Evidence-based intervention to reduce avoidable hospital admissions in care home residents (the Better Health in Residents in Care Homes (BHiRCH) study): protocol for a pilot cluster randomised trial

We need a radical change to take place now´-The potential of integrated healthcare for rural long-term care facilities

OBJECTIVES

This study explores healthcare professionals' perceptions in rural German long-term care facilities, focusing on integrated health systems. The aim is to understand experiences, challenges, and preferences.

METHODS

Twenty nurses and paramedics participated in in-depth interviews. Thematic analysis was applied to transcripts, revealing key themes: acute healthcare provision, interdisciplinary collaboration, telemedicine use, and preferences for the future healthcare landscape.

RESULTS

Themes highlighted factors influencing acute care situations and the crucial role of interdisciplinary collaboration. Integrated care was infrequently encountered despite high demand in rural long-term care facilities.

CONCLUSIONS

Though uncommon, integrated healthcare remains crucial in addressing long-term care facility residents' complex needs. Healthcare professionals express a strong demand for integrated care in rural areas, citing potential benefits for resident wellbeing, healthcare effectiveness, and job satisfaction. The findings guide healthcare organizations in developing institutional-level strategies for integrated care integration, emphasizing its importance in rural settings.

Models for delivery and co-ordination of primary or secondary health care (or both) to older adults living in aged care facilities

BACKGROUND

The number of older people is increasing worldwide and public expenditure on residential aged care facilities (ACFs) is expected to at least double, and possibly triple, by 2050. Co-ordinated and timely care in residential ACFs that reduces unnecessary hospital transfers may improve residents' health outcomes and increase satisfaction with care among ACF residents, their families and staff. These benefits may outweigh the resources needed to sustain the changes in care delivery and potentially lead to cost savings. Our systematic review comprehensively and systematically presents the available evidence of the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of alternative models of providing health care to ACF residents.

OBJECTIVES

Main objective To assess the effectiveness and safety of alternative models of delivering primary or secondary health care (or both) to older adults living in ACFs. Secondary objective To assess the cost-effectiveness of the alternative models.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases and two trials registers (WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov) on 26 October 2022, together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included individual and cluster-randomised trials, and cost/cost-effectiveness data collected alongside eligible effectiveness studies. Eligible study participants included older people who reside in an ACF as their place of permanent abode and healthcare professionals delivering or co-ordinating the delivery of healthcare at ACFs. Eligible interventions focused on either ways of delivering primary or secondary health care (or both) or ways of co-ordinating the delivery of this care. Eligible comparators included usual care or another model of care. Primary outcomes were emergency department visits, unplanned hospital admissions and adverse effects (defined as infections, falls and pressure ulcers). Secondary outcomes included adherence to clinical guideline-recommended care, health-related quality of life of residents, mortality, resource use, access to primary or specialist healthcare services, any hospital admissions, length of hospital stay, satisfaction with the health care by residents and their families, work-related satisfaction and work-related stress of ACF staff.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence using GRADE. The primary comparison was any alternative model of care versus usual care.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 40 randomised trials (21,787 participants; three studies only reported number of beds) in this review. Included trials evaluated alternative models of care aimed at either all residents of the ACF (i.e. no specific health condition; 11 studies), ACF residents with mental health conditions or behavioural problems (12 studies), ACF residents with a specific condition (e.g. residents with pressure ulcers, 13 studies) or residents requiring a specific type of care (e.g. residents after hospital discharge, four studies). Most alternative models of care focused on 'co-ordination of care' (n = 31). Three alternative models of care focused on 'who provides care' and two focused on 'where care is provided' (i.e. care provided within ACF versus outside of ACF). Four models focused on the use of information and communication technology. Usual care, the comparator in all studies, was highly heterogeneous across studies and, in most cases, was poorly reported. Most of the included trials were susceptible to some form of bias; in particular, performance (89%), reporting (66%) and detection (42%) bias. Compared to usual care, alternative models of care may make little or no difference to the proportion of residents with at least one emergency department visit (risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.20; 7 trials, 1276 participants; low-certainty evidence), but may reduce the proportion of residents with at least one unplanned hospital admission (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.99, I2 = 53%; 8 trials, 1263 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of alternative models of care on adverse events (proportion of residents with a fall: RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.60, I² = 74%; 3 trials, 1061 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and adherence to guideline-recommended care (proportion of residents receiving adequate antidepressant medication: RR 5.29, 95% CI 1.08 to 26.00; 1 study, 65 participants) as the certainty of the evidence is very low. Compared to usual care, alternative models of care may have little or no effect on the health-related quality of life of ACF residents (MD -0.016, 95% CI -0.036 to 0.004; I² = 23%; 12 studies, 4016 participants; low-certainty evidence) and probably make little or no difference to the number of deaths in residents of ACFs (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.16, 24 trials, 3881 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). We did not pool the cost-effectiveness or cost data as the specific costs associated with the various alternative models of care were incomparable, both across models of care as well as across settings. Based on the findings of five economic evaluations (all interventions focused on co-ordination of care), we are uncertain of the cost-effectiveness of alternative models of care compared to usual care as the certainty of the evidence is very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to usual care, alternative models of care may make little or no difference to the number of emergency department visits but may reduce unplanned hospital admissions. We are uncertain of the effect of alternative care models on adverse events (i.e. falls, pressure ulcers, infections) and adherence to guidelines compared to usual care, as the certainty of the evidence is very low. Alternative models of care may have little or no effect on health-related quality of life and probably have no effect on mortality of ACF residents compared to usual care. Importantly, we are uncertain of the cost-effectiveness of alternative models of care due to the limited, disparate data available.

