Impact of NHAP guideline implementation intervention on staff and resident vaccination rates

A systematic review of barriers and enablers associated with uptake of influenza vaccine among care home staff

Barriers and enablers to vaccination of care home (CH) staff should be identified in order to develop interventions to address them that increase uptake and protect residents. We aimed to synthesis the evidence describing the barriers and enablers that affect the influenza vaccination uptake of care home (CH) staff.

METHOD

We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, AMED, IBSS, SCOPUS to identify quantitative, qualitative or mixed-method studies. Data related to health or social care workers in CHs reported barriers or enablers were extracted and mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF); the data within each domain were grouped and categorized into key factors affecting influenza vaccine uptake among CH staff.

RESULTS

We screened 4025 studies; 42 studies met our inclusion criteria. Thirty-four (81 %) were surveys. Five theoretical domains were frequently reported as mediators of influenza vaccine uptake: Beliefs about consequences (32 studies), Environmental context and resources (30 studies), Emotions (26 studies), Social influences (25 studies), Knowledge (22 studies). The low acceptance rate of the influenza vaccine among CH staff can be attributed to multiple factors, including insufficient understanding of the vaccine, its efficacy, or misconceptions about the vaccine (knowledge), perceiving the vaccine as ineffective and unsafe (beliefs about consequences), fear of influenza vaccine and its side effects (emotions), and experiencing limited accessibility to the vaccine (environmental context and resources).

CONCLUSION

Interventions aimed at increasing influenza vaccine uptake among CH staff should focus on addressing the barriers identified in this review. These interventions should include components such as enhancing knowledge by providing accurate information about vaccine benefits and safety, addressing negative beliefs by challenging misconceptions, managing concerns and fears through open communication, and improving accessibility to the vaccine through convenient on-site options. This review provides a foundation for the development of tailored Interventions to improve influenza vaccine uptake among CH staff.

Beyond the control of the care home: A meta-ethnography of qualitative studies of Infection Prevention and Control in residential and nursing homes for older people

Objective

This study aimed to develop interpretive insights concerning Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) in care homes for older people.

Design

This study had a meta‐ethnography design.

Data Sources

Six bibliographic databases were searched from inception to May 2020 to identify the relevant literature.

Review Methods

A meta‐ethnography was performed.

Results

Searches yielded 652 records; 15 were included. Findings were categorized into groups: The difficulties of enacting IPC measures in the care home environment; workload as an impediment to IPC practice; the tension between IPC and quality of life for care home residents; and problems dealing with medical services located outside the facility including diagnostics, general practice and pharmacy. Infection was revealed as something seen to lie ‘outside’ the control of the care home, whether according to origins or control measures. This could help explain the reported variability in IPC practice. Facilitators to IPC uptake involved repetitive training and professional development, although such opportunities can be constrained by the ways in which services are organized and delivered.

Conclusions

Significant challenges were revealed in implementing IPC in care homes including staffing skills, education, workloads and work routines. These challenges cannot be properly addressed without resolving the tension between the objectives of maintaining resident quality of life while enacting IPC practice. Repetitive staff training and professional development with parallel organisational improvements have prospects to enhance IPC uptake in residential and nursing homes.

Patient or Public Contribution

A carer of an older person joined study team meetings and was involved in writing a lay summary of the study findings.

Healthcare workers' perceptions and experiences of communicating with people over 50 years of age about vaccination: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Infectious diseases are a major cause of illness and death among older adults. Vaccines can prevent infectious diseases, including against seasonal influenza, pneumococcal diseases, herpes zoster and COVID-19. However, the uptake of vaccination among older adults varies across settings and groups. Communication with healthcare workers can play an important role in older people's decisions to vaccinate. To support an informed decision about vaccination, healthcare workers should be able to identify the older person's knowledge gaps, needs and concerns. They should also be able to share and discuss information about the person's disease risk and disease severity; the vaccine's effectiveness and safety; and practical information about how the person can access vaccines. Therefore, healthcare workers need good communication skills and to actively keep up-to-date with the latest evidence. An understanding of their perceptions and experiences of this communication can help us train and support healthcare workers and design good communication strategies.

