The extent of quality improvement activities in nursing homes

Assuring Quality in Nursing Homes: The Black Box of Administrative and Clinical Leadership—A Scoping Review

Background and Objectives

Licensed nursing home administrators (NHA) and directors of nursing (DON) are responsible for nursing home quality and assuring optimal performance and job satisfaction/retention of their nursing home workforce. NHA/DON-focused studies have generated important foundational knowledge over the last three decades; yet, targeted research is needed to understand and apply the complexities of the black box of this top management team. This scoping review identifies, reviews, synthesizes, and maps the topical areas of research in NHA/DON positions in U.S. nursing homes.

Research Design and Methods

We conducted searches of 5 databases, yielding 3,479 records; screening/review yielded 88 unique records. We used thematic analysis to code the primary foci of the studies and the variables associated with the concepts of interest.

Results

Most papers (n = 40) focused on role characteristics, 23 examined approaches to management and leadership, 24 focused on perceptions about the role, and the remaining 12 examined role structure. The role-related themes linked to outcomes (n = 42), processes (n = 27), and structures (n = 30).

Discussion and Implications

We highlight important gaps for future research and offer a call to action for research, policy, practice, and education collaborations to accelerate the rate of research and translate the findings into best practices for NHA/DON to lead and manage the nursing home workforce and build capacity to ensure person-centered, high-quality care. Based on foundational descriptive studies, it is time to use what is known to design and implement interventions that enhance the capacity of NHA/DON to improve the structures, processes, and outcomes of nursing homes.

The match between institutional elderly care management research and management challenges - a systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Elderly care practice and its management together with policy and research play a crucial role in responding to increasing challenges in institutional care for elderly people. Successful dialogue between these is necessary. The purpose of this systematic literature review is to compare how institutional elderly care management research meets the care challenges currently emphasized in international long-term care policy documents.

METHODS

This paper was based on a systematic literature review. After screening 1971 abstracts using inclusion/exclusion criteria, 58 refereed articles published between 2000 and 2010 remained for analysis. The articles were analyzed using theory-based content analysis by comparing the results to the framework based on analysis of international long-term care management policy documents.

RESULTS

The current challenges of long-term care management identified from policy documents were Integrated Care Management, Productivity Management, Quality Management, Workforce Management and ICT Management. The research on institutional elderly care management responded somewhat to the challenges mentioned in policy documents. However, some of the challenges were studied broadly and some were paid only minor attention. Further, only few studies focused on the core items of challenges addressed in policy documents.

CONCLUSIONS

Institutional care management research needs to focus more on challenges in integrated care, productivity, ICT and division of labor. Managers, researchers and policy-makers should assume more active collaborative roles in processes of research, policymaking and policy implementation. In addition managers' and policymakers' scientific literacy needs to be enhanced.

Quality work in long-term care: the role of first-line leaders

OBJECTIVE

To explore the first-line leaders' role in quality work in long-term care in Norway, in order to determine how that work is related to such success characteristics as leadership, staff, patients, performance, information and information technology.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional telephone survey. The text was analysed using content analysis.

SETTING

Thirty-two Norwegian municipalities stratified according to region and population size.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty-four first-line leaders in nursing homes and home-based care. Main outcome measure The clinical microsystem approach is used as a framework by defining and designing measureable variables.

RESULTS

Thirty-six leaders described how they initiated and motivated employees to be active in quality work; the remaining leaders indicated that they played a passive role. The first-line leaders played a key role in implementing national quality policies and regulations. The quantity of other success characteristics was low.

CONCLUSIONS

The municipalities delegated the responsibility of implanting national policies to the first-line leaders. Missing were key quality success criteria such as macro- and meso-perspectives for the municipality as a whole and co-operation with other leaders in the organization and fostering of relevant learning. Quality work was fragmented rather than comprehensive and systematic.