A feasibility study of a decision aid to support family carers of people with severe dementia or those towards the end-of-life

BACKGROUND

Advance care planning in dementia does not always happen. As dementia progresses, decisions are often left for family carers to make with professionals.

AIM

To test the feasibility and acceptability of the delivery and use of a decision aid for family carers of people with severe dementia or towards the end-of-life.

DESIGN

Feasibility study using a before-after design of a paper-based decision aid with family carers of people with severe dementia or towards the end-of-life. Criteria for whether to progress to full evaluation included achieving: 70% recruitment rate of target of 30 people, and retention of 70% at 6 months. Outcome measures at baseline, 3 and 6 months, included: the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10), EQ5D-5L and Satisfaction with Care at the End of Life (SWC-EOLD).

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-eight family carers were recruited (93% of target), 26 completed baseline assessment and 20 (71%) of those were followed-up at 6 months.

RESULTS

Almost all outcomes changed indicating improvement over 6 months. The DCS and K10 scores decreased indicating less decisional conflict and less psychological distress. The decision aid was acceptable, 25% found it very helpful and 55% a little helpful at 6 months.

CONCLUSION

We met the success criteria demonstrating this study was feasible and acceptable to carers. Future research should test the effectiveness of the decision aid in a full scale evaluation.

Urinary catheter policies in home healthcare agencies and hospital transfers due to urinary tract infection

BACKGROUND

Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are a frequent cause of hospital transfer for home healthcare (HHC) patients, particularly among patients with urinary catheters.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional, nationally representative HHC agency-level survey (2018-2019) and combined it with patient-level data from the Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS) and Medicare inpatient data (2016-2018) to evaluate the association between HHC agencies' urinary catheter policies and hospital transfers due to UTI. Our sample included 28,205 patients with urinary catheters who received HHC from 473 Medicare-certified agencies between 2016-2018. Our survey assessed whether agencies had written policies in place for (1) replacement of indwelling catheters at fixed intervals, and (2) emptying the drainage bag. We used adjusted logistic regression to estimate the association of these policies with probability of hospital transfer due to UTI during a 60-day HHC episode.

RESULTS

Probability of hospital transfer due to UTI during a HHC episode ranged from 5.62% among agencies with neither urinary catheter policy to 4.43% among agencies with both policies. Relative to agencies with neither policy, having both policies was associated with 21% lower probability of hospital transfer due to UTI (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest implementation of policies in HHC to promote best practices for care of patients with urinary catheters may be an effective strategy to prevent hospital transfers due to UTI.

Relationships Between Age, Frailty, Length of Care Home Residence and Biomarkers of Immunity and Inflammation in Older Care Home Residents in the United Kingdom

