Staff Reports of Behavioral Expressions of Persons with Dementia in 250 Assisted Living Communities

Prevalence and Correlates of Antipsychotic Medication Use in Oregon Assisted Living

OBJECTIVE

Investigate how assisted living and residential care (AL/RC) and memory care (MC) contexts are associated with the 90-day prevalence of antipsychotic medication use (APU), considered a quality measure in long-term care.

DESIGN

All licensed AL/RC settings in Oregon received an annual mailed questionnaire to provide aggregate resident demographics, health acuity, health service use, payment type, and organizational policies. Organizational measures were collected from state websites.

METHODS

Random intercepts regression models were estimated to assess organizational and resident population characteristics associated with 90-day APU prevalence over 3 study waves (2017-2019).

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

We examine 932 observations in 463 AL/RC settings from 2017 to 2019 (137 settings participated in all 3 waves, 195 in 2 waves, and 131 in 1 wave).

RESULTS

The average 90-day APU prevalence in 464 Oregon AL/RC settings is 30.7%, although rates differ by MC endorsement (23.9% in AL/RC and 42.7% in MC). Nonprofit settings were associated with lower rates of APU in both AL/RC [β = -4.4 (percentage points), 95% CI -8.4, -0.4] and MC (β = -12.4, 95% CI -21.2, -3.6). Compared with low-Medicaid settings, settings with very high proportions of Medicaid residents were associated with higher APU prevalence, +8.9 in AL/RC (95% CI 1.7, 16.1) and +11.0 percentage points in MC (95% CI 2.3, 19.8).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

APU prevalence in MC settings and with high-Medicaid populations is considerably higher than non-MC and lower-Medicaid settings. Federal policies guide APU in nursing homes but not AL/RC. No national database of AL/RC exists; thus, state-based studies can inform the discussion of state policy and practice development. Additional study is needed to contextualize the relationships between AL/RC population-level practices and characteristics and the APU prevalence to inform policy and practice development related to this measure as a quality indicator.

Does Assisted Living Provide Assistance And Promote Living?

Assisted living has promised assistance and quality of living to older adults for more than eighty years. It is the largest residential provider of long-term care in the United States, serving more than 918,000 older adults as of 2018. As assisted living has evolved, the needs of residents have become more challenging; staffing shortages have worsened; regulations have become complex; the need for consumer support, education, and advocacy has grown; and financing and accessibility have become insufficient. Together, these factors have limited the extent to which today's assisted living adequately provides assistance and promotes living, with negative consequences for aging in place and well-being. This Commentary provides recommendations in four areas to help assisted living meet its promise: workforce; regulations and government; consumer needs and roles; and financing and accessibility. Policies that may be helpful include those that would increase staffing and boost wages and training; establish staffing standards with appropriate skill mix; promulgate state regulations that enable greater use of third-party services; encourage uniform data reporting; provide funds supporting family involvement; make community disclosure statements more accessible; and offer owners and operators incentives to facilitate access for consumers with fewer resources. Attention to these and other recommendations may help assisted living live up to its name.

Dementia Caregivers' Perspectives on Disaster Preparedness: Barriers, Resources, and Recommendations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Disaster preparedness is an urgent concern, particularly for caregivers of persons with dementia. Developing and executing plans for oneself and another person who needs care can be difficult when the care recipient is cognitively impaired. We sought to better understand caregivers' disaster preparedness for the purpose of generating guidance for future interventions to increase caregiver resilience.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a qualitative descriptive study of caregiver disaster experiences and perceptions of their preparedness. Fifty-two participants from diverse backgrounds participated in a focus group or interview. Deductive thematic data analysis was utilized to identify themes. Stress process models guided the interpretation of our findings.

