Home-based primary care visits by nurse practitioners

The quality of home-based primary care delivered by nurse practitioners: A national Medicare claims analysis

BACKGROUND

As the US population ages, there is an increasing demand for home-based primary care (HBPC) by those with Alzheimer's/dementia, multiple chronic conditions, severe physical limitations, or those facing end-of life. Nurse practitioners (NPs) are increasingly providing HBPC, yet little is known about their quality of care in this unique setting.

METHODS

This observational study uses Medicare claims data from 2018 to assess the quality of care for high-intensity HBPC users (5 or more visits/year) based on provider type (NP-only, physician (MD)-only, or both NP and MDs). We employ 12 quality measures from 3 care domains: access and prevention, acute care utilization, and end-of-life. Analysis includes bivariate comparisons and logistic regression models that adjust for demographic, clinical, and geographic characteristics.

RESULTS

Among the 574,567 beneficiaries with 5 or more HBPC visits, 37% saw an NP, 37% saw a MD, and 27% saw both NPs and MDs. In multivariate models, those receiving HBPC from an NP or both NP-MD are significantly more likely to receive a flu shot than the MD-only group, but less likely to access preventive care. NP-only care is associated with more acute care hospitalizations, avoidable ED visits, and fall-related injuries, but significantly fewer avoidable admissions. For end-of-life care, those with NP-only or both NP-MD care are significantly more likely to have an advanced directive, be in hospice in the last 3 days of life, and more likely to die in hospice. The NP group is also more likely to die in the next year.

CONCLUSIONS

HBPC patients are complex, with both palliative and curative needs. NPs provide almost half of HBPC in the Medicare program, to patients who are possibly sicker than those treated by physicians, with similar quality to MDs.

Impact of home visiting nurses on home death proportion in Japan: A nationwide longitudinal ecological study

OBJECTIVE

Home visiting nurses contribute to end-of-life home care in an aging society. However, few previous studies reported patient outcomes based on nursing practices. This study aimed to examine the correlation between the number of them and the change in home death proportion.

METHODS

We divided the number of home visiting nurses into four categories: absent, shortage, medium, and abundant. This study adopted the interaction term between the nurse categories and year as the major exposure variable, and home death proportion per municipality as the objective variable. We estimated the average marginal effects (AME) as the change in home death proportion from 2015 to 2020.

RESULTS

The total number of home visiting nurses was 36,483 in 2015 and 65,868 in 2020. The coefficients of the interaction term were statistically significant in medium and abundant municipalities (Medium: 1.26 (95% CI: 0.49-2.04), Abundant: 2.15 (95% CI: 0.76-3.55)). Increased home death proportion were estimated as AME: 1.56% (95% CI: 0.99-2.13), 1.35% (95% CI: 0.85-1.84), 2.82% (95% CI: 2.30-3.35), and 3.71% (95% CI: 2.44-4.99) in the absent, shortage, medium, and abundant areas, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

To increase the proportion of home deaths, municipalities require a certain number of home visiting nurses.

A global perspective of advanced practice nursing research: A review of systematic reviews

INTRODUCTION

The World Health Organization (WHO) called for the expansion of all nursing roles, including advanced practice nurses (APNs), nurse practitioners (NPs) and clinical nurse specialists (CNSs). A clearer understanding of the impact of these roles will inform global priorities for advanced practice nursing education, research, and policy.

OBJECTIVE

To identify gaps in advanced practice nursing research globally.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A review of systematic reviews was conducted. We searched CINAHL, Embase, Global Health, Healthstar, PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, DARE, Joanna Briggs Institute EBP, and Web of Science from January 2011 onwards, with no restrictions on jurisdiction or language. Grey literature and hand searches of reference lists were undertaken. Review quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP). Study selection, data extraction and CASP assessments were done independently by two reviewers. We extracted study characteristics, country and outcome data. Data were summarized using narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

We screened 5840 articles and retained 117 systematic reviews, representing 38 countries. Most CASP criteria were met. However, study selection by two reviewers was done inconsistently and language and geographical restrictions were applied. We found highly consistent evidence that APN, NP and CNS care was equal or superior to the comparator (e.g., physicians) for 29 indicator categories across a wide range of clinical settings, patient populations and acuity levels. Mixed findings were noted for quality of life, consultations, costs, emergency room visits, and health care service delivery where some studies favoured the control groups. No indicator consistently favoured the control group. There is emerging research related to Artificial Intelligence (AI).