Aging is associated with changes to the immune system, collectively termed immunosenescence and inflammageing. However, the relationships among age, frailty, and immune parameters in older people resident in care homes are not well described. We assessed immune and inflammatory parameters in 184 United Kingdom care home residents aged over 65 years and how they relate to age, frailty index, and length of care home residence. Linear regression was used to identify the independent contribution of age, frailty, and length of care home residence to the various immune parameters as dependent variables. Participants had a mean age (±SD) of 85.3 ± 7.5 years, had been residing in the care home for a mean (±SD) of 1.9 ± 2.2 years at the time of study commencement, and 40.7% were severely frail. Length of care home residence and frailty index were correlated but age and frailty index and age and length of care home residence were not significantly correlated. All components of the full blood count, apart from total lymphocytes, were within the reference range; 31% of participants had blood lymphocyte numbers below the lower value of the reference range. Among the components of the full blood count, platelet numbers were positively associated with frailty index. Amongst plasma inflammatory markers, C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1ra), soluble E-selectin and interferon gamma-induced protein 10 (IP-10) were positively associated with frailty. Plasma soluble vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 (sVCAM-1), IP-10 and tumor necrosis factor receptor II (TNFRII) were positively associated with age. Plasma monocyte chemoattractant protein 1 was positively associated with length of care home residence. Frailty was an independent predictor of platelet numbers, plasma CRP, IL-1ra, IP-10, and sE-selectin. Age was an independent predictor of activated monocytes and plasma IP-10, TNFRII and sVCAM-1. Length of care home residence was an independent predictor of plasma MCP-1. This study concludes that there are independent links between increased frailty and inflammation and between increased age and inflammation amongst older people resident in care homes in the United Kingdom. Since, inflammation is known to contribute to morbidity and mortality in older people, the causes and consequences of inflammation in this population should be further explored.

A complex intervention to reduce avoidable hospital admissions in nursing homes: a research programme including the BHiRCH-NH pilot cluster RCT

Background

An unplanned hospital admission of a nursing home resident distresses the person, their family and nursing home staff, and is costly to the NHS. Improving health care in care homes, including early detection of residents’ health changes, may reduce hospital admissions. Previously, we identified four conditions associated with avoidable hospital admissions. We noted promising ‘within-home’ complex interventions including care pathways, knowledge and skills enhancement, and implementation support.

Objectives

Develop a complex intervention with implementation support [the Better Health in Residents in Care Homes with Nursing (BHiRCH-NH)] to improve early detection, assessment and treatment for the four conditions. Determine its impact on hospital admissions, test study procedures and acceptability of the intervention and implementation support, and indicate if a definitive trial was warranted.

Design

A Carer Reference Panel advised on the intervention, implementation support and study documentation, and engaged in data analysis and interpretation. In workstream 1, we developed a complex intervention to reduce rates of hospitalisation from nursing homes using mixed methods, including a rapid research review, semistructured interviews and consensus workshops. The complex intervention comprised care pathways, approaches to enhance staff knowledge and skills, implementation support and clarity regarding the role of family carers. In workstream 2, we tested the complex intervention and implementation support via two work packages. In work package 1, we conducted a feasibility study of the intervention, implementation support and study procedures in two nursing homes and refined the complex intervention to comprise the Stop and Watch Early Warning Tool (S&W), condition-specific care pathways and a structured framework for nurses to communicate with primary care. The final implementation support included identifying two Practice Development Champions (PDCs) in each intervention home, and supporting them with a training workshop, practice development support group, monthly coaching calls, handbooks and web-based resources. In work package 2, we undertook a cluster randomised controlled trial to pilot test the complex intervention for acceptability and a preliminary estimate of effect.

Setting

Fourteen nursing homes allocated to intervention and implementation support (n = 7) or treatment as usual (n = 7).

Participants

We recruited sufficient numbers of nursing homes (n = 14), staff (n = 148), family carers (n = 95) and residents (n = 245). Two nursing homes withdrew prior to the intervention starting.

Intervention

This ran from February to July 2018.

Data sources

Individual-level data on nursing home residents, their family carers and staff; system-level data using nursing home records; and process-level data comprising how the intervention was implemented. Data were collected on recruitment rates, consent and the numbers of family carers who wished to be involved in the residents’ care. Completeness of outcome measures and data collection and the return rate of questionnaires were assessed.

Results

The pilot trial showed no effects on hospitalisations or secondary outcomes. No home implemented the intervention tools as expected. Most staff endorsed the importance of early detection, assessment and treatment. Many reported that they ‘were already doing it’, using an early-warning tool; a detailed nursing assessment; or the situation, background, assessment, recommendation communication protocol. Three homes never used the S&W and four never used care pathways. Only 16 S&W forms and eight care pathways were completed. Care records revealed little use of the intervention principles. PDCs from five of six intervention homes attended the training workshop, following which they had variable engagement with implementation support. Progression criteria regarding recruitment and data collection were met: 70% of homes were retained, the proportion of missing data was < 20% and 80% of individual-level data were collected. Necessary rates of data collection, documentation completion and return over the 6-month study period were achieved. However, intervention tools were not fully adopted, suggesting they would not be sustainable outside the trial. Few hospitalisations for the four conditions suggest it an unsuitable primary outcome measure. Key cost components were estimated.

