A Longitudinal, Clinical, and Spatial Epidemiologic Analysis of a Large COVID-19 Long-Term Care Home Outbreak

Changes in End-of-Life Symptom Management Prescribing among Long-Term Care Residents during COVID-19

OBJECTIVE

To examine changes in the prescribing of end-of-life symptom management medications in long-term care (LTC) homes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study using routinely collected health administrative data in Ontario, Canada.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

We included all individuals who died in LTC homes between January 1, 2017, and March 31, 2021. We separated the study into 2 periods: before COVID-19 (January 1, 2017, to March 17, 2020) and during COVID-19 (March 18, 2020, to March 31, 2021).

METHODS

For each LTC home, we measured the percentage of residents who died before and during COVID-19 who had a subcutaneous symptom management medication prescription in their last 14 days of life. We grouped LTC homes into quintiles based on their mean prescribing rates before COVID-19, and examined changes in prescribing during COVID-19 and COVID-19 outcomes across quintiles.

RESULTS

We captured 75,438 LTC residents who died in Ontario's 626 LTC homes during the entire study period, with 19,522 (25.9%) dying during COVID-19. The mean prescribing rate during COVID-19 ranged from 46.9% to 79.4% between the lowest and highest prescribing quintiles. During COVID-19, the mean prescribing rate in the lowest prescribing quintile increased by 9.6% compared to before COVID-19. Compared to LTC homes in the highest prescribing quintile, homes in the lowest prescribing quintile experienced the highest proportion of COVID-19 outbreaks (73.4% vs 50.0%), the largest mean outbreak intensity (0.27 vs 0.09 cases/bed), the highest mean total days with a COVID-19 outbreak (72.7 vs 24.2 days), and the greatest proportion of decedents who were transferred and died outside of LTC (22.1% vs 8.6%).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

LTC homes in Ontario had wide variations in the prescribing rates of end-of-life symptom management medications before and during COVID-19. Homes in the lower prescribing quintiles had more COVID-19 cases per bed and days spent in an outbreak.

Drivers of COVID-19 Outcomes in Long-Term Care Facilities Using Multi-Level Analysis: A Systematic Review

This study aimed to identify the individual, organizational, and environmental factors which contributed to COVID-19-related outcomes in long-term care facilities (LTCFs). A systematic review was conducted to summarize and synthesize empirical studies using a multi-level analysis approach to address the identified influential factors. Five databases were searched on 23 May 2023. To be included in the review, studies had to be published in peer-reviewed journals or as grey literature containing relevant statistical data. The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool was employed to assess the methodological quality of each article included in this study. Of 2137 citations identified after exclusions, 99 records met the inclusion criteria. The predominant individual, organizational, and environmental factors that were most frequently found associated with the COVID-19 outbreak comprised older age, higher dependency level; lower staffing levels and lower star and subset domain ratings for the facility; and occupancy metrics and co-occurrences of outbreaks in counties and communities where the LTCFs were located, respectively. The primary individual, organizational, and environmental factors frequently linked to COVID-19-related deaths comprised age, and male sex; higher percentages of racial and ethnic minorities in LTCFs, as well as ownership types (including private, for-profit, and chain membership); and higher occupancy metrics and LTCF's size and bed capacity, respectively. Unfolding the risk factors collectively may mitigate the risk of outbreaks and pandemic-related mortality in LTCFs during future endemic and pandemics through developing and improving interventions that address those significant factors.

Risk evaluation of venue types and human behaviors of COVID-19 outbreaks in public indoor environments: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Despite increasing vaccination rates, the incidence of breakthrough infections with COVID-19 has increased due to the continued emergence of new variants of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus. Therefore, Non-pharmaceutical interventions remain the most effective measures for coping with the ever-changing pandemic. The lifting of compulsory interventions has made individuals primary responsibility for their own health, which highlights the importance of increasing awareness of the infection risk from the environment in which they live and their individual behaviors. We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Scopus on April 17, 2023, for all studies reporting COVID-19 outbreaks in public indoor venues. The study outcome was the attack rate. A total of 42 studies, which included cross-sectional studies, cohort studies, and case studies, reporting data on 1951 confirmed cases in 64 COVID-19 outbreaks satisfied the meta-analysis and were included in the review. A random-effect model was used in the meta-analysis, and subgroup analyses were conducted to investigate factors affecting attack rates. We found a strong level of evidence (p < 0.01) supporting a higher pooled attack rate in recreation-related venues (0.44, 95% CI: 0.30 to 0.60) than in work-related venues (0.21, 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.27). Compared to those outbreaks without that, outbreaks with high-intensity exercise, vocalization, contact behavior, or close body proximity had a higher attack rate of 0.51, 0.55, 0.33, and 0.39, respectively. Further studies suggest that different attack rates across different types of settings may be the result of heterogeneity in exposed people's behaviors. There were significant heterogeneities that may limit the interpretation of connections between influencing factors and outbreak outcomes. The identification of key behaviors that may contribute to transmission risk, and their correlation with venue type, has important implications for the development of future public health interventions and individual prevention strategies for respiratory infectious diseases such as COVID-19.