RESULTS

Analyses of caregivers' experiences and observations revealed that disaster preparedness was challenging for caregivers, though also perceived to be an important responsibility. We identified 3 main themes: (a) barriers to preparing for a disaster as a caregiver for a person living with dementia, (b) why it is important for a caregiver to develop a disaster plan, and (c) how to facilitate preparedness for caregivers of persons living with dementia.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

This study highlighted the difficulties of preparing for a disaster while caring for a person with dementia. Applying stress process models to our results provided strong evidence that interventions could be developed to bolster caregivers' resources to cope with stressors associated with disaster preparedness. A key issue for public officials is the question of whether disaster shelters are appropriate for persons with dementia.

Psychotropic medication prescribing in assisted living and nursing home residents with dementia after the National Partnership

BACKGROUND

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services implemented the National Partnership to Improve Dementia Care in Nursing Homes (the Partnership) to decrease antipsychotic use and improve care for nursing home (NH) residents with dementia. We determined whether the extent of antipsychotic and other psychotropic medication prescribing in AL residents with dementia mirrored that of long-stay NH (LSNH) residents after the Partnership.

METHODS

Using a 20% sample of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries with Part D, we conducted a retrospective cohort study including AL and LSNH residents with dementia. The monthly prevalence of psychotropic medication prescribing (antipsychotics, antidepressants, anxiolytics/sedative-hypnotics, anticonvulsants/mood stabilizers, benzodiazepines, and antidementia medications) was examined. We used an interrupted time-series analysis to compare medication prescribing before (July 1, 2010-March 31, 2012) and after (April 1, 2012-December 31, 2017) the Partnership in both settings.

RESULTS

We identified 107,931 beneficiaries with ≥1 month as an AL resident and 323,766 beneficiaries with ≥1 month as a LSNH resident with dementia, including 1,923,867 person-months and 4,984,405 person-months, respectively. Antipsychotic prescribing declined over the study period in both settings. After the launch of the Partnership, the rate of decline in antipsychotic prescribing slowed in AL residents with dementia (slope change = 0.03 [95% CLs: 0.02, 0.04]) while the rate of decline in antipsychotic prescribing increased in LSNH residents with dementia (slope change = -0.12 [95% CLs: -0.16, -0.08]). Antidepressants were the most prevalent medication prescribed, anticonvulsant/mood stabilizer prescribing increased, and anxiolytic/sedative-hypnotic and antidementia medication prescribing declined.

CONCLUSIONS

The federal Partnership to reduce antipsychotic prescribing in NH residents did not appear to affect antipsychotic prescribing in AL residents with dementia. Given the increase in the prescribing of mood stabilizers/anticonvulsants that occurred after the launch of the Partnership, monitoring may be warranted for all psychotropic medications in AL and NH settings.

Dementia and COVID-19 Infection Control in Assisted Living in Seven States

Background

Assisted living (AL) is the largest residential long‐term care provider in the United States, including for persons with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. Despite recognizing the challenge of infection control for persons with dementia, this study of 119 AL communities is the first to describe dementia‐relevant COVID‐19 infection control across different types of AL communities, and to discuss implications for the future.

Methods

From a parent study sampling frame of 244 AL communities across seven states, 119 administrators provided data about COVID‐19 infection control practices and resident behaviors. Data were collected from July 2020 through September 2021. Communities were differentiated based on the presence of beds/units dedicated for persons living with dementia, as being either dementia‐specific, mixed, or integrated. Data obtained from administrators related to feasibility of implementing seven infection control practices, and the extent to which residents themselves practiced infection prevention. Analyses compared practices across the three community types.

Results

Less than half of administrators found it feasible to close indoor common areas, all community types reported a challenge organizing group activities for safe distancing, and more than half of residents with dementia did not wear a face covering or maintain physical distance from other residents when indicated. Dementia‐specific AL communities were generally the most challenged with infection control during COVID‐19.

Conclusion

All AL community types experienced infection control challenges, more so in dementia‐specific communities (which generally provide care to persons with more advanced dementia and have fewer private beds). Results indicate a need to bolster infection prevention capacity when caring for this especially vulnerable population, and have implications for care in nursing homes as well.