Nursing Home Response to Nursing Home Compare: The Provider Perspective

The Relationship between Nursing Home Staffing and Health Outcomes Revisited

OBJECTIVE

Nursing homes make staffing decisions in conjunction with choosing quality goals, potentially leading to endogeneity bias between staffing and quality. We use instrumental variables (IVs) to explore it.

DESIGN

Retrospective statistical analysis of 2017-2019 Payroll-Based Journal, Minimum Data Set, Nursing Home Care Compare, and Long-Term Care Focus.

SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS

A total of 11,261 nursing homes nationally.

METHODS

We estimated separate models for each of 6 quality measures as dependent variables, and registered nurses (RNs), certified nurse assistants (CNAs), and licensed practical nurses (LPNs) as independent variables, including other control variables associated with quality. The models were estimated using both ordinary least squares (OLS) and 2-stage least squares (2SLS) methods, the latter accounting for endogeneity. The IVs were defined as the average staffing of competing nursing homes in the same market as the index facility.

RESULTS

Estimated coefficients for the quality measures in the 2SLS models were up to 5 times larger than in the OLS models. The 2SLS estimates for antipsychotic medications use increased with higher RN staffing [0.279 (0.004 to 0.553)] and decreased with higher CNAs [-0.125 (-0.198 to -0.052)]. Hospitalizations decreased with more RNs [-1.328 (-1.673 to -0.983)] and LPN staffing [-0.483 (-0.755 to -0.211])] and increased with CNA [0.201 (0.109 to 0.293)] staffing. Emergency room visits decreased with higher RNs [-1.098 (-1.500 to -0.696)] and increased with CNAs [0.191 (0.084 to 0.298)]. Long-stay activities of daily living [-0.313 (-0.416 to -0.209)] and short-stay functioning [-0.481 (-0.598 to -0.364)] improved only with higher CNA staffing and pressure sores improved only with increased RN staffing [-0.436 (-0.836 to -0.035)].

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Our findings demonstrate the importance of accounting for endogeneity in studies of staffing and quality. Endogeneity changes conclusions about significance, direction, and magnitude of the relationship between staffing and specific quality measures. These findings highlight the need to further study and understand the nuanced relationship between different staffing types and different health outcomes such as the difference between the relationship of RN and CNA hours per resident day to antipsychotic quality measures.

Regulation of long-term care for older persons: a scoping review of empirical research

OBJECTIVE

Not only care professionals are responsible for the quality of care but other stakeholders including regulators also play a role. Over the last decades, countries have increasingly invested in regulation of Long-Term Care (LTC) for older persons, raising the question of how regulation should be put into practice to guarantee or improve the quality of care. This scoping review aims to summarize the evidence on regulatory practices in LTC for older persons. It identifies empirical studies, documents the aims and findings, and describes research gaps to foster this field.

DESIGN

A literature search (in PubMed, Embase, Cinahl, APA PsycInfo and Scopus) was performed from inception up to December 12th, 2022. Thirty-one studies were included.

RESULTS

All included studies were from high-income countries, in particular Australia, the US and Northwestern Europe, and almost all focused on care provided in LTC facilities. The studies focused on different aspects of regulatory practice, including care users' experiences in collecting intelligence, impact of standards, regulatory systems and strategies, inspection activities and policies, perception and style of inspectors, perception and attitudes of inspectees and validity and reliability of inspection outcomes.

CONCLUSION

With increasingly fragmented and networked care providers, and an increasing call for person-centred care, more flexible forms of regulatory practice in LTC are needed, organized closer to daily practice, bottom-up. We hope that this scoping review will raise awareness of the importance of regulatory practice and foster research in this field, to improve the quality of LTC for older persons, and optimize their functional ability and well-being.

