Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 23
Filter
1.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 42(11): 1333-1339, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1574858

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: We sought to contain a healthcare-associated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, to evaluate contributory factors, and to prevent future outbreaks. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental cluster-control outbreak evaluation. METHODS: All patients and staff on the outbreak ward (case cluster), and randomly selected patients and staff on COVID-19 wards (positive control cluster) and a non-COVID-19 wards (negative control cluster) underwent reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing. Hand hygiene and personal protective equipment (PPE) compliance, detection of environmental SARS-COV-2 RNA, patient behavior, and SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody prevalence were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 145 staff and 26 patients were exposed, resulting in 24 secondary cases. Also, 4 of 14 (29%) staff and 7 of 10 (70%) patients were asymptomatic or presymptomatic. There was no difference in mean cycle threshold between asymptomatic or presymptomatic versus symptomatic individuals. None of 32 randomly selected staff from the control wards tested positive. Environmental RNA detection levels were higher on the COVID-19 ward than on the negative control ward (OR, 19.98; 95% CI, 2.63-906.38; P < .001). RNA levels on the COVID-19 ward (where there were no outbreaks) and the outbreak ward were similar (OR, 2.38; P = .18). Mean monthly hand hygiene compliance, based on 20,146 observations (over preceding year), was lower on the outbreak ward (P < .006). Compared to both control wards, the proportion of staff with detectable antibodies was higher on the outbreak ward (OR, 3.78; 95% CI, 1.01-14.25; P = .008). CONCLUSION: Staff seroconversion was more likely during a short-term outbreak than from sustained duty on a COVID-19 ward. Environmental contamination and PPE use were similar on the outbreak and control wards. Patient noncompliance, decreased hand hygiene, and asymptomatic or presymptomatic transmission were more frequent on the outbreak ward.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Dementia , Stroke , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Infection Control , RNA, Viral , SARS-CoV-2
2.
Age Ageing ; 50(5): 1454-1463, 2021 09 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1406457

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Sars-CoV-2 outbreaks resulted in a high case fatality rate in nursing homes (NH) worldwide. It is unknown to which extent presymptomatic residents and staff contribute to the spread of the virus. AIMS: To assess the contribution of asymptomatic and presymptomatic residents and staff in SARS-CoV-2 transmission during a large outbreak in a Dutch NH. METHODS: Observational study in a 185-bed NH with two consecutive testing strategies: testing of symptomatic cases only, followed by weekly facility-wide testing of staff and residents regardless of symptoms. Nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal testing with RT-PCR for SARs-CoV-2, including sequencing of positive samples, was conducted with a standardised symptom assessment. RESULTS: 185 residents and 244 staff participated. Sequencing identified one cluster. In the symptom-based test strategy period, 3/39 residents were presymptomatic versus 38/74 residents in the period of weekly facility-wide testing (P-value < 0.001). In total, 51/59 (91.1%) of SARS-CoV-2 positive staff was symptomatic, with no difference between both testing strategies (P-value 0.763). Loss of smell and taste, sore throat, headache or myalga was hardly reported in residents compared to staff (P-value <0.001). Median Ct-value of presymptomatic residents was 21.3, which did not differ from symptomatic (20.8) or asymptomatic (20.5) residents (P-value 0.624). CONCLUSIONS: Symptoms in residents and staff are insufficiently recognised, reported or attributed to a possible SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, residents without (recognised) symptoms showed the same potential for viral shedding as residents with symptoms. Weekly testing was an effective strategy for early identification of SARS-Cov-2 cases, resulting in fast mitigation of the outbreak.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Metadata , Nursing Homes
3.
Aging Dis ; 12(3): 710-717, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1315005