Targeting nursing homes under the Quality Improvement Organization program's 9th statement of work

In the Quality Improvement Organization (QIO) program's latest Statement of Work, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is targeting its nursing home activities toward facilities that perform poorly on two quality measures-pressure ulcers and restraint use. The designation of target facilities is a shift in strategy for CMS and a direct response to criticism that QIO program resources were not being targeted effectively to facilities or clinical areas that most needed improvement. Using administrative data, this article analyzes implications of using narrowly defined criteria to identify facilities that need improvement, particularly in light of considerable evidence showing that nursing home quality is multidimensional and may change over time. The analyses show that one in four facilities is targeted for improvement nationally but that approximately half of some states' facilities are targeted while other states have almost none targeted. The analyses also convey deeper limitations to using threshold values on individual measures to identify poorly performing homes. Target facilities can be among the top performers on a range of other quality measures, and their performance on targeted measures themselves may change over time. The implication of these features is that a very different group of facilities would have been chosen had the QIO program targeted other measures or examined performance at a different point in time. Ultimately, CMS has chosen a blunt instrument to identify poorly performing nursing homes, and supplemental strategies-such as soliciting input from state survey agencies and more closely aligning quality improvement and quality assurance efforts-should be considered to address potential limitations.

Modeling efficiency at the process level: an examination of the care planning process in nursing homes

OBJECTIVE

To examine the efficiency of the care planning process in nursing homes.

METHODS

We collected detailed primary data about the care planning process for a stratified random sample of 107 nursing homes from Kansas and Missouri. We used these data to calculate the average direct cost per care plan and used data on selected deficiencies from the Online Survey Certification and Reporting System to measure the quality of care planning. We then analyzed the efficiency of the assessment process using corrected ordinary least squares (COLS) and data envelopment analysis (DEA).

RESULTS

Both approaches suggested that there was considerable inefficiency in the care planning process. The average COLS score was 0.43; the average DEA score was 0.48. The correlation between the two sets of scores was quite high, and there was no indication that lower costs resulted in lower quality. For-profit facilities were significantly more efficient than not-for-profit facilities.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple studies of nursing homes have found evidence of inefficiency, but virtually all have had measurement problems that raise questions about the results. This analysis, which focuses on a process with much simpler measurement issues, finds evidence of inefficiency that is largely consistent with earlier studies. Making nursing homes more efficient merits closer attention as a strategy for improving care. Increasing efficiency by adopting well-designed, reliable processes can simultaneously reduce costs and improve quality.

Quality improvement in a publicly provided long-term care system: the case of Norway

OBJECTIVE

To explore the extent to which quality improvement activities are implemented in the Norwegian long-term care system for older people, and to determine if variations in the extent and scope of quality improvement activities are associated with the characteristics of the first-line care leaders, the sector or the size of the municipality.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional telephone survey supplemented with information from public records and official municipal websites. Data were organized according to six total quality management components, and a sum score was developed to measure quality improvement. Variations in the extent of quality improvement activities were analysed using multivariate analysis.

SETTING

Thirty-two Norwegian municipalities stratified according to region and population size.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty-four first-line leaders in nursing homes and home-based care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

A sum score has been used as a measure of quality improvement activities.

RESULTS

The unit's quality improvement activities varied by quality improvement components and by municipality. The technical component that requires training in tools and techniques was low; the general components as 'leader's involvement' and 'employee participation' were more common. The size of the populations of the municipalities showed a significant independent association with the scope of quality activities.

CONCLUSIONS

The six quality improvement components varied from high to extremely low, and the large municipalities had more quality activities than small- or medium-sized municipalities.

Balancing regulatory controls and incentives: toward smarter and more transparent oversight in long-term care

Government oversight of long-term care involves inspections of patients' records, limited observations of patients and care practices, reviews of policies and procedures, and distribution of publicly available information. Although many providers bemoan the stifling consequences of excessive regulation, oversight in this area remains a highly legitimate endeavor for the public, though the public has limited trust in the existing regulatory regime. This distrust stems from many sources, not least of which includes considerable variation, both within and across states, in the way government oversight occurs. Reforming the current regulatory structure requires that we regulate "smarter" and more consistently. This means improving and maximizing use of the data already being collected, but it also means explicitly rationalizing the regulator's responsibility to review performance and apply sanctions when necessary. Oversight should more closely resemble consultancy, with regulators sharing information with providers about how to improve quality. Ideally, there needs to be an iterative process in which state inspectors identify performance problems and the nation's quality improvement organizations then help providers design quality improvement interventions to ameliorate the problems identified. The benefits of a revised regulatory approach are especially apparent in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, where more effective oversight would have identified nursing home residents at risk for low-quality care before the disaster occurred while better identifying those in need of evacuation or assistance afterward.