Quality Improvement Efforts in VA Community Living Centers Following Public Reporting of Performance

For two decades, the U.S. government has publicly reported performance measures for most nursing homes, spurring some improvements in quality. Public reporting is new, however, to Department of Veterans Affairs nursing homes (Community Living Centers [CLCs]). As part of a large, public integrated healthcare system, CLCs operate with unique financial and market incentives. Thus, their responses to public reporting may differ from private sector nursing homes. In three CLCs with varied public ratings, we used an exploratory, qualitative case study approach involving semi-structured interviews to compare how CLC leaders (n = 12) perceived public reporting and its influence on quality improvement. Across CLCs, respondents said public reporting was helpful for transparency and to provide an "outside perspective" on CLC performance. Respondents described employing similar strategies to improve their public ratings: using data, engaging staff, and clearly defining staff roles vis-à-vis quality improvement, although more effort was required to implement change in lower performing CLCs. Our findings augment those from prior studies and offer new insights into the potential for public reporting to spur quality improvement in public nursing homes and those that are part of integrated healthcare systems.

Measuring Nursing Home Performance Using Administrative Data

To improve the quality of nursing home care, reliable estimates of outcomes are essential. Obtaining such estimates requires optimal use of limited data, especially for small homes. We analyze the variation in mortality and hospital admissions across nursing homes in the Netherlands during the years 2010-2013. We use administrative data on all nursing home clients. We apply mixed-effects survival models, empirical Bayes estimation, and machine-learning techniques to optimally use the available longitudinal data. We find large differences in both outcomes across nursing homes, yet the estimates are surrounded by substantial uncertainty. We find no correlation between performance on mortality and avoidable hospital admissions, suggesting that these are related to different aspects of quality. Hence, caution is needed when evaluating the performance of individual nursing homes, especially when the number of outcome indicators is limited.

Assessing the impact of enforcement and compliance with minimum staffing standards on the quality of care in nursing homes: Evidence from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' staff star rating downgrade policy

Policymakers have historically attempted to influence quality in nursing homes through the imposition of minimum staffing standards and through the public dissemination of quality on websites like Care Compare. One current Federal standard necessitates a registered nurse (RN) on duty for at least eight consecutive hours each day. In 2018, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced that they would incentivize compliance with this requirement by downgrading nursing homes with 7+ days without an RN present during the quarter by one star on their Care Compare staffing domain quality rating. This study evaluates the impact of this new enforcement mechanism. Using an intent-to-treat sample of nursing homes at risk for downgrade with difference-in-differences and event study models, it finds that the policy increased compliance and staffing levels. Using the policy to instrument for full compliance, it finds that the daily presence of an RN causally improves several quality dimensions.

Intermediate Care Facilities for Individuals With Intellectual Disabilities: Does Ownership Type Affect Quality of Care?

Because many large, state-owned Intermediate Care Facilities for Individuals With Intellectual Disabilities (ICF/IIDs) have closed or downsized, their average size has fallen markedly, as has the number that are publicly owned. We probe the relationship between ownership type and four measures of care quality in ICF/IIDs. Data on deficiency citations suggest that for-profits underperform other ownership types, although data on complaints show no clear pattern. Meanwhile, data on staffing ratios and restrictive behavior management practices, based mostly on facility self-reports, generally tell the opposite story. Our results lend some credence to concerns regarding inadequate care in for-profit ICF/IIDs, while underscoring the importance of requiring ICF/IID operators to report more comprehensive, longitudinal data that are less prone to error and reporting bias.

Nursing home quality, COVID-19 deaths, and excess mortality

The COVID-19 pandemic in the US has been particularly devastating for nursing home residents. A key question is how have some nursing homes been able to effectively protect their residents, while others have not? Using data on the universe of US nursing homes, we examine whether establishment quality is predictive of COVID-19 mortality. Higher-quality nursing homes, as measured by CMS overall five-star rating, have substantially lower COVID-19 mortality through September of 2020. Quality does not predict the ability to prevent any COVID-19 resident or staff cases, but higher-quality establishments prevent the spread of resident infections conditional on having one. Preventing COVID-19 cases and deaths may come at some cost, as high-quality homes have substantially higher non-COVID deaths. The positive correlation between establishment quality and non-COVID mortality is strong enough that high-quality homes also have more total deaths than their low-quality counterparts and this relationship has grown with time. As of late April 2021, five-star homes have experienced 8.4 percent more total deaths than one-star homes.