ABSTRACT

In December 2019, the People's Republic of China and the World Health Organization first reported on a cluster of pneumonia with an unknown cause. Nine months later more than 1.4 million people have died from COVID 19. In this work, the effects of the COVID 19 pandemic on five nursing homes in Austria, which cared for 889 residents in the first half of 2020, were examined. The research question was whether the measures taken were appropriate to prevent an outbreak within the individual facilities. To detect previously unrecognized infections, the present study evaluated the prevalence of neutralizing antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 virus in residents and employees of the nursing homes. Following the analysis of blood samples, the prospectively collected data was connected to data from screening examinations and data from contact tracing. The present study demonstrated an overall prevalence of neutralizing antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 virus in nursing homes of 3.7%. Whereas the prevalence in those facilities that have never been hit by an outbreak is 0%, the prevalence in those facilities with an outbreak is up to 4.9%. Neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were detected in 35 persons. A retrospective analysis of all 5 included nursing homes demonstrated that upon regular clinical screening in combination with PCRs an infection with SARS-COV-2 was detected in 66 residents and 24 employees from different professional groups. In only 25 of the 35 persons with neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 an infection was proven in advance. This study suggests that specific measures can prevent transmission within a health care facility. Nevertheless, the results also show that a risk reduction to 0% cannot be achieved. In preparation for further pandemic waves there is still the need to reduce the probability of a transmission in nursing homes with specific test strategies.

4.
Age Ageing ; 50(4): 1038-1047, 2021 06 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1287983

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Nursing homes for older adults have concentrated large numbers of severe cases and deaths for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: Point seroprevalence study of nursing homes to describe the demography and characteristic of severe acute respiratory syndrome by coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immunoglobulin G (IgG)-positive residents and staff. RESULTS: Clinical information and blood samples were available for 9,332 residents (mean age 86.7 ± 8.1 years, 76.4% women) and 10,614 staff (mean age 45.6 ± 11.5, 86.2% women). Up to 84.4% of residents had frailty, 84.9% co-morbidity and 69.3% cognitive impairment; 65.2% of workers were health-aides.COVID-19 seroprevalence was 55.4% (95% confidence interval (CI), 54.4-56.4) for older adults and 31.5% (30.6-32.4) for staff. In multivariable analysis, frailty of residents was related with seropositivity (odds ratio (OR): 1.19, P = 0.02). In the case of staff, age > 50 years (2.10, P < 0.001), obesity (1.19, P = 0.01), being a health-aide (1.94, P < 0.001), working in a center with high seroprevalence in residents (3.49, P < 0.001) and contact with external cases of COVID-19 (1.52, P < 0.001) were factors associated with seropositivity. Past symptoms of COVID-19 were good predictors of seropositivity for residents (5.41, P < 0.001) and staff (2.52, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Level of dependency influences risk of COVID-19 among residents. Individual and work factors, contacts outside the nursing home are associated with COVID-19 exposure in staff members. It is key to strengthen control measures to prevent the introduction of COVID-19 into care facilities from the community.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Demography , Female , Humans , Male , Nursing Homes , Seroepidemiologic Studies
5.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 43(8): 997-1003, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1270639

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate trends in racial and ethnic disparities in weekly cumulative rates of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases and deaths in Connecticut nursing homes. DESIGN: Longitudinal analysis of nursing-home COVID-19 reports and other databases. Multivariable negative binomial models were used to estimate disparities in COVID-19 incidence and fatality rates across nursing-home groups with varying proportions of racial and ethnic minority residents, defined as low-, medium-, medium-high-, and high-proportion groups. Trends in such disparities were estimated from week 1 (April 13) to week 10 (ending on June 19, 2020). SETTING: The study was conducted across 211 nursing homes. RESULTS: The average number of cases ranged from 6.1 cases per facility for the low-proportion group to 11.7 cases per facility for the high-proportion group in week 1, and from 26.7 to 58.5 cases per facility in week 10. Compared to the low-proportion group, the adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for the high-proportion group were 1.18 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77-1.80; P > .10) in week 1 and 1.54 (95% CI, 1.05-2.25; P < .05) in week 10, showing a 30% (95% CI, 5%-62%) relative increase (P < .05). The average weekly number of COVID-19-related deaths ranged from 0 to 0.3 deaths per facility for different groups in week 1, and from 7.6 to 13.3 deaths per facility in week 10. Adjusted disparities in fatalities similarly increased over time. CONCLUSIONS: Connecticut nursing homes caring for predominately racial and ethnic minority residents tended to have higher COVID-19 incidence and fatality rates. These across-facility disparities increased during the early periods of the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Ethnicity , Humans , Minority Groups , Nursing Homes , Racial Groups , United States
6.
J Am Med Dir Assoc ; 22(8): 1593-1598, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1267723

