Institutional versus at-home long term care for functionally dependent older people

Risk factors for 30-day readmission following shoulder arthroscopy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Recently, there has been a rapid shift from open shoulder surgery to arthroscopic shoulder procedures for treating several shoulder pathologies. This shift is mainly due to reduced postoperative complications and 30-day readmission. Although the 30-day readmission rate is low, the risk still exists. One way to minimize the risk factors is to analyze all the risk factors contributing to the 30-day readmission following shoulder arthroscopy.

METHODS

Electronic databases such as PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane library were searched. Studies were selected based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Newcastle-Ottawa score was used for the quality assessment of individual studies. Two reviewers extracted data from the selected studies. Results were evaluated through narrative analysis and presented as an odds ratio with 95% confidence interval. A meta-analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity in the available data.

RESULTS

A total of 12 studies evaluating 494,038 patients were selected in our review. All the studies have a low risk of bias (median = 8). Significant factors predicting readmission included age, gender, COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder), steroid use, smoking, preoperative opioid use, higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (3 or higher), and general and regional anesthesia vs. regional anesthesia alone.

CONCLUSION

Through our systematic review, we tried to identify risk factors that can predict 30-day readmission following shoulder arthroscopy. These include age > 65 years, COPD, steroid use, opioid use, and OR time > 90 mins. These high-risk patients could be triaged earlier by identifying these parameters, and effective pre and post-operative surveillance could minimize 30-day readmission risk following shoulder arthroscopy.

Demographic Characteristics Driving Disparities in Receipt of Long-term Services and Supports in the Community Setting

BACKGROUND

Research suggests that growth in Black and Hispanic (minority) older adults' nursing home (NH) use may be the result of disparities in access to community-based and alternative long-term services and supports (LTSS).

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine whether minority groups receiving care in NHs versus the community had fewer differences in their functional needs compared with the differences in nonminority older adults, suggesting a disparity.

METHODS

We identified respondents aged 65 years or above with a diagnosis of Alzheimer disease or dementia in the 2016 Health and Retirement Study who reported requiring LTSS help. We performed unadjusted analyses to assess the difference in functional need between community and NH care. Functional need was operationalized using a functional limitations score and 6 individual activities of daily living. We compared the LTSS setting for minority older adults to White older adults using difference-in-differences.

RESULTS

There were 186 minority older adults (community=75%, NH=25%) and 357 White older adults (community=50%, NH=50%). Between settings, minority older adults did not differ in education or marital status, but were younger and had greater income in the NH versus the community. The functional limitations score was higher in NHs than in the community for both groups. Functional needs for all 6 activities of daily living for the minority group were greater in NHs compared with the community.

CONCLUSION

Functional need for minority older adults differed by setting while demographics varied in unexpected ways. Factors such as familial and financial support are important to consider when implementing programs to keep older adults out of NHs.

Home or foster home care versus institutional long-term care for functionally dependent older people

BACKGROUND

Changing population demographics have led to an increasing number of functionally dependent older people who require care and medical treatment. In many countries, government policy aims to shift resources into the community from institutional care settings with the expectation that this will reduce costs and improve the quality of care compared.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of long-term home or foster home care versus institutional care for functionally dependent older people.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and two trials registers to November 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies and interrupted time series studies complying with the EPOC study design criteria and comparing the effects of long-term home care versus institutional care for functionally dependent older people.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of each included study. We reported the results narratively, as the substantial heterogeneity across studies meant that meta-analysis was not appropriate.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 studies involving 16,377 participants, all of which were conducted in high income countries. Included studies compared community-based care with institutional care (care homes). The sample size ranged from 98 to 11,803 (median N = 204). There was substantial heterogeneity in the healthcare context, interventions studied, and outcomes assessed. One study was a randomised trial (N = 112); other included studies used designs that had potential for bias, particularly due lack of randomisation, baseline imbalances, and non-blinded outcome assessment. Most studies did not select (or exclude) participants for any specific disease state, with the exception of one study that only included patients if they had a stroke. All studies had methodological limitations, so readers should interpret results with caution.It is uncertain whether long-term home care compared to nursing home care decreases mortality risk (2 studies, N = 314, very-low certainty evidence). Estimates ranged from a nearly three-fold increased risk of mortality in the homecare group (risk ratio (RR) 2.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.57 to 5.32) to a 62% relative reduction (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.61). We did not pool data due to the high degree of heterogeneity (I2 = 94%).It is uncertain whether the intervention has a beneficial effect on physical function, as the certainty of evidence is very low (5 studies, N = 1295). Two studies reported that participants who received long-term home care had improved activities of daily living compared to those in a nursing home, whereas a third study reported that all participants performed equally on physical function.It is uncertain whether long-term home care improves happiness compared to nursing home care (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.27 to 3.04) or general satisfaction because the certainty of evidence was very low (2 studies, N = 114).The extent to which long-term home care was associated to more or fewer adverse health outcomes than nursing home care was not reported.It is uncertain whether long-term home care compared to nursing home care decreases the risk of hospital admission (very low-certainty evidence, N = 14,853). RR estimates ranged from 2.75 (95% CI 2.59 to 2.92), showing an increased risk for those receiving care at home, to 0.82 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.93), showing a slightly reduced risk for the same group. We did not pool data due to the high degree of heterogeneity (I2 = 99%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are insufficient high-quality published data to support any particular model of care for functionally dependent older people. Community-based care was not consistently beneficial across all the included studies; there were some data suggesting that community-based care may be associated with improved quality of life and physical function compared to institutional care. However, community alternatives to institutional care may be associated with increased risk of hospitalisation. Future studies should assess healthcare utilisation, perform economic analysis, and consider caregiver burden.