Relationship Between Nursing Home Compare Improvement in Function Quality Measure and Physical Recovery After Hip Replacement

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether patients with a total or partial hip replacement admitted to a skilled nursing facility (SNF) after the improvement in function quality measure was added to Nursing Home Compare in July 2016 have greater physical recovery than patients admitted before July 2016.

DESIGN

Pre (January 1, 2015-June 30, 2016) vs post (July 1, 2016-December 31, 2017) design.

SETTING

Skilled nursing facilities (n=12,829).

PARTICIPANTS

Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries (N=106,832) discharged from acute hospitals to SNF after hip replacement between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2017.

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The 5- and 14-day minimum data set assessments were used to calculate total scores for the quality measure, self-care, mobility, and balance. We calculated the average adjusted change per 10 days and any improvement between the 5- and 14-day assessments.

RESULTS

The average adjusted change per 10 days for the quality measure total score for patients admitted before July 2016 and after July 2016 was 1.00 points (standard error, 0010) and 1.06 points (standard error, 0.010), respectively (P<.01). This was a relative increase of 6.0%. Among patients admitted to a SNF before July 2016, 44.4% (standard error, 0.06) had any improvement in the quality measure total score compared with 45.5% (standard error, 0.23) of patients admitted after July 2016 (P<.01). This was a relative increase of 2.5%. The adjusted change per 10 days and percentage of patients who had any improvement in the total scores for self-care, mobility, and balance were all significantly higher after July 2016.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients admitted to a SNF after a hip replacement after July 2016 had greater physical recovery than patients admitted before the improvement in function quality measure was added to Nursing Home Compare.

Medicare Usage Changes in Nursing Homes and Their Impacts on Long-Stay Resident Outcomes

Medicare provides skilled nursing facility (SNF) coverage for short-stay rehabilitation in nursing homes (NHs) at a better rate than Medicaid covers long-term NH care. National trends of increasing Medicare days culminated in 2010/2011 with a reduction to the SNF rates. Before the cuts, NHs that increased SNF days also improved outcomes for long-stay residents, including pain, pressure ulcer, and functional decline outcomes, suggesting spillover effects of SNF days. We replicated the prior study to determine how changes in SNF days and long-stay outcomes related following the rate cut. From 2011 to 2014, SNF days decreased and all three study outcomes improved. Spillover effects were not consistently observed. Decreasing SNF days was associated with increasing percentages of long-stay residents with daily pain and with decreasing percentages of long-stay residents getting pressure ulcers. Research on these associations in more recent years is needed to determine whether they persist and to inform practice.

Restorative Quality Improvement: Novel Application of Six Sigma in a Skilled Nursing Facility

BACKGROUND

Six Sigma is a quality improvement (QI) method used in hospitals, but not typically in nursing homes (NHs), to reduce service variability and expenditures.

LOCAL PROBLEM

The existing QI process for functional maintenance program (FMP) charting/auditing in an urban NH allowed variability and lost revenue.

METHODS

A single-group pre/posttest design with analysis of variance and t-test analysis was used to implement Six Sigma for the FMP process.

INTERVENTION

Phases of Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control addressed performance objectives of FMP capacity; staff retention; congruence between prescribed, performed, and charted FMPs; and month-end summaries of resident status on FMPs.

RESULTS

With the existing staff, capability was increased by 17 residents ($200 000 revenue) and 90% to 100% charting congruence was achieved. Limited success was attributed to lack of skill diffusion, team communication, manager availability, and project prioritization.

CONCLUSIONS

Six Sigma was moderately successful when applied in a single NH for QI.

Evaluating national trends in outcomes after implementation of a star rating system: Results from dialysis facility compare

OBJECTIVE

To examine which factors are driving improvement in the Dialysis Facility Compare (DFC) star ratings and to test whether nonclinical facility characteristics are associated with observed longitudinal changes in the star ratings.