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 disproportionately impacts residents in long-term care facilities. Our objective was to quantify the presence and magnitude of antibody response in vaccinated, older adult residents at assisted living, personal care, and independent living communities. DESIGN: A cross-sectional quality improvement study was conducted March 15 - April 1, 2021 in the greater Pittsburgh region. SETTING AND POPULATION: Participants were older adult residents at assisted living, personal care, and independent living communities, who received mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine. Conditions that impair immune responses were exclusionary criteria. METHODS: Sera were collected to measure IgG anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody level with reflex to total anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin levels, and blinded evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus neutralization titers. Descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation coefficients, and multiple linear regression analysis evaluated relationships between factors potentially associated with antibody levels. Spearman correlations were calculated between antibody levels and neutralization titers. RESULTS: All participants (N = 70) had received two rounds of vaccination and were found to have antibodies with wide variation in relative levels. Antibody levels trended lower in males, advanced age, current use of steroids, and longer length of time from vaccination. Pseudovirus neutralization titer levels were strongly correlated (P < .001) with Beckman Coulter antibody levels [D614 G NT50, rs = 0.91; B.1.1.7 (UK) NT50, rs = 0.91]. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Higher functioning, healthier, residential older adults mounted detectable antibody responses when vaccinated with mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines. Data suggests some degree of immunity is present during the immediate period following vaccination. However, protective effects remain to be determined in larger studies as clinical protection is afforded by ongoing adaptive immunity, which is known to be decreased in older adults. This study provides important preliminary results on level of population risk in older adult residents at assisted living, personal care, and independent living communities to inform reopening strategies, but are not likely to be translatable for residents in nursing homes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Aged , Antibody Formation , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Male , RNA, Messenger , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
7.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(5): e2110071, 2021 05 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1227701

ABSTRACT

Importance: Nursing homes and other long-term care facilities have been disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Strategies are urgently needed to reduce transmission in these high-risk populations. Objective: To evaluate COVID-19 transmission in nursing homes associated with contact-targeted interventions and testing. Design, Setting, and Participants: This decision analytical modeling study developed an agent-based susceptible-exposed-infectious (asymptomatic/symptomatic)-recovered model between July and September 2020 to examine SARS-CoV-2 transmission in nursing homes. Residents and staff of a simulated nursing home with 100 residents and 100 staff split among 3 shifts were modeled individually; residents were split into 2 cohorts based on COVID-19 diagnosis. Data were analyzed from September to October 2020. Exposures: In the resident cohorting intervention, residents who had recovered from COVID-19 were moved back from the COVID-19 (ie, infected with SARS-CoV-2) cohort to the non-COVID-19 (ie, susceptible and uninfected with SARS-CoV-2) cohort. In the immunity-based staffing intervention, staff who had recovered from COVID-19 were assumed to have protective immunity and were assigned to work in the non-COVID-19 cohort, while susceptible staff worked in the COVID-19 cohort and were assumed to have high levels of protection from personal protective equipment. These interventions aimed to reduce the fraction of people's contacts that were presumed susceptible (and therefore potentially infected) and replaced them with recovered (immune) contacts. A secondary aim of was to evaluate cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections associated with 2 types of screening tests (ie, rapid antigen testing and polymerase chain reaction [PCR] testing) conducted with varying frequency. Main Outcomes and Measures: Estimated cumulative incidence proportion of SARS-CoV-2 infection after 3 months. Results: Among the simulated cohort of 100 residents and 100 staff members, frequency and type of testing were associated with smaller outbreaks than the cohorting and staffing interventions. The testing strategy associated with the greatest estimated reduction in infections was daily antigen testing, which reduced the mean cumulative incidence proportion by 49% in absence of contact-targeted interventions. Under all screening testing strategies, the resident cohorting intervention and the immunity-based staffing intervention were associated with reducing the final estimated size of the outbreak among residents, with the immunity-based staffing intervention reducing it more (eg, by 19% in the absence of testing) than the resident cohorting intervention (eg, by 8% in the absence of testing). The estimated reduction in transmission associated with these interventions among staff varied by testing strategy and community prevalence. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that increasing the frequency of screening testing of all residents and staff, or even staff alone, in nursing homes may reduce outbreaks in this high-risk setting. Immunity-based staffing may further reduce spread at little or no additional cost and becomes particularly important when daily testing is not feasible.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Homes for the Aged , Nursing Homes , Personnel Staffing and Scheduling/organization & administration , Adaptive Immunity , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , COVID-19 Serological Testing , Decision Support Techniques , Humans , Personal Protective Equipment , Viral Load , Vulnerable Populations
8.
Palliat Med ; 35(5): 830-842, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1171344