OBJECTIVES

To explore healthcare workers' perceptions and experiences of communicating with older adults about vaccination.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL and Scopus on 21 March 2020. We also searched Epistemonikos for related reviews, searched grey literature sources, and carried out reference checking and citation searching to identify additional studies. We searched for studies in any language.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included qualitative studies and mixed-methods studies with an identifiable qualitative component. We included studies that explored the perceptions and experiences of healthcare workers and other health system staff towards communication with adults over the age of 50 years or their informal caregivers about vaccination.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data using a data extraction form designed for this review. We assessed methodological limitations using a list of predefined criteria. We extracted and assessed data regarding study authors' motivations for carrying out their study. We used a thematic synthesis approach to analyse and synthesise the evidence. We used the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach to assess our confidence in each finding. We examined each review finding to identify factors that may influence intervention implementation and we developed implications for practice.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 studies in our review. Most studies explored healthcare workers' views and experiences about vaccination of older adults more broadly but also mentioned communication issues specifically. All studies were from high-income countries. The studies focused on doctors, nurses, pharmacists and others working in hospitals, clinics, pharmacies and nursing homes. These healthcare workers discussed different types of vaccines, including influenza, pneumococcal and herpes zoster vaccines. The review was carried out before COVID-19 vaccines were available. We downgraded our confidence in several of the findings from high confidence to moderate, low or very low confidence. One reason for this was that some findings were based on only small amounts of data. Another reason was that the findings were based on studies from only a few countries, making us unsure about the relevance of these findings to other settings. Healthcare workers reported that older adults asked about vaccination to different extents, ranging from not asking about vaccines at all, to great demand for information (high confidence finding). When the topic of vaccination was discussed, healthcare workers described a lack of information, and presence of misinformation, fears and concerns about vaccines among older adults (moderate confidence). The ways in which healthcare workers discussed vaccines with older adults appeared to be linked to what they saw as the aim of vaccination communication. Healthcare workers differed among themselves in their perceptions of this aim and about their own roles and the roles of older adults in vaccine decisions. Some healthcare workers thought it was important to provide information but emphasised the right and responsibility of older adults to decide for themselves. Others used information to persuade and convince older adults to vaccinate in order to increase 'compliance' and 'improve' vaccination rates, and in some cases to gain financial benefits. Other healthcare workers tailored their approach to what they believed the older adult needed or wanted (moderate confidence). Healthcare workers believed that older adults' decisions could be influenced by several factors, including the nature of the healthcare worker-patient relationship, the healthcare worker's status, and the extent to which healthcare workers led by example (low confidence). Our review also identified factors that are likely to influence how communication between healthcare workers and older adults take place. These included issues tied to healthcare workers' views and experiences regarding the diseases in question and the vaccines; as well as their views and experiences of the organisational and practical implementation of vaccine services.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is little research focusing specifically on healthcare workers' perceptions and experiences of communication with older adults about vaccination. The studies we identified suggest that healthcare workers differed among themselves in their perceptions about the aim of this communication and about the role of older adults in vaccine decisions. Based on these findings and the other findings in our review, we have developed a set of questions or prompts that may help health system planners or programme managers when planning or implementing strategies for vaccination communication between healthcare workers and older adults.

Interventions to increase influenza vaccination rates of those 60 years and older in the community

