Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
J Am Med Dir Assoc ; 22(6): 1128-1132, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1174340

ABSTRACT

Residents of long-term care (LTC) homes have suffered disproportionately during the COVID-19 pandemic, from the virus itself and often from the imposition of lockdown measures. Provincial Geriatrics Leadership Ontario, in collaboration with interRAI and the International Federation on Aging, hosted a virtual Town Hall on September 25, 2020. The purpose of this event was to bring together international perspectives from researchers, clinicians, and policy experts to address important themes potentially amenable to timely policy interventions. This article summarizes these themes and the ensuing discussions among 130 attendees from 5 continents. The disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on frail residents of LTC homes reflects a systematic lack of equitable prioritization by health system decision makers around the world. The primary risk factors for an outbreak in an LTC home were outbreaks in the surrounding community, high staff and visitor traffic in large facilities, and crowding of residents in ageing buildings. Infection control measures must be prioritized in LTC homes, though care must be taken to protect frail and vulnerable residents from their overly blunt application that deprives residents from appropriate physical and psychosocial support. Staffing, in terms of overall numbers, training, and leadership skills, was inadequate. The built environment of LTC homes can be configured for both optimal resident well-being and infection control. Infection control and resident wellness need not be mutually exclusive. Improving outcomes for LTC residents requires more staffing with proper training and interprofessional leadership. All these initiatives must be underpinned by an effective quality assurance system based on standardized, comprehensive, accessible, and clinically relevant data, and which can support broad communities of practice capable of effecting real and meaningful change for frail older persons, wherever they chose to reside.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Long-Term Care , Pandemics , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Built Environment , COVID-19/prevention & control , Frail Elderly , Health Workforce , Humans , Infection Control , Ontario
2.
J Am Med Dir Assoc ; 22(6): 1133-1137, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1141947

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The vaccination of skilled nursing facility (SNF) staff is a critical component in the battle against COVID-19. Together, residents and staff constitute the single most vulnerable population in the pandemic. The health of these workers is completely entangled with the health of those they care for. Vaccination of SNF staff is key to increasing uptake of the vaccine, reducing health disparities, and reopening SNFs to visitors. Yet, as the vaccine rollout begins, some SNF staff are declining to be vaccinated. The purpose of this article is to describe reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy reported by staff of skilled nursing facilities and understand factors that could potentially reduce hesitancy. DESIGN: Five virtual focus groups were conducted with staff of SNFs as part of a larger project to improve vaccine uptake. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Focus groups with 58 staff members were conducted virtually using Zoom. MEASURES: Focus groups sought to elicit concerns, perspectives, and experiences related to COVID-19 testing and vaccination. RESULTS: Our findings indicate that some SNF staff are hesitant to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Reasons for this hesitancy include beliefs that the vaccine has been developed too fast and without sufficient testing; personal fears about pre-existing medical conditions, and more general distrust of the government. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: SNF staff indicate that seeing people like themselves receive the vaccination is more important than seeing public figures. We discuss the vaccination effort as a social enterprise and the need to develop long-term care provider-academic-community partnerships in response to COVID-19 and in expectation of future pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 , Health Personnel/psychology , Skilled Nursing Facilities , Vaccination Refusal/psychology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Testing , Focus Groups , Humans
3.
J Am Geriatr Soc ; 68(12): 2716-2720, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-840738

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Infection screening tools classically define fever as 38.0°C (100.4°F). Frail older adults may not mount the same febrile response to systemic infection as younger or healthier individuals. We evaluate temperature trends among nursing home (NH) residents undergoing diagnostic SARS-CoV-2 testing and describe the diagnostic accuracy of temperature measurements for predicting test-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study evaluating diagnostic accuracy of pre-SARS-CoV-2 testing temperature changes. SETTING: Two separate NH cohorts tested diagnostically (e.g., for symptoms) for SARS-CoV-2. PARTICIPANTS Veterans residing in Veterans Affairs (VA) managed NHs and residents in a private national chain of community NHs. MEASUREMENTS: For both cohorts, we determined the sensitivity, specificity, and Youden's index with different temperature cutoffs for SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction results. RESULTS: The VA cohort consisted of 1,301 residents in 134 facilities from March 1, 2020, to May 14, 2020, with 25% confirmed for SARS-CoV-2. The community cohort included 3,368 residents spread across 282 facilities from February 18, 2020, to June 9, 2020, and 42% were confirmed for SARS-CoV-2. The VA cohort was younger, less White, and mostly male. A temperature testing threshold of 37.2°C has better sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2, 76% and 34% in the VA and community NH, respectively, versus 38.0°C with 43% and 12% sensitivity, respectively. CONCLUSION: A definition of 38.0°C for fever in NH screening tools should be lowered to improve predictive accuracy for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Stakeholders should carefully consider the impact of adopting lower testing thresholds on testing availability, cost, and burden on staff and residents. Temperatures alone have relatively low sensitivity/specificity, and we advocate any threshold be used as part of a screening tool, along with other signs and symptoms of infection.


Subject(s)
Aging/physiology , Body Temperature/physiology , COVID-19 , Nursing Homes/statistics & numerical data , Thermography , Veterans Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19 Testing/methods , Dimensional Measurement Accuracy , Female , Homes for the Aged/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Mass Screening/methods , Mass Screening/standards , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity , Thermography/methods , Thermography/standards , Thermography/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology
4.
J Am Med Dir Assoc ; 21(7): 895-899.e1, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-591519

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Many nursing home residents infected with SARS-CoV-2 fail to be identified with standard screening for the associated COVID-19 syndrome. Current nursing home COVID-19 screening guidance includes assessment for fever, defined as a temperature of at least 38.0°C. The objective of this study was to describe the temperature changes before and after universal testing for SARS-CoV-2 in nursing home residents. DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The Veterans Administration (VA) operates 134 Community Living Centers (CLC), similar to nursing homes, that house residents who cannot live independently. VA guidance to CLCs directed daily clinical screening for COVID-19 that included temperature assessment. MEASURES: All CLC residents (n = 7325) underwent SARS-CoV-2 testing. We report the temperature in the window of 14 days before and after universal SARS-CoV-2 testing among CLC residents. Baseline temperature was calculated for 5 days before the study window. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 was identified in 443 (6.0%) residents. The average maximum temperature in SARS-CoV-2-positive residents was 37.66 (0.69) compared with 37.11 (0.36) (P = .001) in SARS-CoV-2-negative residents. Temperatures in those with SARS-CoV-2 began rising 7 days before testing and remained elevated during the 14-day follow-up. Among SARS-CoV-2-positive residents, only 26.6% (n = 118) met the fever threshold of 38.0°C during the survey period. Most residents (62.5%, n = 277) with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 did experience 2 or more 0.5°C elevations above their baseline values. One cohort of SARS-CoV-2 residents' (20.3%, n = 90) temperatures never deviated >0.5°C from baseline. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: A single screening for temperature is unlikely to detect nursing home residents with SARS-CoV-2. Repeated temperature measurement with a patient-derived baseline can increase sensitivity. The current fever threshold as a screening criteria for SARS-CoV-2 infection should be reconsidered.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Fever/diagnosis , Mass Screening/methods , Nursing Homes/organization & administration , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Skilled Nursing Facilities/organization & administration , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Body Temperature/physiology , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Cohort Studies , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Early Diagnosis , Female , Fever/epidemiology , Humans , Infection Control , Male , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Thermometers/statistics & numerical data , United States , Veterans
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL