing home residents with lower respiratory tract infections in the United States and the Netherlands, where treatment approaches are quite different.

METHODS

We combined data from 2 prospective cohort studies of lower respiratory tract infections conducted in 36 nursing homes in the United States and 61 in the Netherlands. We included residents whose infections were treated with antibiotics: 806 in the United States and 415 in the Netherlands. Outcome measures were 1-month and 3-month mortality. We used logistic regression to adjust for differing illness severity.

RESULTS

Dutch residents had higher mortality than US residents (28.1% vs 15.1% at 1 month, respectively; P <.001). After adjusting for illness severity with logistic regression, the differences between the Dutch and US populations were not significant (odds ratio 1.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-1.90). Predicted mortality was overestimated for more severely ill US residents at 1 month but not at 3 months. No antibiotic regimen was consistently associated with increased or decreased mortality.

CONCLUSION

Despite differences in illness severity and treatment, adjusted mortality did not differ between the 2 countries. Although we cannot exclude a short-term survival benefit from more aggressive treatment in the United States, differences in baseline health appear prognostically more important than the type of antibiotic treatment.