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of interventions to increase influenza vaccination uptake in people aged 60 years and older varies by country and participant characteristics. This review updates versions published in 2010 and 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To assess access, provider, system, and societal interventions to increase the uptake of influenza vaccination in people aged 60 years and older in the community.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and ERIC for this update, as well as WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov for ongoing studies to 7 December 2017. We also searched the reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-randomised trials of interventions to increase influenza vaccination in people aged 60 years or older in the community.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as specified by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three new RCTs for this update (total 61 RCTs; 1,055,337 participants). Trials involved people aged 60 years and older living in the community in high-income countries. Heterogeneity limited some meta-analyses. We assessed studies as at low risk of bias for randomisation (38%), allocation concealment (11%), blinding (44%), and selective reporting (100%). Half (51%) had missing data. We assessed the evidence as low-quality. We identified three levels of intervention intensity: low (e.g. postcards), medium (e.g. personalised phone calls), and high (e.g. home visits, facilitators).Increasing community demand (12 strategies, 41 trials, 53 study arms, 767,460 participants)One successful intervention that could be meta-analysed was client reminders or recalls by letter plus leaflet or postcard compared to reminder (odds ratio (OR) 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 1.15; 3 studies; 64,200 participants). Successful interventions tested by single studies were patient outreach by retired teachers (OR 3.33, 95% CI 1.79 to 6.22); invitations by clinic receptionists (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.55 to 4.76); nurses or pharmacists educating and nurses vaccinating patients (OR 152.95, 95% CI 9.39 to 2490.67); medical students counselling patients (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.35); and multiple recall questionnaires (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.24).Some interventions could not be meta-analysed due to significant heterogeneity: 17 studies tested simple reminders (11 with 95% CI entirely above unity); 16 tested personalised reminders (12 with 95% CI entirely above unity); two investigated customised compared to form letters (both 95% CI above unity); and four studies examined the impact of health risk appraisals (all had 95% CI above unity). One study of a lottery for free groceries was not effective.Enhancing vaccination access (6 strategies, 8 trials, 10 arms, 9353 participants)We meta-analysed results from two studies of home visits (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.61) and two studies that tested free vaccine compared to patient payment for vaccine (OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.98 to 2.82). We were unable to conduct meta-analyses of two studies of home visits by nurses plus a physician care plan (both with 95% CI above unity) and two studies of free vaccine compared to no intervention (both with 95% CI above unity). One study of group visits (OR 27.2, 95% CI 1.60 to 463.3) was effective, and one study of home visits compared to safety interventions was not.Provider- or system-based interventions (11 strategies, 15 trials, 17 arms, 278,524 participants)One successful intervention that could be meta-analysed focused on payments to physicians (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.77 to 2.77). Successful interventions tested by individual studies were: reminding physicians to vaccinate all patients (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.53 to 3.99); posters in clinics presenting vaccination rates and encouraging competition between doctors (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.86 to 2.22); and chart reviews and benchmarking to the rates achieved by the top 10% of physicians (OR 3.43, 95% CI 2.37 to 4.97).We were unable to meta-analyse four studies that looked at physician reminders (three studies with 95% CI above unity) and three studies of facilitator encouragement of vaccination (two studies with 95% CI above unity). Interventions that were not effective were: comparing letters on discharge from hospital to letters to general practitioners; posters plus postcards versus posters alone; educational reminders, academic detailing, and peer comparisons compared to mailed educational materials; educational outreach plus feedback to teams versus written feedback; and an intervention to increase staff vaccination rates.Interventions at the societal levelNo studies reported on societal-level interventions.Study funding sourcesStudies were funded by government health organisations (n = 33), foundations (n = 9), organisations that provided healthcare services in the studies (n = 3), and a pharmaceutical company offering free vaccines (n = 1). Fifteen studies did not report study funding sources.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We identified interventions that demonstrated significant positive effects of low (postcards), medium (personalised phone calls), and high (home visits, facilitators) intensity that increase community demand for vaccination, enhance access, and improve provider/system response. The overall GRADE assessment of the evidence was moderate quality. Conclusions are unchanged from the 2014 review.

Anthropometric measurements may be informative for nursing home-acquired pneumonia

Objective:

To evaluate the relationship between anthropometric measurements and Nursing Home-Acquired Pneumonia (NHAP) risk.

Methods:

Consecutive patients of 65 years or elderly who were living in the Balikli Rum Hospital Nursing Homes were included in this prospective study. At the beginning of this study, the patients’ anthropometrics values were measured. The patients were followed for one year, and any incidences of pneumonia attacks were recorded. The relationship between the anthropometric measurements and pneumonia occurrences was analyzed.