Universal masking during COVID-19 outbreaks in aged care settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Aged care facilities (ACF) are a high-risk COVID-19 transmission setting, and older residents are at greater risk of severe outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed whether universal masking and COVID-19 vaccination reduce SARS-CoV-2 attack rates (ARs) in ACF. Articles published between 1 December 2019 and 28 February 2022 were screened across five databases (Medline, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL)). Risk of bias was assessed using relevant Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. Meta-analysis of single proportions, subgroup analysis, and meta-regression were performed to compare the effects of universal masking and vaccine doses on pooled SARS-CoV-2 ARs. Of 99 included articles, SARS-CoV-2 ARs for residents were available in 86 studies (representing 139 outbreaks), and for staff in 49 studies (78 outbreaks). Universal masking was associated with lower SARS-CoV-2 ARs in ACF outbreaks (AR = 34.9% [95% CI: 27.2-42.6%]) compared to facilities without universal masking (67.3% [54.2-80.4%], p < .0001). In ACF with universal masking prior to outbreak onset, facility-wide testing, and documentation of asymptomatic infection, the asymptomatic AR at time of testing was 11.4% (6.5-17.4%) in residents. Receipt of zero, one and two vaccination doses were associated with ARs of 64.9% (49.6-80.2%), 54.9% (33.7-76.1%) and 45.2% (29.2-61.3%), respectively. To protect residents from COVID-19, ACF should provide vaccination of residents and staff, universal masking for staff, and facility-wide testing during times of heightened community transmission.

COVID-19 outbreak trends in Canada, 2021

Background

In January 2021, the Public Health Agency of Canada launched an outbreak surveillance system, the Canadian COVID-19 Outbreak Surveillance System (CCOSS), with the goal of monitoring incidence and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreaks across various community settings and complementing case surveillance.

Methods

Seven provinces were included in this report; these provinces submitted weekly cumulative COVID-19 outbreak line lists to CCOSS in 2021. Data includes administrative variables (e.g. date outbreak declared, date outbreak declared over, outbreak identifier), 24 outbreak settings, and number of confirmed cases and outcomes (hospitalization, death). Descriptive analyses for COVID-19 outbreaks across Canada from January 3, 2021, to January 1, 2022, were performed examining trends over time, severity, and outbreak size.

Results

Incidence of outbreaks followed similar trends to case incidence. Outbreaks were most common in school and childcare settings (39%) and industrial/agricultural settings (21%). Outbreak size ranged from 2 to 639 cases per outbreak; the median size was four cases per outbreak. Correctional facilities had the largest median outbreak size with 18 cases per outbreak, followed by long-term care facilities with 10 cases per outbreak. During periods of high case incidence, outbreaks may be under-ascertained due to limited public health capacity, or reporting may be biased towards high-risk settings prioritized for testing. Outbreaks reported to CCOSS were dominated by jurisdictions with the largest populations.

Conclusion

The trends illustrate that COVID-19 outbreaks in 2021 were reported most frequently in community settings such as schools; however, the largest outbreaks occurred in congregate living settings. The information gathered from outbreak surveillance complemented case incidence trends and furthered understanding of COVID-19 in Canada.

Improving longitudinal research in geospatial health: An agenda

All aspects of public health research require longitudinal analyses to fully capture the dynamics of outcomes and risk factors such as ageing, human mobility, non-communicable diseases (NCDs), climate change, and endemic, emerging, and re-emerging infectious diseases. Studies in geospatial health are often limited to spatial and temporal cross sections. This generates uncertainty in the exposures and behavior of study populations. We discuss a research agenda, including key challenges and opportunities of working with longitudinal geospatial health data. Examples include accounting for residential and human mobility, recruiting new birth cohorts, geoimputation, international and interdisciplinary collaborations, spatial lifecourse studies, and qualitative and mixed-methods approaches.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and corresponding control measures on long-term care facilities: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) were high-risk settings for COVID-19 outbreaks.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on LTCFs, including rates of infection, hospitalisation, case fatality, and mortality, and to determine the association between control measures and SARS-CoV-2 infection rates in residents and staff.

METHOD

We conducted a systematic search of six databases for articles published between December 2019 and 5 November 2021, and performed meta-analyses and subgroup analyses to identify the impact of COVID-19 on LTCFs and the association between control measures and infection rate.

