Associations between clinical indicators of quality and aged-care residents’ needs and consumer and staff satisfaction: the first Australian study

Objectives To ascertain Australian multistate prevalence and incidence of five commonly collected clinical indicators of aged-care home quality and to measure associations between these clinical indicators and levels of care needs and consumer and staff satisfaction. Methods A retrospective analysis of national audit data collected from 426 facilities between 2015 and 2016 was performed. Regression models were used to examine associations between five clinical indicators (falls, pressure injury, physical restraint, unplanned weight loss and polypharmacy) and level of care needs measured by the Aged Care Funding Instrument (ACFI) and consumer and care staff survey responses. Results With the exception of polypharmacy, commonly collected negative clinical outcomes were rare events. Compared with care homes with <25% of residents having high-level care needs (high ACFI), homes with 25<75% high-ACFI residents had more occurrences of all negative clinical outcomes except pressure injury. Homes with ≥75% high-ACFI residents reported the highest rates of polypharmacy (odds ratio 1.48, 95% confidence interval 1.39 – 1.57). Falls, unplanned weight loss and pressure injury were inversely associated with satisfaction scores adjusted for residents’ level of care needs. Conclusions This first Australian study of multistate clinical indicator data suggests interpretation of clinical indicators of aged-care home quality requires consideration of the level of residents’ care needs. What is known about the topic? Many Australian aged-care providers use quality indicators (QI) through benchmarking companies or in-house programs. The five most widely used aged-care clinical QIs in Australia are falls, pressure injury, physical restraint, unplanned weight loss and polypharmacy. Prevalence and incidence of these QIs are highly variable among Australian studies. A consistent message in the international literature is that residents’ clinical characteristics influence QI outcomes at baseline and may continue to influence outcomes over time. Study of associations between Australian aged-care home characteristics and QI outcomes has been limited. What does this paper add? This is the first Australian study of multistate clinical QI data. It is also the first to consider the level of resident care needs in the interpretation of clinical QI outcomes and exploration of the association between level of consumer and staff satisfaction and QI outcomes. What are the implications for practitioners? Understanding the connections between aged-care home characteristics, consumer and staff perceptions and clinical QIs is crucial in the meaningful interpretation of QI outcomes in context. With the recent introduction of the National Aged Care Quality Indicator Program, it is timely to review national policy, to gauge current quality of care and the measure of care quality in the sector, and to develop directions for possible research to inform and resolve debates regarding the potential influence and unplanned effects that such a program may have.

Process, structural, and outcome quality indicators of nutritional care in nursing homes: a systematic review

Background

The quality of nursing homes (NHs) has attracted a lot of interest in recent years and is one of the most challenging issues for policy-makers. Nutritional care should be considered an important variable to be measured from the perspective of quality management. The aim of this systematic review is to describe the use of structural, process, and outcome indicators of nutritional care in NHs and the relationship among them.

Methods

The literature search was carried out in Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science. A temporal filter was applied in order to select papers published in the last 10 years. All types of studies were included, with the exception of reviews, conference proceedings, editorials, and letters to the editor. Papers published in languages other than English, Italian, and Spanish were excluded.

Results

From the database search, 1063 potentially relevant studies were obtained. Of these, 19 full-text articles were considered eligible for the final synthesis. Most of the studies adopted an observational cross-sectional design. They generally assessed the quality of nutritional care using several indicators, usually including a mixture of many different structural, process, and outcome indicators. Only one of the 19 studies described the quality of care by comparing the results with the threshold values. Nine papers assessed the relationship between indicators and six of them described some significant associations—in the NHs that have a policy related to nutritional risk assessment or a suitable scale to weigh the residents, the prevalence or risk of malnutrition is lower. Finally, only four papers of these nine included risk adjustment. This could limit the comparability of the results.

Conclusion

Our findings show that a consensus must be reached for defining a set of indicators and standards to improve quality in NHs. Establishing the relationship between structural, process, and outcome indicators is a challenge. There are grounds for investigating this theme by means of prospective longitudinal studies that take the risk adjustment into account.

Medication management policy, practice and research in Australian residential aged care: Current and future directions

Eight percent of Australians aged 65 years and over receive residential aged care each year. Residents are increasingly older, frailer and have complex care needs on entry to residential aged care. Up to 63% of Australian residents of aged care facilities take nine or more medications regularly. Together, these factors place residents at high risk of adverse drug events. This paper reviews medication-related policies, practices and research in Australian residential aged care. Complex processes underpin prescribing, supply and administration of medications in aged care facilities. A broad range of policies and resources are available to assist health professionals, aged care facilities and residents to optimise medication management. These include national guiding principles, a standardised national medication chart, clinical medication reviews and facility accreditation standards. Recent Australian interventions have improved medication use in residential aged care facilities. Generating evidence for prescribing and deprescribing that is specific to residential aged care, health workforce reform, medication-related quality indicators and inter-professional education in aged care are important steps toward optimising medication use in this setting.

Prevalence and factors associated with polypharmacy in long-term care facilities: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to investigate the prevalence of, and factors associated with, polypharmacy in long-term care facilities (LTCFs).

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 2000 to September 2014. Primary research studies in English were eligible for inclusion if they fulfilled the following criteria: (1) polypharmacy was quantitatively defined, (2) the prevalence of polypharmacy was reported or could be extracted from tables or figures, and (3) the study was conducted in a LTCF. Methodological quality was assessed using an adapted version of the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist.

RESULTS

Forty-four studies met the inclusion criteria and were included. Polypharmacy was most often defined as 5 or more (n = 11 studies), 9 (n = 13), or 10 (n = 11) medications. Prevalence varied widely between studies, with up to 91%, 74%, and 65% of residents taking more than 5, 9, and 10 medications, respectively. Seven studies performed multivariate analyses for factors associated with polypharmacy. Positive associations were found for recent hospital discharge (n = 2 studies), number of prescribers (n = 2), and comorbidity including circulatory diseases (n = 3), endocrine and metabolic disorders (n = 3), and neurological motor dysfunctioning (n = 3). Older age (n = 5), cognitive impairment (n = 3), disability in activities of daily living (n = 3), and length of stay in the LTCF (n = 3) were inversely associated with polypharmacy.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of polypharmacy in LTCFs is high, varying widely between facilities, geographical locations and the definitions used. Greater use of multivariate analysis to investigate factors associated with polypharmacy across a range of settings is required. Longitudinal research is needed to explore how polypharmacy has evolved over time.