Randomized trial to improve fracture prevention in nursing home residents

BACKGROUND

Interventions to improve the fracture prevention in nursing homes are needed.

METHODS

Cluster-randomized, single-blind, controlled trial of a multi-modal quality improvement intervention. Nursing homes (n=67) with > or =10 residents with a diagnosis of osteoporosis or recent hip fracture (n=606) were randomized to receive an early or delayed intervention consisting of audit and feedback, educational modules, teleconferences, and academic detailing. Medical record abstraction and the Minimum Data Set were used to measure the prescription of osteoporosis therapies before and after the intervention period. Analysis was at the facility-level and Generalized Estimating Equation modeling was used to account for clustering.

RESULTS

No significant improvements were observed in any of the quality indicators. The use of osteoporosis pharmacotherapy or hip protectors improved by 8.0% in the intervention group and 0.6% in the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant (P=.72). Participation in the intervention activities was low, but completion of the educational module (odds ratio [OR] 4.8, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9-12.0) and direct physician contact by an academic detailer (OR 4.5, 95% CI, 1.1-18.2) were significantly associated with prescription of osteoporosis pharmacotherapy or hip protectors in multivariable models.

CONCLUSIONS

Audit-feedback and education interventions were ineffective in improving fracture prevention in the nursing home setting, although results may have been tempered by low participation in the intervention activities.

Have Nursing Home Compare quality measure scores changed over time in response to competition?

BACKGROUND

Currently, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services report on 15 Quality Measures (QMs) on the Nursing Home Compare (NHC) website. It is assumed that nursing homes are able to make improvements on these QMs, and in doing so they will attract more residents. In this investigation, we examine changes in QM scores, and whether competition and/or excess demand have influenced these change scores over a period of 1 year.

METHODS

Data come from NHC and the On-line Survey Certification And Recording (OSCAR) system. QM change scores are calculated using values from January 2003 to January 2004. A series of regression analyses are used to examine the association of competition and excess demand on QM scores.

RESULTS

Eight QMs show an average decrease in scores (ie, better quality) and six QMs show an average increase in scores (ie, worse quality). However, for 13 of the 14 QMs these average changes averaged less than 1%. The regression analyses show an association between higher competition and improving QM scores and an association between lower occupancy and improving QM scores.

CONCLUSION

As would be predicted based on the market-driven mechanism underlying quality improvements using report cards, we show that it is in the most competitive markets and those with the lowest average occupancy rates that improvements in the QM scores are more likely.

Quality improvement nursing facilities: a nursing leadership perspective

The purposes of this study were to characterize the state of quality improvement (QI) in nursing facilities and to identify barriers to improvement from nursing leaders' perspectives. The study employed a non-experimental descriptive design, using closed- and open-ended survey questions in a sample of 51 nursing facilities in a midwestern state. Only two of these facilities had active QI programs. Furthermore, turnover and limited training among these nursing leaders represented major barriers to rapid implementation of such programs. This study is consistent with earlier findings that QI programs are limited in nursing homes.

Improving the quality of long-term care with better information

Publicly reporting information stimulates providers' efforts to improve the quality of health care. The availability of mandated, uniform clinical data in all nursing homes and home health agencies has facilitated the public reporting of comparative quality data. This article reviews the conceptual and technical challenges of applying information about the quality of long-term care providers and the evidence for the impact of information-based quality improvement. Quality "tools" have been used despite questions about the validity of the measures and their use in selecting providers or offering them bonus payments. Although the industry now realizes the importance of quality, research still is needed on how consumers use this information to select providers and monitor their performance and whether these efforts actually improve the outcomes of care.