CONCLUSION

There is a large body of advanced practice nursing research globally, but several WHO regions are underrepresented. Identified research gaps include AI, interprofessional team functioning, workload, and patients and families as partners in healthcare.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021278532.

Evaluating the influence of primary healthcare nurse practitioners' interventions in home care on hospitalizations and emergency department transfers

RATIONALE

Home care allows patients with functional limitations to receive services at home and prevent health decline. Home care can reduce hospitalization and emergency department (ED) transfers. Integrating primary healthcare nurse practitioners (PHCNPs) in home care increases the supply of services, but little is known about their influence on patients' ability to remain at home.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Evaluate the influence of PHCNPs' interventions on hospitalizations and ED transfers in patients receiving care from interprofessional home care teams with PHCNPs.

METHOD

The retrospective cohort study employed multiple logistic regression and Cox modelling techniques to assess the influence of PHCNP interventions on hospitalizations and ED transfers. Descriptive and bivariate analyses examined sample characteristics and variable associations. Four purposively selected sites in Québec, Canada, were included. Data were collected from electronic health records of all patients (n = 343) receiving home care from these teams.

RESULTS

The characteristics of the sites, sample, and PHCNP interventions were described. Planned interventions led to a 5.8% decrease in hospitalizations and ED transfers (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.058, p = 0.039), while unplanned interventions resulted in a 1.5-fold increase in this outcome (adjusted OR: 1.518, p < 0.001). The risk of hospitalization and ED transfers increased by 10.7 times with unplanned interventions (adjusted OR: 10.651, p = 0.002). Furthermore, imaging was associated with a 2-fold increased risk (adjusted OR: 1.954, p = 0.021), consultations with a 1.8-fold increased risk (adjusted OR: 1.849, p = 0.034), and laboratory test-related interventions after 30 or more days reduced the risk by 68.0% (adjusted OR: 0.320, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

PHCNPs in interprofessional home care teams show promise in reducing hospitalizations and ED transfers through planned visits. These findings provide valuable insights that can contribute to enhancing home care services for a population with limited access to healthcare and high healthcare needs. Further research is needed in other jurisdictions.

Identifying indicators sensitive to primary healthcare nurse practitioner practice: A review of systematic reviews

AIM

To identify indicators sensitive to the practice of primary healthcare nurse practitioners (PHCNPs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A review of systematic reviews was undertaken to identify indicators sensitive to PHCNP practice. Published and grey literature was searched from January 1, 2010 to December 2, 2022. Titles/abstracts (n = 4251) and full texts (n = 365) were screened independently by two reviewers, with a third acting as a tie-breaker. Reference lists of relevant publications were reviewed. Risk of bias was examined independently by two reviewers using AMSTAR-2. Data were extracted by one reviewer and verified by a second reviewer to describe study characteristics, indicators, and results. Indicators were recoded into categories. Findings were summarized using narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Forty-four systematic reviews were retained including 271 indicators that were recoded into 26 indicator categories at the patient, provider and health system levels. Nineteen reviews were assessed to be at low risk of bias. Patient indicator categories included activities of daily living, adaptation to health conditions, clinical conditions, diagnosis, education-patient, mortality, patient adherence, quality of life, satisfaction, and signs and symptoms. Provider indicator categories included adherence to best practice-providers, education-providers, illness prevention, interprofessional team functioning, and prescribing. Health system indicator categories included access to care, consultations, costs, emergency room visits, healthcare service delivery, hospitalizations, length of stay, patient safety, quality of care, scope of practice, and wait times.

DISCUSSION

Equal to improved care for almost all indicators was found consistently for the PHCNP group. Very few indicators favoured the control group. No indicator was identified for high/low fidelity simulation, cultural safety and cultural sensitivity with people in vulnerable situations or Indigenous Peoples.

CONCLUSION

This review of systematic reviews identified patient, provider and health system indicators sensitive to PHCNP practice. The findings help clarify how PHCNPs contribute to care outcomes.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020198182.