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 outbreak restricting measures may have affected the provision of good end-of-life care for patients with and without COVID-19. AIM: To describe characteristics of patients who died and the care they received, and to examine how patient characteristics, setting and visiting restrictions are related to provided care and evaluation of the dying process. DESIGN: An open observational online survey among healthcare professionals about their experience of end-of-life care that was provided to a patient with or without COVID-19 who died between March and July 2020. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Healthcare professionals (nurses, physicians and others) in the Netherlands from all settings: home (n = 163), hospital (n = 249), nursing home (n = 192), hospice (n = 89) or elsewhere (n = 68). RESULTS: Of patients reported on, 56% had COVID-19. Among these patients, 358 (84.4%) also had a serious chronic illness. Having COVID-19 was negatively, and having a serious chronic illness was positively associated with healthcare staff's favourable appreciation of end-of-life care. Often there had been visiting restrictions in the last 2 days of life (75.8%). This was negatively associated with appreciation of care at the end of life and the dying process. Finally, care at the end of life was less favourably appreciated in hospitals and especially nursing homes, and more favourably in home settings and especially hospices. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that end-of-life care during the COVID-19 pandemic may be further optimised, especially in nursing homes and hospitals. Allowing at least some level of visits of relatives seems a key component.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Terminal Care , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Netherlands , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Aging (Albany NY) ; 13(5): 6247-6257, 2021 03 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1154951

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Centenarians are known to be successful agers compared to other older adults. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study was to compare coronavirus disease (COVID-19) symptoms and outcomes in centenarians and other residents living in nursing homes. Design-Setting-Subjects-Methods: A retrospective multicenter cohort study was conducted using data from 15 nursing homes in the Marseille area. Older residents with confirmed COVID-19 between March and June 2020 were enrolled. The clinical and biological characteristics, the treatment measures, and the outcomes in residents living in these nursing homes were collected from the medical records. RESULTS: A total of 321 residents were diagnosed with COVID-19 including 12 centenarians. The median age was 101 years in centenarians and 89 years in other residents. The most common symptoms were asthenia and fever. Three centenarians (25%) experienced a worsening of pre-existing depression (vs. 5.5% of younger residents; p = 0.032). Mortality was significantly higher in centenarians than in younger residents (50% vs. 21.3%, respectively; p = 0.031). A quarter of the younger residents and only one centenarian were hospitalized. However, 33.3% of the centenarians received treatment within the context of home hospitalization. CONCLUSION: Worsening of pre-existing depression seems to be more frequent in centenarians with COVID-19 in nursing homes. This population had a higher mortality rate but a lower hospitalization rate than younger residents.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/diagnosis , Comorbidity , Depression/epidemiology , Female , France/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Nursing Homes , Pandemics , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
10.
Eur J Epidemiol ; 36(3): 287-298, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1126570

