Aged Residential Care Health Utilisation Study (ARCHUS): a randomised controlled trial to reduce acute hospitalisations from residential aged care

Linking hospital and residential aged care: a nurse-led vascular-geriatric model of care

The interplay of frailty, multimorbidity and polypharmacy in the older person results in complex care needs. Monitoring and proactive management of chronic diseases in this context can be challenging. Early identification of deterioration reduces the risk of hospitalisation in older people, particularly in residential care, where the person can be particularly vulnerable. Deterioration of a resident often results in an expectation of in-hospital care, which especially where there are life-limiting conditions, may not align to the wishes of the person and their family. However, links between tertiary hospital services with the expertise to upskill and mentor those providing the more complex care to residents of aged care facilities need to be developed. Current models of care need to be adapted to incorporate the provision of specialist nursing within residential facilities to support higher-level care delivered in the person's familiar environment, improve the person and family experience, and reduce the costs and potential for iatrogenic problems associated with hospitalisation. Vascular dysfunction is common in aged care and results in impaired healing and complex wounds. We developed a Vascular and Geriatric (VaG) model of care to support specialist care for aged care residents with vascular dysfunction. The VaG model enhances existing links between hospital and residential care settings and builds workforce capacity in residential care facilities by the use of clinical consultation, peer learning and networking to increase the vascular skill set initially of the hospital outreach nurse and then modelled to residential care clinicians. This paper reports the development and implementation of the VaG model as part of the Aged Care Outreach Service.

Staff Training Interventions to Improve End-of-Life Care of Nursing Home Residents: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to review evidence from all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using palliative care education or staff training as an intervention to improve nursing home residents' quality of life (QOL) or quality of dying (QOD) or to reduce burdensome hospitalizations.

DESIGN

A systematic review with a narrative summary.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Residents in nursing homes and other long-term care facilities.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Google Scholar, references of known articles, previous reviews, and recent volumes of key journals. RCTs were included in the review. Methodologic quality was assessed.

RESULTS

The search yielded 932 articles after removing the duplicates. Of them, 16 cluster RCTs fulfilled inclusion criteria for analysis. There was a great variety in the interventions with respect to learning methods, intensity, complexity, and length of staff training. Most interventions featured other elements besides staff training. In the 6 high-quality trials, only 1 showed a reduction in hospitalizations, whereas among 6 moderate-quality trials 2 suggested a reduction in hospitalizations. None of the high-quality trials showed effects on residents' QOL or QOD. Staff reported an improved QOD in 1 moderate-quality trial.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Irrespective of the means of staff training, there were surprisingly few effects of education on residents' QOL, QOD, or burdensome hospitalizations. Further studies are needed to explore the reasons behind these findings.

Reducing emergency presentations from long-term care: A before-and-after study of a multidisciplinary team intervention

INTRODUCTION

The complexity of care required by many older people living in long-term care (LTC) facilities poses challenges that can lead to potentially avoidable referrals to a hospital emergency department (ED). The Aged Residential Care Intervention Project (ARCHIP) ran an implementation study to evaluate a multidisciplinary team (MDT) intervention supporting LTC facility staff to decrease potentially avoidable ED presentations by residents.

METHODS

ARCHIP (conducted in 21 facilities [1,296 beds] with previously noted high ED referral rates) comprised clinical coaching for LTC facility staff by a gerontology nurse specialist (GNS) and an MDT (facility senior nurse, resident's general practitioner, GNS, geriatrician, pharmacist) review of selected high-risk residents' care-plans. A before-after repeated measures analysis was conducted for 9 months before and 9 months after intervention commencement (a 29-month period because of staggered facility enrolment). Modelling was adjusted for time trend, seasonality, facility size, and cluster effect.

RESULTS

ED admission rate ratio post- versus pre-intervention was 0.75 (95% C.I. 0.63, 0.89, p-value = 0.0008), a 25% reduction in ED presentations post-intervention. A sensitivity model used a shorter, staggered time period centred on intervention start (9 months pre-intervention and 9 months post-intervention) for each facility, and a four-level categorical intervention variable testing intervention effect over time. The sensitivity test showed a 24% reduction in ED presentations in months 1-3 post-intervention (p-value = 0.07), a 34% reduction in months 4-6 (p-value = 0.01), and a 32% reduction in ED presentations in months 7-9 (p-value = 0.03). However, when the higher ED referral rates for 3 months immediately pre-intervention were modelled, the impact of the intervention on ED presentation rates reverted almost to previous levels.

KEY CONCLUSIONS

A GNS-led MDT outreach intervention, targeted at selected conditions, decreases avoidable ED admissions of high-risk residents from selected facilities.