Limitations

The study homes may already have had effective approaches to early detection, assessment and treatment for acute health changes; consistent with government policy emphasising the need for enhanced health care in homes. Alternatively, the implementation support may not have been sufficiently potent.

Conclusion

A definitive trial is feasible, but the intervention is unlikely to be effective. Participant recruitment, retention, data collection and engagement with family carers can guide subsequent studies, including service evaluation and quality improvement methodologies.

Future work

Intervention research should be conducted in homes which need to enhance early detection, assessment and treatment. Interventions to reduce avoidable hospital admissions may be beneficial in residential care homes, as they are not required to employ nurses.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN74109734 and ISRCTN86811077.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 9, No. 2. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Effectiveness and organizational conditions of effectiveness of telemedicine in nursing homes. A study protocol of a comparative prospective cohort (EFFORT study)

The profile of nursing home (NH) residents has changed over the past decade with more dependency, more severe chronic diseases and more treatments prescribed. For residents, the major consequence is the higher risk of unplanned hospitalization. French guidelines recommend the development of interactive telemedicine (InT) in NHs in order to improve access to care, and to decrease the rate of avoidable unplanned hospitalizations.

Methods and analysis: The aim of this study is to analyze the impact of an InT protocol delivered in NHs on the rate of unplanned hospitalizations, and on the quality of life at work and the organizational conditions of effectiveness of telemedicine in NHs. We will perform a mixed methods study combining a cluster non-randomized controlled trial in two matched parallel arms (telemedicine group and control group) and qualitative analysis of the evolution of organizational and professional contexts in NHs.

Ethics and dissemination: The study protocol was approved and sponsored by the French Ministry of Health. The study received ethical approval from the Bordeaux University Hospital Institutional Review Board. We will communicate the final results to the public via conferences and results will also be submitted for publication in international peer-reviewed scientific journals.

Trial registration number NCT03486977

Pilot cluster randomised trial of an evidence-based intervention to reduce avoidable hospital admissions in nursing home residents (Better Health in Residents of Care Homes with Nursing-BHiRCH-NH Study)

OBJECTIVES

To pilot a complex intervention to support healthcare and improve early detection and treatment for common health conditions experienced by nursing home (NH) residents.

DESIGN

Pilot cluster randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

14 NHs (7 intervention, 7 control) in London and West Yorkshire.

PARTICIPANTS

NH residents, their family carers and staff.

INTERVENTION

Complex intervention to support healthcare and improve early detection and treatment of urinary tract and respiratory infections, chronic heart failure and dehydration, comprising: (1) 'Stop and Watch (S&W)' early warning tool for changes in physical health, (2) condition-specific care pathway and (3) Situation, Background, Assessment and Recommendation tool to enhance communication with primary care. Implementation was supported by Practice Development Champions, a Practice Development Support Group and regular telephone coaching with external facilitators.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Data on NH (quality ratings, size, ownership), residents, family carers and staff demographics during the month prior to intervention and subsequently, numbers of admissions, accident and emergency visits, and unscheduled general practitioner visits monthly for 6 months during intervention. We collected data on how the intervention was used, healthcare resource use and quality of life data for economic evaluation. We assessed recruitment and retention, and whether a full trial was warranted.

RESULTS

We recruited 14 NHs, 148 staff, 95 family carers and 245 residents. We retained the majority of participants recruited (95%). 15% of residents had an unplanned hospital admission for one of the four study conditions. We were able to collect sufficient questionnaire data (all over 96% complete). No NH implemented intervention tools as planned. Only 16 S&W forms and 8 care pathways were completed. There was no evidence of harm.

CONCLUSIONS

Recruitment, retention and data collection processes were effective but the intervention not implemented. A full trial is not warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN74109734 (https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN74109734). ORIGINAL PROTOCOL: BMJ Open. 2019;9(5):e026510. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026510.

The use of the PARIHS framework in implementation research and practice-a citation analysis of the literature

BACKGROUND

The Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework was developed two decades ago and conceptualizes successful implementation (SI) as a function (f) of the evidence (E) nature and type, context (C) quality, and the facilitation (F), [SI = f (E,C,F)]. Despite a growing number of citations of theoretical frameworks including PARIHS, details of how theoretical frameworks are used remains largely unknown. This review aimed to enhance the understanding of the breadth and depth of the use of the PARIHS framework.