ABSTRACT

We conducted a nationwide, registry-based study to investigate the importance of 34 potential risk factors for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnosis, hospitalization (with or without intensive care unit [ICU] admission), and subsequent all-cause mortality. The study population comprised all COVID-19 cases confirmed in Sweden by mid-September 2020 (68,575 non-hospitalized, 2494 ICU hospitalized, and 13,589 non-ICU hospitalized) and 434,081 randomly sampled general-population controls. Older age was the strongest risk factor for hospitalization, although the odds of ICU hospitalization decreased after 60-69 years and, after controlling for other risk factors, the odds of non-ICU hospitalization showed no trend after 40-49 years. Residence in a long-term care facility was associated with non-ICU hospitalization. Male sex and the presence of at least one investigated comorbidity or prescription medication were associated with both ICU and non-ICU hospitalization. Three comorbidities associated with both ICU and non-ICU hospitalization were asthma, hypertension, and Down syndrome. History of cancer was not associated with COVID-19 hospitalization, but cancer in the past year was associated with non-ICU hospitalization, after controlling for other risk factors. Cardiovascular disease was weakly associated with non-ICU hospitalization for COVID-19, but not with ICU hospitalization, after adjustment for other risk factors. Excess mortality was observed in both hospitalized and non-hospitalized COVID-19 cases. These results confirm that severe COVID-19 is related to age, sex, and comorbidity in general. The study provides new evidence that hypertension, asthma, Down syndrome, and residence in a long-term care facility are associated with severe COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Mortality/trends , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/mortality , Comorbidity , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Residential Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Sex Factors , Socioeconomic Factors , Sweden/epidemiology , Young Adult
11.
BMC Geriatr ; 21(1): 159, 2021 03 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1119405

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To support the implementation of nurse-led interventions in long-term dementia care, in-depth knowledge of specific supporting factors and barriers is required. Conditions and structures of caring for people with dementia differ widely, depending on the country and the care context. Our study aimed to describe the experiences and opinions of nursing experts and managers with regard to facilitators and barriers to the implementation of nurse-led interventions in long-term dementia care. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study using individual interviews based on qualitative vignettes as a useful stimulus to generate narrations allowing to study peoples' perceptions and beliefs. The study took place in nursing homes in the German-speaking part of Switzerland and in the Principality of Liechtenstein using purposive sampling. We intended to conduct the interviews face-to-face in a quiet room according to the participant's choice. However, due to the lockdown of nursing homes during the COVID-19 pandemic in spring 2020, we performed interviews face-to-face and by video. We analysed data thematically following Braun and Clarke to achieve a detailed, nuanced description. To verify our interpretation and to ensure congruence with participants' perspectives, we conducted member checks. The Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) served to structure our manuscript. RESULTS: Six dyads of nursing home managers and nursing experts from six nursing homes took part in our study (n = 12). Our thematic analysis yielded seven themes reflecting facilitators and barriers to implementing nurse-led interventions in long-term dementia care: «A common attitude and cohesion within the organization¼, «Commitment on several levels¼, «A needs-oriented implementation¼, «The effect and the public perception of the intervention¼, «A structured and guided implementation process¼, «Supporting knowledge and competencies¼, as well as «Resources for implementing the intervention¼. CONCLUSIONS: To support the implementation of nurse-led interventions in long-term dementia care, active commitment-building seems essential. It is necessary that the value of the intervention is perceptible.Commitment-building is the precondition to reach the persons involved, such as nursing home managers, nursing staff, residents and relatives. Furthermore, nurses should precisely inform about the intervention. It is necessary that the value of the intervention is perceptible. In addition, nurses should adjust the interventions to the situational needs of people with dementia, thus. Therefore, it is important to support dementia-specific competencies in long-term care. Findings indicate that the barrier is determined by the intervention and its implementation - and not by the behaviour of the person with dementia.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Dementia , Communicable Disease Control , Dementia/diagnosis , Dementia/epidemiology , Dementia/therapy , Humans , Long-Term Care , Pandemics , Qualitative Research , SARS-CoV-2 , Switzerland/epidemiology
12.
JMIR Res Protoc ; 10(2): e23767, 2021 Feb 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1088870

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Social integration and mental health are vital aspects of healthy aging. However, close to half of Canadians older than 80 years report feeling socially isolated. Research has shown that social isolation leads to increased mortality and morbidity, and various interventions have been studied to alleviate loneliness among older adults. This proposal presents an evaluation of an intervention that provides one-on-one coaching, is intergenerational, provides both educational and socialization experiences, and increases technology literacy of older adults to overcome loneliness. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the protocol of a randomized, mixed-methods study that will take place in Ontario, Canada. The purpose of this study is to evaluate if an intergenerational technology literacy program can reduce social isolation and depression in older adults via quantitative and qualitative outcome measures. METHODS: This study is a randomized, mixed-methods, feasibility trial with 2 conditions. Older adults in the intervention condition will receive 1 hour of weekly technological assistance to send an email to a family member, for 8 weeks, with the assistance of a volunteer. Participants in the control condition will not receive any intervention. The primary outcomes are loneliness, measured using the University of California, Los Angeles Loneliness Scale, and depression, measured using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale, both of which are measured weekly. Secondary outcomes are quality of life, as assessed using the Older People's Quality of Life-Brief version, and technological literacy, evaluated using the Computer Proficiency Questionnaire-12, both of which will be administered before and after the intervention. Semistructured interviews will be completed before and after the intervention to assess participants' social connectedness, familiarity with technology, and their experience with the intervention. The study will be completed in a long-term care facility in Southwestern Ontario, Canada. Significance was set at P<.05. RESULTS: This study was funded in April 2019 and ethical approval was obtained in August 2019. Recruitment for the study started in November 2019. The intervention began in February 2020 but was halted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The trial will be restarted when safe. As of March 2020, 8 participants were recruited. CONCLUSIONS: Information and communication technology interventions have shown varying results in reducing loneliness and improving mental health among older adults. Few studies have examined the role of one-on-one coaching for older adults in addition to technology education in such interventions. Data from this study may have the potential to provide evidence for other groups to disseminate similar interventions in their respective communities. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/23767.

13.
BMJ Open ; 11(1): e042804, 2021 01 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1013051

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Nursing homes' residents and staff constitute the largest proportion of the fatalities associated with COVID-19 epidemic. Although there is a significant variation in COVID-19 outbreaks among the US nursing homes, we still do not know why such outbreaks are larger and more likely in some nursing homes than others. This research aims to understand why some nursing homes are more susceptible to larger COVID-19 outbreaks. DESIGN: Observational study of all nursing homes in the state of California until 1 May 2020. SETTING: The state of California. PARTICIPANTS: 713 long-term care facilities in the state of California that participate in public reporting of COVID-19 infections as of 1 May 2020 and their infections data could be matched with data on ratings and governance features of nursing homes provided by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The number of reported COVID-19 infections among staff and residents. RESULTS: Study sample included 713 nursing homes. The size of outbreaks among residents in for-profit nursing homes is 12.7 times larger than their non-profit counterparts (log count=2.54; 95% CI, 1.97 to 3.11; p<0.001). Higher ratings in CMS-reported health inspections are associated with lower number of infections among both staff (log count=-0.19; 95% CI, -0.37 to -0.01; p=0.05) and residents (log count=-0.20; 95% CI, -0.27 to -0.14; p<0.001). Nursing homes with higher discrepancy between their CMS-reported and self-reported ratings have higher number of infections among their staff (log count=0.41; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.51; p<0.001) and residents (log count=0.13; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.18; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The size of COVID-19 outbreaks in nursing homes is associated with their ratings and governance features. To prepare for the possible next waves of COVID-19 epidemic, policy makers should use these insights to identify the nursing homes who are more likely to experience large outbreaks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Nursing Homes/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , California/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male
14.
Ann Agric Environ Med ; 27(4): 664-671, 2020 Dec 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1000860

