Disaster preparedness and pandemic plans: a survey of Nebraska home health agencies

Hospices and Emergency Preparedness Planning: A Scoping Review of the Literature

Objective. Palliative and end-of-life care, as provided by hospices, are important elements of a healthcare response to disasters. A scoping review of the literature was conducted to examine and synthesize what is currently known about emergency preparedness planning by hospices. Methods. A literature search of academic and trade publications was conducted through 6 publication databases, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines when applicable. Publications were selected and findings were organized into themes. Results. A total of 26 articles were included in the literature review. Six themes of Policies and Procedures; Testing/Training/Education; Integration and Coordination; Mitigation; Risk Assessment/Hazard and Vulnerability Analysis; and Regulations were identified. Conclusions. This review demonstrates that hospices have begun to individualize emergency preparedness features that support their unique role. The review supports all-hazards planning for hospices, and emerging from this review is a developing vision for expanded roles of hospices to help communities in times of disaster. Continued research in this specialized area is needed to improve hospices' emergency preparedness efforts.

Hospice Emergency Planning and COVID-19

Objectives: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services requirements for Emergency Preparedness Planning (EPP) by hospice organizations significantly increased in 2017. This study seeks to assess the involvement of various hospice personnel in EPP before and since the onset of the novel coronavirus disease COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A link to an anonymous online survey was sent to members of the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine and the Hospice and Palliative Nurses Association, targeting members involved in hospice care in the United States. A descriptive analysis of the data was performed. Results: Prior to the pandemic, 39.8% of respondents were "moderately" or "very" involved with the development and revisions of the Emergency Preparedness Plan. Since the beginning of the pandemic, this increased to 59%, which largely occurred among physicians. Clinical Nurse and Nurse Practitioner involvement in development/revisions remained low. Approximately 30% of respondents desired more involvement across the areas of EPP. Conclusion: The involvement of personnel of various disciplines is varied and the involvement of physicians appears to have increased with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. A notable portion of personnel desired more involvement across all aspects of EPP. More research is needed in this important but little-understood area.

The state of infection prevention and control at home health agencies in the United States prior to COVID-19: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Home health care is a rapidly growing healthcare sector worldwide. Home health professionals face unique challenges related to preventing and controlling infections, which are likely to amplify during an infectious disease outbreak (e.g. SARS-CoV-2). Little is known about the current state of infection prevention and control-related policies and outbreak preparedness at U.S. home health agencies.

OBJECTIVES

In this study, we conducted a national survey to assess infection prevention and control-related policies, infrastructure, and procedures prior to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Using a stratified random sample of 1506 U.S. home health agencies, we conducted a 61-item survey (paper and online) from November 9, 2018 to December 31, 2019.

METHODS

Survey data were linked to publicly-available data on the quality of patient care, patient satisfaction, and other agency characteristics. Probability weights were developed to account for sample design and nonresponse; Pearson's χ2, Fisher's exact, t-tests or linear regression were used to compare the universe of agencies/respondents and urban/rural agencies.

RESULTS

35.6% of agencies responded (n = 536). Most home health personnel in charge of infection prevention and control have other responsibilities; one-third have no formal infection prevention and control training. Rural agencies are more likely to not have anyone in charge of infection prevention and control compared to those in urban areas. About 22% of agencies implement recommended guidelines when administering antibiotics. Less than a third (26.4%) report that their staff vaccination rates were higher than 95% during the last flu season. Only 48.1% of agencies accept patients requiring ventilation, and of those, 40.9% located in rural areas do not have specific infection prevention and control policies for ventilated patients, compared to 20.8% in urban areas (p < 0.001). Only 39.7% of agencies provide N95 respirators to their clinical staff; rural agencies are significantly more likely to provide those supplies than urban agencies (50.7% vs. 37.7%, p = 0.004). Lastly, agencies report their greatest challenges with infection prevention and control are collecting/reporting infection data and adherence to/monitoring of nursing bag technique.

CONCLUSIONS

Prior to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, we found that infection prevention and control was suboptimal among U.S. home health care agencies. Consequently, most agencies have limited capacity to respond to infectious disease outbreaks. Staff and personal protective equipment shortages remain major concerns, and agencies will need to quickly adjust their existing infection prevention and control policies and potentially create new ones. In the long-term, agencies also need to improve influenza vaccination coverage among their staff. Tweetable abstract: Infection prevention and control infrastructure, policies and procedures and outbreak preparedness at U.S. home health agencies was found to be suboptimal in nationally-representative survey conducted just prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.