DATA SOURCES

Data were collected from eligible patients in over 6,000 Medicare-certified dialysis facilities from three annual star rating and individual measure updates, publicly released on DFC in October 2015, October 2016, and April 2018.

STUDY DESIGN

Changes in the star rating and individual quality measures were investigated across three public data releases. Year-to-year changes in the star ratings were linked to facility characteristics, adjusting for baseline differences in quality measure performance.

DATA COLLECTION

Data from publicly reported quality measures, including standardized mortality, hospitalization, and transfusion ratios, dialysis adequacy, type of vascular access for dialysis, and management of mineral and bone disease, were extracted from annual DFC data releases.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

The proportion of four- and five-star facilities increased from 30.0% to 53.4% between October 2015 and April 2018. Quality improvement was driven by the domain of care containing the dialysis adequacy and hypercalcemia measures. Additionally, independently owned facilities and facilities belonging to smaller dialysis organizations had significantly lower odds of year-to-year improvement than facilities belonging to either of the two large dialysis organizations (Odds Ratio [OR]: 0.736, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 0.631-0.856 and OR: 0.797, 95% CI: 0.723-0.879, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The percentage of four- and five-star facilities has increased markedly over a three-year time period. These changes were driven by improvement in the specific quality measures that may be most directly under the control of the dialysis facility.

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.

Two Decades of Nursing Home Compare: What Have We Learned?

Approximately two decades ago, federally mandated public reporting began for U.S. nursing homes through a system now known as Nursing Home Compare. The goals were to provide information to enable consumers to choose higher quality nursing homes and to incent providers to improve the quality of care delivered. We conduct a systematic review of the literature on responses to Nursing Home Compare and its effectiveness in meeting these goals. We find evidence of modest but meaningful response by both consumers and providers. However, we also find evidence that some improvement in scores does not reflect true quality improvement, that disparities by race and income have increased, that risk-adjustment of the measures is likely inadequate, and that several key domains of quality are not represented. Our results support moderate success of Nursing Home Compare in achieving intended goals but also reveal the need for continued refinement.

Prioritizing LTSS Quality: Exploring the Views of Older Adults, Families, and Professionals

We conducted a cross-sectional survey involving 349 older adults, family members, and long-term services and supports (LTSS) professionals in Minnesota to assess their views on priorities for residential LTSS quality. We found considerable agreement among the three groups on the highest priorities to ensure the wellbeing of older adults who use LTSS: safety, dignity, and staffing. Relationships were also viewed as a high priority. However, older adults prioritized the physical environment over professionals, and they expressed more varied opinions on priorities overall. Older adults also consistently rated autonomy/choice as less important than other quality domains, a finding worth further exploration.

Consumer Response to Composite Ratings of Nursing Home Quality

Health care report cards are intended to address information asymmetries and enable consumers to choose providers of better quality. However, the form of the information may matter to consumers. Nursing Home Compare, a website that publishes report cards for nursing homes, went from publishing a large set of indicators to a composite rating in which nursing homes are assigned one to five stars. We evaluate whether the simplified ratings motivated consumers to choose better-rated nursing homes. We use a regression discontinuity design to estimate changes in new admissions six months after the publication of the ratings. Our main results show that nursing homes that obtained an additional star gained more admissions, with heterogeneous effects depending on baseline number of stars. We conclude that the form of quality reporting matters to consumers, and that the increased use of composite ratings is likely to increase consumer response.

Medicaid and Nursing Home Choice: Why Do Duals End Up in Low-Quality Facilities?

We provide empirical evidence on the relative importance of specific observable factors that can explain why individuals enrolled in both Medicare and Medicaid (duals) are concentrated in lower quality nursing homes, relative to those not on Medicaid. Descriptive results show that duals are 9.7 percentage points more likely than nonduals to be admitted to a low-quality (1-2 stars) nursing home. Using the Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition approach in a multivariate framework, we find that 35.4% of the difference in admission to low-quality nursing homes can be explained by differences in the distribution of observable characteristics. Differences in education and distance to high-quality nursing homes are important drivers, as are health status and race. Our findings highlight the need for creative policy solutions targeting the modifiable factors to reduce the disparity.