METHODS

This citation analysis commenced from four core articles representing the key stages of the framework's development. The citation search was performed in Web of Science and Scopus. After exclusion, we undertook an initial assessment aimed to identify articles using PARIHS and not only referencing any of the core articles. To assess this, all articles were read in full. Further data extraction included capturing information about where (country/countries and setting/s) PARIHS had been used, as well as categorizing how the framework was applied. Also, strengths and weaknesses, as well as efforts to validate the framework, were explored in detail.

RESULTS

The citation search yielded 1613 articles. After applying exclusion criteria, 1475 articles were read in full, and the initial assessment yielded a total of 367 articles reported to have used the PARIHS framework. These articles were included for data extraction. The framework had been used in a variety of settings and in both high-, middle-, and low-income countries. With regard to types of use, 32% used PARIHS in planning and delivering an intervention, 50% in data analysis, 55% in the evaluation of study findings, and/or 37% in any other way. Further analysis showed that its actual application was frequently partial and generally not well elaborated.

CONCLUSIONS

In line with previous citation analysis of the use of theoretical frameworks in implementation science, we also found a rather superficial description of the use of PARIHS. Thus, we propose the development and adoption of reporting guidelines on how framework(s) are used in implementation studies, with the expectation that this will enhance the maturity of implementation science.

A group intervention to improve quality of life for people with advanced dementia living in care homes: the Namaste feasibility cluster RCT

BACKGROUND

People with advanced dementia who live and die in nursing homes experience variable quality of life, care and dying. There is a need to identify appropriate, cost-effective interventions that facilitate high-quality end-of-life care provision.

OBJECTIVES

To establish the feasibility and acceptability to staff and family of conducting a cluster randomised controlled trial of the Namaste Care intervention for people with advanced dementia in nursing homes.

DESIGN

The study had three phases: (1) realist review and (2) intervention refinement to inform the design of (3) a feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial with a process evaluation and economic analysis. Clusters (nursing homes) were randomised in a 3 : 1 ratio to intervention or control (usual care). The nature of the intervention meant that blinding was not possible.

SETTING

Nursing homes in England providing care for people with dementia.

PARTICIPANTS

Residents with advanced dementia (assessed as having a Functional Assessment Staging Test score of 6 or 7), their informal carers and nursing home staff.

INTERVENTION

Namaste Care is a complex group intervention that provides structured personalised care in a dedicated space, focusing on enhancements to the physical environment, comfort management and sensory engagement.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The two contender primary outcome measures were Comfort Assessment in Dying - End of Life Care in Dementia for quality of dying (dementia) and Quality of Life in Late Stage Dementia for quality of life. The secondary outcomes were as follows: person with dementia, sleep/activity (actigraphy), neuropsychiatric symptoms, agitation and pain; informal carers, satisfaction with care at the end of life; staff members, person-centred care assessment, satisfaction with care at the end of life and readiness for change; and other data - health economic outcomes, medication/service use and intervention activity.

RESULTS

Phase 1 (realist review; 86 papers) identified that a key intervention component was the activities enabling the development of moments of connection. In phase 2, refinement of the intervention enabled the production of a user-friendly 16-page A4 booklet. In phase 3, eight nursing homes were recruited. Two homes withdrew before the intervention commenced; four intervention and two control homes completed the study. Residents with advanced dementia (n = 32) were recruited in intervention (n = 18) and control (n = 14) homes. Informal carers (total, n = 12: intervention, n = 5; control, n = 7) and 97 staff from eight sites (intervention, n = 75; control, n = 22) were recruited over a 6-month period. Recruitment is feasible. Completion rates of the primary outcome questionnaires were high at baseline (100%) and at 4 weeks (96.8%). The Quality of Life in Late Stage Dementia was more responsive to change over 24 weeks. Even where economic data were missing, these could be collected in a full trial. The intervention was acceptable; the dose varied depending on the staffing and physical environment of each care home. Staff and informal carers reported changes for the person with dementia in two ways: increased social engagement and greater calm. No adverse events related to the intervention were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

A subsequent definitive trial is feasible if there are amendments to the recruitment process, outcome measure choice and intervention specification.

FUTURE WORK

In a full trial, consideration is needed of the appropriate outcome measure that is sensitive to different participant responses, and of clear implementation principles for this person-centred intervention in a nursing home context.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN14948133.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 6. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.