Results:

There were 133 inmates at the initial assessments. Of 108 patients who were eligible for the study, 77 (72.2%) were female and 37 (27.8%) were male. The mean age of the group was 79.8±10.5. Patients were assigned to a group according to the presence of pneumonia during the one -year follow-up. There were 74 (55.6%) patients who had suffered from at least one attack of pneumonia during the follow-up period. The mean triceps skinfold was significantly thinner in the pneumonia group, and the mean handgrip measurements in both the dominant and non-dominant hands were significantly weaker in the pneumonia group. Furthermore, the frequency of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases (COPD) was significantly higher in this group (p < 0.001).

Conclusions:

The risk of pneumonia was high in the elderly population who live in nursing homes. Simple anthropometric values may be predictive of the potential for Nursing Home-Acquired Pneumonia.

Lower Barthel Index Is Associated with Higher Risk of Hospitalization-Requiring Pneumonia in Long-Term Care Facilities

Pneumonia is an important infectious entity that affects residents in long-term care facilities (LTCFs), whereas hospitalization-requiring pneumonia (HRP) represents a more critical patient condition with worse outcomes. The evidence addressing the association between Barthel index and risk of HRP among LTCF residents is lacking. A multicenter, retrospective cohort study was conducted in three LTCFs enrolling adult patients who resided for 3 months or more and ever underwent Barthel index evaluation within a study period of January 1 to December 31, 2010. The endpoint was HRP after enrollment. A total of 299 patients (169 women; age, 79.0 ± 12.2 years) were enrolled and categorized into HRP Group (n = 68; 36 women; age, 79.1 ± 11.3 years) and Non-HRP Group (n = 231; 133 women; age, 79.0 ± 12.4 years) by the endpoint. The patients in HRP Group had significantly lower Barthel index (8.6 versus 25.8 points, p < 0.001) but higher proportion of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (13.2% versus 3.9%, p = 0.004). By the multivariate analysis of logistic regression, we found that lower Barthel index (odds ratio (OR), 0.967; p < 0.001), existence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR, 4.192; p = 0.015), and feeding route (percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy comparing with oral feeding; OR, 0.177; p = 0.012) were independently associated with HRP. In conclusion, a lower Barthel index is significantly associated with the occurrence of pneumonia that requires hospitalization in long-term care residents. Barthel index is a useful and reliable tool for risk evaluation in this population.

A Systematic Review of Interventions to Change Staff Care Practices in Order to Improve Resident Outcomes in Nursing Homes

BACKGROUND

We systematically reviewed interventions that attempted to change staff practice to improve long-term care resident outcomes.

METHODS

Studies met criteria if they used a control group, included 6 or more nursing home units and quantitatively assessed staff behavior or resident outcomes. Intervention components were coded as including education material, training, audit and feedback, monitoring, champions, team meetings, policy or procedures and organizational restructure.

RESULTS

Sixty-three unique studies were broadly grouped according to clinical domain-oral health (3 studies), hygiene and infection control (3 studies), nutrition (2 studies), nursing home acquired pneumonia (2 studies), depression (2 studies) appropriate prescribing (7 studies), reduction of physical restraints (3 studies), management of behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (6 studies), falls reduction and prevention (11 studies), quality improvement (9 studies), philosophy of care (10 studies) and other (5 studies). No single intervention component, combination of, or increased number of components was associated with greater likelihood of positive outcomes. Studies with positive outcomes for residents also tended to change staff behavior, however changing staff behavior did not necessarily improve resident outcomes. Studies targeting specific care tasks (e.g. oral care, physical restraints) were more likely to produce positive outcomes than those requiring global practice changes (e.g. care philosophy). Studies using intervention theories were more likely to be successful. Program logic was rarely articulated, so it was often unclear whether there was a coherent connection between the intervention components and measured outcomes. Many studies reported barriers relating to staff (e.g. turnover, high workload, attitudes) or organizational factors (e.g. funding, resources, logistics).

CONCLUSION

Changing staff practice in nursing homes is possible but complex. Interventionists should consider barriers and feasibility of program components to impact on each intended outcome.