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Since there is no study on burnout and job satisfaction in Slovenian nursing homes during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study aims to analyse job satisfaction and burnout levels of healthcare professionals working in Slovenian nursing homes in rural areas during the COVID-19 pandemic, and make a comparison with the results of the same services in 2013. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study is based on a cross-organisational and descriptive quantitative study conducted in spring 2013 (n = 556) and spring 2020 at the peak of the pandemic in Eastern Europe (n = 781) to identify the relationships and the changes in the satisfaction and burnout levels of healthcare professionals working in Slovenian nursing homes in rural areas, and on a qualitative study conducted in 2020, to identify in-depth relationships and changes in both studies during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: An increase in burnout syndromes between 2013 - 2020 was observed. The respondents experienced intensified emotional exhaustion and lack of personal accomplishment during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, depersonalisation did not differ statistically over the years. During the pandemic crisis, healthcare workers were less satisfied with their job than in spring 2013. Their job satisfaction was related to satisfaction with the work of nursing homes and with the work of state institutions and politicians who directly affected their working conditions and recognition in society. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic significantly exacerbated already existing burnout syndromes of nursing homes healthcare workers in Slovenian rural areas. Job satisfaction proved to be a relevant predictor of burnout syndrome. A negative correlation was observed between job satisfaction in 2020 and emotional exhaustion and personal accomplishment in 2013 and 2020.


Subject(s)
Burnout, Professional/etiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Job Satisfaction , Nursing Homes , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Qualitative Research
15.
Front Sports Act Living ; 2: 589214, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-993497

ABSTRACT

Objectives: The health-enhancing benefits or regular physical activity (PA) reach into old age. With the emergence of the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the associated national lockdowns and restrictions, nursing home residents were restrained from being physically active. In our study, we aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19-related restrictions on PA promotion in nursing homes from an organizational-sociological lens. Methods: We collected data in eight nursing homes in Germany. Data collection included (i) semistructured interviews focusing on COVID-19-related restrictions and their effects on nursing homes from the home administrators' perspectives; (ii) open-ended surveys with nursing home staff and relatives focusing on daily routines and contact restrictions; and (iii) collection of documents such as care concepts, mission statements, and weekly activity plans. We analyzed all data with a reflexive thematic analysis approach. Results: We identified three stages of COVID-19-related changes in nursing homes that impacted PA promotion, as follows: (1) external closure and search for emergency control, (2) organizational adaptations to create a livable daily life in the internal environment, and (3) slow reintegration of interactions with the external organizational environment. Document analysis revealed that PA promotion was not part of decision programs or internal staff work descriptions. Rather, PA promotion was delegated to external service providers. The assignment of PA promotion to external providers was not structurally anchored in decision programs, which makes PA promotion not sustainable, particularly during unforeseen events that limit access to the organization. During the pandemic, executive staff believed in internal staff to buffer competencies with regard to PA promotion. Thus, executive staff often considered PA promotion relevant, even during the pandemic, but thought that PA promotion is a task that can be fulfilled by unqualified but motivated internal staff. Conclusion: While our study participants showed a high level of coping-capacity belief, it remains unclear which long-term impacts of COVID-19 on PA promotion in nursing homes are to be expected. At the practice level, executive staff in nursing homes that aim to promote PA within their organization should become aware that PA promotion needs to be incorporated into organizational structures to be implemented and continued in challenging times such as in a pandemic.