RESULTS

We included 108 studies from 19 countries. These studies included 1,902,044 residents and 255,498 staff from 81,572 LTCFs, among whom 296,024 residents and 36,807 staff were confirmed SARS-CoV-2 positive. The pooled infection rate was 32.63% (95%CI: 30.29 ~ 34.96%) for residents, whereas it was 10.33% (95%CI: 9.46 ~ 11.21%) for staff. In LTCFs that cancelled visits, new patient admissions, communal dining and group activities, and vaccinations, infection rates in residents and staff were lower than the global rate. We reported the residents' hospitalisation rate to be 29.09% (95%CI: 25.73 ~ 32.46%), with a case-fatality rate of 22.71% (95%CI: 21.31 ~ 24.11%) and mortality rate of 15.81% (95%CI: 14.32 ~ 17.30%). Significant publication biases were observed in the residents' case-fatality rate and the staff infection rate, but not in the infection, hospitalisation, or mortality rate of residents.

CONCLUSION

SARS-CoV-2 infection rates would be very high among LTCF residents and staff without appropriate control measures. Cancelling visits, communal dining and group activities, restricting new admissions, and increasing vaccination would significantly reduce the infection rates.

The implications of the COVID-19 pandemic for long term care facilities

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite advances in infection prevention and control and breakthroughs in vaccination development, challenges remain for long-term care facilities (LTCFs) as they face a likely future of emerging infectious diseases. To ensure the safety of LTCF residents from the current and future pandemics, we identify lessons learned from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) experience for improving future prevention and response efforts.

RECENT FINDINGS

In addition to high disease susceptibility among LTCF residents, LTCF vulnerabilities include a lack of pandemic preparedness, a lack of surge capacity in human, material and testing resources, and poorly designed buildings. External sources of vulnerability include staff working in multiple LTCFs and high COVID-19 rates in surrounding communities. Other challenges include poor cooperation between LTCFs and the other components of health systems, inadequately enforced regulations, and the sometimes contradictory interests for-profit LTCFs face between protecting their residents and turning a profit.

SUMMARY

These challenges can be addressed in the post-COVID-19 period through systemic reforms. Governments should establish comprehensive health networks that normalize mechanisms for prediction/preparedness and response/recovery from disruptive events including pandemics. In addition, governments should facilitate cooperation among public and private sector health systems and institutions while utilizing advanced digital communication technologies. These steps will greatly reduce the threat to LTCFs posed by emerging infectious diseases in future.

COVID-19 in Long-Term Care: The Built Environment Impact on Infection Control

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article is to review available literature for evidence-based impact of the built environment upon the prevention and management of COVID-19 with a view to emphasizing lessons learned for future infection control of pandemics.

BACKGROUND

This is urgently needed given the devastation brought upon long-term care residents worldwide. Long-term care (LTC) facilities face a battle to protect their residents. Previous studies of infection control design issues have focused generally on Fomites: that is, contaminated objects and surfaces. As COVID-19 has been shown to be largely spread through the air, this article will broaden the focus to include engineering controls that effect this type of transmission.

METHOD

A literature search was conducted using key words such as long-term care facilities, built environment, COVID-19, infection control, and nursing homes.

RESULTS

Results were sorted using an engineering controls pyramid developed by the author to stratify approaches to LTC infrastructure. Basically, six elements were supported: ventilation, spatial separation, physical barriers, hand hygiene stations, resident room zones, and private rooms.

IMPLICATIONS

Conclusions were that the built environment has a major impact on infection control that can be deleterious or beneficial. Substantial changes need to be made to protect the very vulnerable LTC population from future pandemics and infectious diseases.

COVID-19 deaths in care homes: primary care management study

OBJECTIVES

COVID-19 presented a new risk to the care home sector. Primary care adapted their approach to the management of COVID-19 in care homes as the pandemic evolved. Our aim was to evaluate the clinical presentation, management, care planning and clinical decision-making, and after death care of care home residents who died due to COVID-19 in Aneurin Bevan University Health Board in Southeast Wales.

METHOD

Clinical records of 136 in care homes were reviewed by a General Practitioner reviewer using a standardised template. These were then reviewed by a multidisciplinary panel to identify themes.

RESULTS

Most individuals presented with 'typical' COVID-19 symptoms (cough, fever); however, >50 presented with atypical symptoms. 90% had a record of Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decision, but only 46% had documented advance care planning (ACP), and only 37% had a clearly documented treatment escalation plan.

CONCLUSION

Care home residents are at risk of sudden clinical deterioration and death. This evaluation demonstrates that although DNACPR is in place for most individuals, holistic planning for end of life (including ACP and clinical care plans covering management of deterioration and escalation of care) is only present for a minority.