Interventions to increase influenza vaccination rates of those 60 years and older in the community

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of interventions to increase the uptake of influenza vaccination in people aged 60 and older is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess access, provider, system and societal interventions to increase the uptake of influenza vaccination in people aged 60 years and older in the community.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 5), MEDLINE (January 1950 to May week 3 2014), EMBASE (1980 to June 2014), AgeLine (1978 to 4 June 2014), ERIC (1965 to June 2014) and CINAHL (1982 to June 2014).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to increase influenza vaccination uptake in people aged 60 and older.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study quality and extracted influenza vaccine uptake data.

MAIN RESULTS

This update identified 13 new RCTs; the review now includes a total of 57 RCTs with 896,531 participants. The trials included community-dwelling seniors in high-income countries. Heterogeneity limited meta-analysis. The percentage of trials with low risk of bias for each domain was as follows: randomisation (33%); allocation concealment (11%); blinding (44%); missing data (49%) and selective reporting (100%). Increasing community demand (32 trials, 10 strategies)The interventions with a statistically significant result were: three trials (n = 64,200) of letter plus leaflet/postcard compared to letter (odds ratio (OR) 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 1.15); two trials (n = 614) of nurses/pharmacists educating plus vaccinating patients (OR 3.29, 95% CI 1.91 to 5.66); single trials of a phone call from a senior (n = 193) (OR 3.33, 95% CI 1.79 to 6.22), a telephone invitation versus clinic drop-in (n = 243) (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.55 to 4.76), a free groceries lottery (n = 291) (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.76) and nurses educating and vaccinating patients (n = 485) (OR 152.95, 95% CI 9.39 to 2490.67).We did not pool the following trials due to considerable heterogeneity: postcard/letter/pamphlets (16 trials, n = 592,165); tailored communications (16 trials, n = 388,164); customised letter/phone-call (four trials, n = 82,465) and client-based appraisals (three trials, n = 4016), although several trials showed the interventions were effective. Enhancing vaccination access (10 trials, six strategies)The interventions with a statistically significant result were: two trials (n = 2112) of home visits compared to clinic invitation (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.61); two trials (n = 2251) of free vaccine (OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.98 to 2.82) and one trial (n = 321) of patient group visits (OR 24.85, 95% CI 1.45 to 425.32). One trial (n = 350) of a home visit plus vaccine encouragement compared to a home visit plus safety advice was non-significant.We did not pool the following trials due to considerable heterogeneity: nurse home visits (two trials, n = 2069) and free vaccine compared to no intervention (two trials, n = 2250). Provider- or system-based interventions (17 trials, 11 strategies)The interventions with a statistically significant result were: two trials (n = 2815) of paying physicians (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.77 to 2.77); one trial (n = 316) of reminding physicians about all their patients (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.53 to 3.99); one trial (n = 8376) of posters plus postcards (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.86 to 2.22); one trial (n = 1360) of chart review/feedback (OR 3.43, 95% CI 2.37 to 4.97) and one trial (n = 27,580) of educational outreach/feedback (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.81).Trials of posters plus postcards versus posters (n = 5753), academic detailing (n = 1400) and increasing staff vaccination rates (n = 26,432) were non-significant.We did not pool the following trials due to considerable heterogeneity: reminding physicians (four trials, n = 202,264) and practice facilitators (three trials, n = 2183), although several trials showed the interventions were effective. Interventions at the societal level We identified no RCTs of interventions at the societal level.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are interventions that are effective for increasing community demand for vaccination, enhancing access and improving provider/system response. Heterogeneity limited pooling of trials.

Infection prevention in long-term care: a systematic review of randomized and nonrandomized trials

The purpose of this systematic review was to critically review and synthesize current evidence and the methodological quality of nonpharmacological infection-prevention interventions in long-term care (LTC) facilities for older adults. Two reviewers searched three electronic databases for studies published over the last decade assessing randomized and nonrandomized trials designed to reduce infections in older adults in which primary outcomes were infection rates and reductions of risk factors related to infections. To establish clarity and standardized reporting of findings, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist was used. Data extracted included study design, sample size, type and duration of interventions, outcome measures reported, and findings. Two reviewers independently assessed study quality using a validated quality assessment tool. Twenty-four articles met inclusion criteria; the majority were randomized control trials (67%) in which the primary purpose was to reduce pneumonia (66%). Thirteen (54%) studies reported statistically significant results in favor of interventions on at least one of their outcome measures. The methodological clarity of available evidence was limited, placing them at potential risk of bias. Gaps and inconsistencies surrounding interventions in LTC are evident. Future interventional studies need to enhance methodological rigor using clearly defined outcome measures and standardized reporting of findings.