Are Medicare's Nursing Home Compare Ratings Accurate Predictors of 90-Day Complications, Readmission, and Bundle Cost for Patients Undergoing Primary Total Joint Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

Nursing Home Compare (NHC) ratings, created and maintained by Medicare, are used by both hospitals and consumers to aid in the skilled nursing facility (SNF) selection process. To date, no studies have linked NHC ratings to actual episode-based outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether NHC ratings are valid predictors of 90-day complications, readmission, and bundle costs for patients discharged to an SNF after primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA).

METHODS

All SNF-discharged primary TJA cases in 2017 at a multihospital academic health system were queried. Demographic, psychosocial, and clinical variables were manually extracted from the health record. Medicare NHC ratings were then collected for each SNF. For patients in the Medicare bundle, postacute and total bundle cost was extracted from claims.

RESULTS

Four hundred eighty-eight patients were discharged to a total of 105 unique SNFs. In multivariate analysis, overall NHC rating was not predictive of 90-day readmission/major complications, >75th percentile postacute cost, or 90-day bundle cost exceeding the target price. SNF health inspection and quality measure ratings were also not predictive of 90-day readmission/major complications or bundle performance. A higher SNF staffing rating was independently associated with a decreased odds for >75th percentile 90-day postacute spend (odds ratio, 0.58; P = .01) and a 90-day bundle cost exceeding the target price (odds ratio = 0.69; P = .02) but was similarly not predictive of 90-day readmission/complications.

CONCLUSION

Results of our study suggest that Medicare's NHC tool is not a useful predictor of 90-day costs, complications, or readmissions for SNFs within our health system.

Does Nursing Home Compare Reflect Patient Safety In Nursing Homes?

The past several decades have seen significant policy efforts to improve the quality of care in nursing homes, but the patient safety movement has largely ignored this setting. In this study we compared nursing homes' performance on several composite quality measures from Nursing Home Compare, the most prominent recent example of a national policy aimed at improving the quality of nursing home care, to their performance on measures of patient safety in nursing homes such as pressure sores, infections, falls, and medication errors. Although Nursing Home Compare captures some aspects of patient safety, we found the relationship to be weak and somewhat inconsistent, leaving consumers who care about patient safety with little guidance. We recommend that Nursing Home Compare be refined to provide a clearer picture of patient safety and quality of life, allowing consumers to weight these domains according to their preferences and priorities.

Nursing Home Compare Star Rankings and the Variation in Potentially Preventable Emergency Department Visits and Hospital Admissions

Measurement of the quality of US health care increasingly emphasizes clinical outcomes over clinical processes. Nursing Home Compare Star Ratings are provided by Medicare to help select better nursing home care. The authors determined the rates and types of 2 important clinical outcomes-potentially preventable hospital admissions and potentially preventable emergency department (ED) visits-for a subset of 439,011 long-term nursing homes residents residing in 12,883 nursing homes throughout the United States over a 2-year period (2010-2011) and compared them with the Star Rating system. This study found that (1) the likelihood of potentially preventable events increases with increasing burden of chronic illness, (2) the principle reasons for hospital admissions and ED visits (eg, septicemia, pneumonia, confusion, gastroenteritis) are not part of existing nursing home quality measures, (3) the rate of potentially preventable admissions and ED visits for nursing homes residents varies greatly both across and within states, with 5 states having in excess of 20% more than the national average for both, and (4) the Nursing Home Compare Stars measure has limited correlation with rates of these potentially preventable events. Nursing Home Compare Star rankings could benefit by incorporating outcomes measures such as preventable hospitalizations and ED visits, and by comparing nursing home performance on results drawn from across states rather than within them. Such reform could better help users find nursing homes of higher quality and stimulate homes to improve quality in ways that benefit residents.