Effective health care for older people living and dying in care homes: a realist review

Background

Care home residents in England have variable access to health care services. There is currently no coherent policy or consensus about the best arrangements to meet these needs. The purpose of this review was to explore the evidence for how different service delivery models for care home residents support and/or improve wellbeing and health-related outcomes in older people living and dying in care homes.

Methods

We conceptualised models of health care provision to care homes as complex interventions. We used a realist review approach to develop a preliminary understanding of what supported good health care provision to care homes. We completed a scoping of the literature and interviewed National Health Service and Local Authority commissioners, providers of services to care homes, representatives from the Regulator, care home managers, residents and their families. We used these data to develop theoretical propositions to be tested in the literature to explain why an intervention may be effective in some situations and not others. We searched electronic databases and related grey literature. Finally the findings were reviewed with an external advisory group.

Results

Strategies that support and sustain relational working between care home staff and visiting health care professionals explained the observed differences in how health care interventions were accepted and embedded into care home practice. Actions that encouraged visiting health care professionals and care home staff jointly to identify, plan and implement care home appropriate protocols for care, when supported by ongoing facilitation from visiting clinicians, were important. Contextual factors such as financial incentives or sanctions, agreed protocols, clinical expertise and structured approaches to assessment and care planning could support relational working to occur, but of themselves appeared insufficient to achieve change.

Conclusion

How relational working is structured between health and care home staff is key to whether health service interventions achieve health related outcomes for residents and their respective organisations. The belief that either paying clinicians to do more in care homes and/or investing in training of care home staff is sufficient for better outcomes was not supported.

The 'Big Five'. Hypothesis generation: a multidisciplinary intervention package reduces disease-specific hospitalisations from long-term care: a post hoc analysis of the ARCHUS cluster-randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

long-term care (LTC) residents have higher hospitalisation rates than non-LTC residents. Rapid decline may follow hospitalisations, hence the importance of preventing unnecessary hospitalisations. Literature describes diagnosis-specific interventions (for cardiac failure, ischaemic heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, stroke, pneumonia-termed 'big five' diagnoses), impacting on hospitalisations of older community-dwellers, but few RCTs show reductions in acute admissions from LTC.

METHODS

LTC facilities with higher than expected hospitalisations were recruited for a cluster-randomised controlled trial (RCT) of facility-based complex, non-disease-specific, 9-month intervention comprising gerontology nurse specialist (GNS)-led staff education, facility benchmarking, GNS resident review and multidisciplinary discussion of residents selected using standard criteria. In this post hoc exploratory analysis, the outcome was acute hospitalisations for 'big five' diagnoses. Re-randomisation analyses were used for end points during months 1-14. For end points during months 4-14, proportional hazards models are adjusted for within-facility clustering.

RESULTS

we recruited 36 facilities with 1,998 residents (1,408 female; mean age 82.9 years); 1,924 were alive at 3 months. The intervention did not impact overall rates of acute hospitalisations or mortality (previously published), but resulted in fewer 'big five' admissions (RR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.54-0.99; P = 0.043) with no significant difference in the rate of other acute admissions. When considering events occurring after 3 months (only), the intervention group were 34.7% (HR = 0.65; 95% CI = 0.49-0.88; P = 0.005) less likely to have a 'big five' acute admission than controls, with no differences in likelihood of acute admissions for other diagnoses (P = 0.96).

CONCLUSIONS

this generic intervention may reduce admissions for common conditions which the literature shows are impacted by disease-specific admission reduction strategies.

Interventions to optimise prescribing for older people in care homes

BACKGROUND

There is a substantial body of evidence that prescribing for care home residents is suboptimal and requires improvement. Consequently, there is a need to identify effective interventions to optimise prescribing and resident outcomes in this context. This is an update of a previously published review (Alldred 2013).

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the review was to determine the effect of interventions to optimise overall prescribing for older people living in care homes.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (including the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Specialised Register), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL to May 2015. We also searched clinical trial registries for relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials evaluating interventions aimed at optimising prescribing for older people (aged 65 years or older) living in institutionalised care facilities. Studies were included if they measured one or more of the following primary outcomes: adverse drug events; hospital admissions; mortality; or secondary outcomes, quality of life (using validated instrument); medication-related problems; medication appropriateness (using validated instrument); medicine costs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened titles and abstracts, assessed studies for eligibility, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We presented a narrative summary of results.