Impact of a multidisciplinary intervention on antibiotic use for nursing home-acquired pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Academic detailing in nursing homes (NHs) has been shown to improve drug use patterns and adherence to guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a multidisciplinary intervention that included academic detailing on adherence to national nursing home-acquired pneumonia (NHAP) guidelines related to use of antibiotics.

METHODS

This quasi-experimental study evaluated the effects of a 2-year multifaceted and multidisciplinary intervention targeting implementation of national evidence-based guidelines for NHAP. Interventions took place in 8 NHs in Colorado; 8 NHs in Kansas and Missouri served as controls. Interventions included (1) educational sessions for nurses to improve recognition and timely treatment of NHAP symptoms and (2) academic detailing to clinicians by pharmacists regarding diagnostic and prescribing practices. Differences in antibiotic use between groups were compared after 2 intervention years relative to baseline.

RESULTS

A total of 549 episodes of NHAP were evaluated in the intervention group and 574 in the control group. Compared with baseline, 1 facility in the intervention group significantly improved in guideline adherence for optimal antibiotic use (P = 0.007), whereas no facilities in the control group improved. The mean adherence score for optimal antibiotic use in intervention NHs increased from 60% to 66%, whereas the control NHs increased from 32% to 39% (P = 0.3). Mean adherence to guidelines recommending antibiotic use within 4 hours of NHAP diagnosis increased from 57% to 75% in intervention NHs but decreased from 38% to 31% in control NHs (P = 0.0003 for difference). There was no difference between intervention and control NHs for guideline adherence regarding optimal duration of antibiotic use.

CONCLUSIONS

The ability of this multifaceted study to repeatedly remind nursing staff of the importance of timely antibiotic administration contrasts with its limited academic detailing interaction with clinicians. This difference within the intervention may explain the differential impact of the intervention on antibiotic guideline adherence.

A multifaceted intervention to implement guidelines did not affect hospitalization rates for nursing home-acquired pneumonia

OBJECTIVE

Determine whether a comprehensive approach to implementing national consensus guidelines for nursing home-acquired pneumonia (NHAP) affected hospitalization rates.

DESIGN

Quasi-experimental, mixed-methods, multifaceted, unblinded intervention trial.

SETTING

Sixteen nursing homes (NHs) from 1 corporation: 8 in metropolitan Denver, CO; 8 in Kansas and Missouri during 3 influenza seasons, October to April 2004 to 2007.

PARTICIPANTS

Residents with 2 or more signs and symptoms of systemic lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI); NH staff and physicians were eligible.

INTERVENTION

Multifaceted, including academic detailing to clinicians, within-facility nurse change agent, financial incentives, and nursing education.

MEASUREMENTS

Subjects' NH medical records were reviewed for resident characteristics, disease severity, and care processes. Bivariate analysis compared hospitalization rates for subjects with stable and unstable vital signs between intervention and control NHs and time periods. Qualitative interviews were analyzed using content coding.

RESULTS

Hospitalization rates for stable residents in both NH groups remained low throughout the study. Few critically ill subjects in the intervention NHs were hospitalized in either the baseline or intervention period. In control NHs, 8.7% of subjects with unstable vital signs were hospitalized during the baseline and 33% in intervention year 2, but the difference was not statistically significant (P = .10). Interviews with nursing staff and leadership confirmed there were significant pressures for, and enablers of, avoiding hospitalization for treatment of acute infections.

CONCLUSIONS

Secular pressures to avoid hospitalization and the challenges of reaching NH physicians via academic detailing are likely responsible for the lack of intervention effect on hospitalization rates for critically ill NH residents.