Impact of home care versus alternative locations of care on elder health outcomes: an overview of systematic reviews

Background

Many elders struggle with the decision to remain at home or to move to an alternative location of care. A person’s location of care can influence health and wellbeing. Healthcare organizations and policy makers are increasingly challenged to better support elders’ dwelling and health care needs. A summary of the evidence that examines home care compared to other care locations can inform decision making. We surveyed and summarized the evidence evaluating the impact of home care versus alternative locations of care on elder health outcomes.

Methods

We conducted an overview of systematic reviews. Data sources included MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and CINAHL. Eligible reviews included adults 65+ years, elder home care, alternative care locations, and elder health outcomes. Two independent reviewers screened citations. We extracted data and appraised review quality using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) checklist. Results were synthesized narratively.

Results

The search yielded 2575 citations, of which 19 systematic reviews were eligible. Three hundred and forty studies with 271,660 participants were synthesized across the systematic reviews. The categories of comparisons included: home with support versus independent living at home (n = 11 reviews), home care versus institutional care (n = 3 reviews), and rehabilitation at home versus conventional rehabilitation services (n = 7 reviews). Two reviews had data relevant to two categories. Most reviews favoured home with support to independent living at home. Findings comparing home care to institutional care were mixed. Most reviews found no differences in health outcomes between rehabilitation at home versus conventional rehabilitation services. Systematic review quality was moderate, with a median AMSTAR score of 6 (range 4 - 10 out of 11).

Conclusions

The evidence on the impact of home care compared to alternative care locations on elder health outcomes is heterogeneous. Our findings support positive health impacts of home support interventions for community dwelling elders compared to independent living at home. There is insufficient evidence to determine the impact of alternative care locations on elders’ health. Additional research targeting housing and care options for the elderly is needed.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12877-016-0395-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The Phantoms of Home Care: Home Care Nurses' Care Decisions for Medicare Home Health Alzheimer's Disease Patients

Early indications are that the Medicare home health prospective payment system (PPS) has controlled Medicare home health expenditures. However, studies indicate many unresolved questions about whether PPS improves patient quality of care and is cost-effective. The article reviews effective home-based palliative care interventions and presents the views of seven home health care nurses regarding the impact of Medicare requirements on their care decisions for one chronic disease population—Alzheimer's disease. The article asserts the current failure to simultaneously address the cost and quality-of-life issues of home health Alzheimer's patients is analogous to the end-of-life care situation Medicare confronted in the 1970s prior to the Medicare hospice demonstration program that preceded the Hospice Medicare Benefit. The article asserts that a similar demonstration is appropriate to determine how PPS might better meet patient quality-of-life needs and the government's need to reduce costs.

[Monitoring a home care cohort]

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate home care by primary care teams for people over 65 years old with chronic conditions, in order to identify improvement opportunities. To identify patient and care variables associated with cognitive and functional impairment, nursing home admission, attendance at casualty units, hospital admission and death.

DESIGN

Analytic study of the follow-up of a cohort for 3 years.

SETTING

Primary health care teams in Catalonia, Spain.

PATIENTS

One thousand three hundred patients over 65 with chronic pathologies and cared for by home care programmes in Catalonia.

MAIN MEASUREMENTS

The following will be recorded annually: health status (Charlson, Barthel, Pfeiffer, Braden, and Gijón), data on the carer (Zarit), care received (social and health), self-perception of health (SF-12), Casualty attendance, short-term admissions and the final results, i.e. death or definitive admission to a nursing home or hospital. The statistical analyses will be based on logistic regression and a survival analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The study should reveal patient characteristics with prognostic value, as well as identify the social and health factors related to better survival and lower consumption of health and social resources.