MAIN RESULTS

The 12 included studies involved 10,953 residents in 355 (range 1 to 85) care homes in ten countries. Nine studies were cluster-randomised controlled trials and three studies were patient-randomised controlled trials. The interventions evaluated were diverse and often multifaceted. Medication review was a component of ten studies. Four studies involved multidisciplinary case-conferencing, five studies involved an educational element for health and care professionals and one study evaluated the use of clinical decision support technology. We did not combine the results in a meta-analysis due to heterogeneity across studies. Interventions to optimise prescribing may lead to fewer days in hospital (one study out of eight; low certainty evidence), a slower decline in health-related quality of life (one study out of two; low certainty evidence), the identification and resolution of medication-related problems (seven studies; low certainty evidence), and may lead to improved medication appropriateness (five studies out of five studies; low certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether the intervention improves/reduces medicine costs (five studies; very low certainty evidence) and it may make little or no difference on adverse drug events (two studies; low certainty evidence) or mortality (six studies; low certainty evidence). The risk of bias across studies was heterogeneous.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We could not draw robust conclusions from the evidence due to variability in design, interventions, outcomes and results. The interventions implemented in the studies in this review led to the identification and resolution of medication-related problems and improvements in medication appropriateness, however evidence of a consistent effect on resident-related outcomes was not found. There is a need for high-quality cluster-randomised controlled trials testing clinical decision support systems and multidisciplinary interventions that measure well-defined, important resident-related outcomes.

The Aged Residential Care Healthcare Utilization Study (ARCHUS): a multidisciplinary, cluster randomized controlled trial designed to reduce acute avoidable hospitalizations from long-term care facilities

OBJECTIVE

To assess effect of a complex, multidisciplinary intervention aimed at reducing avoidable acute hospitalization of residents of residential aged care (RAC) facilities.

DESIGN

Cluster randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

RAC facilities with higher than expected hospitalizations in Auckland, New Zealand, were recruited and randomized to intervention or control.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1998 residents of 18 intervention facilities and 18 control facilities.

INTERVENTION

A facility-based complex intervention of 9 months' duration. The intervention comprised gerontology nurse specialist (GNS)-led staff education, facility bench-marking, GNS resident review, and multidisciplinary (geriatrician, primary-care physician, pharmacist, GNS, and facility nurse) discussion of residents selected using standard criteria.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary end point was avoidable hospitalizations. Secondary end points were all acute admissions, mortality, and acute bed-days. Follow-up was for a total of 14 months.

RESULTS

The intervention did not affect main study end points: number of acute avoidable hospital admissions (RR 1.07; 95% CI 0.85-1.36; P = .59) or mortality (RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.76-1.61; P = .62).

CONCLUSIONS

This multidisciplinary intervention, packaging selected case review, and staff education had no overall impact on acute hospital admissions or mortality. This may have considerable implications for resourcing in the acute and RAC sectors in the face of population aging. Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12611000187943).

Selecting long-term care facilities with high use of acute hospitalisations: issues and options

BACKGROUND

This paper considers approaches to the question "Which long-term care facilities have residents with high use of acute hospitalisations?" It compares four methods of identifying long-term care facilities with high use of acute hospitalisations by demonstrating four selection methods, identifies key factors to be resolved when deciding which methods to employ, and discusses their appropriateness for different research questions.

METHODS

OPAL was a census-type survey of aged care facilities and residents in Auckland, New Zealand, in 2008. It collected information about facility management and resident demographics, needs and care. Survey records (149 aged care facilities, 6271 residents) were linked to hospital and mortality records routinely assembled by health authorities. The main ranking endpoint was acute hospitalisations for diagnoses that were classified as potentially avoidable. Facilities were ranked using 1) simple event counts per person, 2) event rates per year of resident follow-up, 3) statistical model of rates using four predictors, and 4) change in ranks between methods 2) and 3). A generalized mixed model was used for Method 3 to handle the clustered nature of the data.

RESULTS

3048 potentially avoidable hospitalisations were observed during 22 months' follow-up. The same "top ten" facilities were selected by Methods 1 and 2. The statistical model (Method 3), predicting rates from resident and facility characteristics, ranked facilities differently than these two simple methods. The change-in-ranks method identified a very different set of "top ten" facilities. All methods showed a continuum of use, with no clear distinction between facilities with higher use.

CONCLUSION

Choice of selection method should depend upon the purpose of selection. To monitor performance during a period of change, a recent simple rate, count per resident, or even count per bed, may suffice. To find high-use facilities regardless of resident needs, recent history of admissions is highly predictive. To target a few high-use facilities that have high rates after considering facility and resident characteristics, model residuals or a large increase in rank may be preferable.