16.
Int J Infect Dis ; 104: 125-131, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-959852

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to identify demographic, clinical and medical care factors associated with mortality in three nursing homes in France. METHODS: Two nursing homes were hospital-dependent, had connections with infection prevention and control departments, and had permanent physicians. A third nursing home had no direct connection with a general hospital, no infection control practitioner, and no permanent physician. The main outcome was death. RESULTS: During the first 3 months of the outbreak, 224 of 375 (59.7%) residents were classified as COVID-19 cases and 57 of 375 (15.2%) died. The hospital-dependent nursing homes had lower COVID-19 case fatality rates in comparison with the non-hospital-dependent nursing home (15 [6.6%] vs 38 [25.8%], OR 0.20 [0.11-0.38], p = 0.001). During the first 3 weeks of the outbreak, mortality in COVID-19 patients decreased if they had a daily clinical examination (OR: 0.09 [0.03-0.35], p = 0.01), three vital signs measurement per day (OR: 0.06 [0.01-0.30], p = 0.001) and prophylactic anticoagulation (OR: 0 [0.00-0.24], p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggested that high mortality rates in some nursing homes during the COVID-19 outbreak might have been contributed by a lack of medical care management. Increasing human and material resources, encouraging presence of nursing home physicians and establishing a connection with general hospitals should be considered to deal with present and future health disasters in nursing homes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Disease Outbreaks , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Demography , Female , France/epidemiology , Hospitals , Humans , Male , Multivariate Analysis , Nursing Homes , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Standard of Care
17.
Braz J Infect Dis ; 25(1): 101039, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-956945

ABSTRACT

The current coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused 10,541 deaths among nursing home residents in France, by July 17th, 2020. This study reported the results of an urgent pre-hospital intervention in eight French nursing homes. A retrospective study was conducted from March 26th to May 7th, 2020, before and after the intervention of a task force which took action from April 9th to April 11th, 2020. The task force included nurses and specialists of the county general hospital. The intervention had four steps: i) daily notification of deaths; ii) audit by infectious diseases and hygiene specialists focused on nursing team reinforcing, tracking of suspected cases, patients' cohorting, review of preventive and protective measures, hydration, thromboembolism prevention; iii) intervention of an emergency team which urgently performed procedures suggested; iv) relay with a geriatric team. There were a total of 770 residents distributed in eight facilities with capacity varying from 53 to 145 residents. The number of deaths peaked at 139 in week 2 and the trough at 0 occurred in weeks 6-7. Comparison between periods (before vs after intervention) showed a significant decrease in number of new deaths (83/770; 11% vs 35/687; 5%, p = 0.0001) and new COVID-19 cases (348/770; 45% vs 123/422; 29%, p < 0.001). The urgent pre-hospital intervention by a multidisciplinary task force achieved mortality reduction during COVID-19 outbreak in nursing homes. Pre-hospital intervention is a valid alternative to hospitalization in case of hospital saturation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , Hospitals , Humans , Nursing Homes , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
18.
J Gen Fam Med ; 22(2): 100-103, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-897814

ABSTRACT

Long-term care facilities are a recognized high-risk setting for severe outcomes during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak. This study describes a COVID-19 outbreak in a long-term care facility in Japan. The index case was a nurse who wore a surgical mask and used standard precautions. Of the 17 confirmed cases of COVID-19, 14 (14/93, 15.1%) were residents and three (3/69, 4.3%) were healthcare personnel (HCP); no visitors tested positive 0 (0/22, 0.0%). Mask utilization by HCP was not much effective in preventing COVID-19 transmission, even when interaction was not considered as being in close contact.

19.
Geriatr Nurs ; 42(2): 544-547, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-856716

ABSTRACT

The Acute Care for Elders (ACE) is a model of care addressed to reduce the incidence of loss of self-care abilities of older adults occurring during hospitalization for acute illness. This observational study aimed to describe the effectiveness of an ACE unit at a long-term care facility to prevent functional decline (decrease in the Barthel Index score of >5 points from admission to discharge) in older adults with frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale score ≥5) and symptomatic COVID-19. Fifty-one patients (mean age: 80.2 + 9.1 years) were included. Twenty-eight (54.9%) were women, with a median Barthel index of 50 (IQR:30-60) and Charlson of 6(IQR: 5-7), and 33 (64.7%) had cognitive impairment. At discharge, 36(70.6%) patients had no functional decline, 6 (11.7%) were transferred to hospital and 4(7.8%) died. An ACE unit at a long-term care facility constitutes an alternative to hospital care to prevent hospital-associated disability for frail older patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/nursing , Frail Elderly , Long-Term Care/organization & administration , Pneumonia, Viral/nursing , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Geriatric Assessment , Humans , Male , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2
20.
JAMA Netw Open ; 3(8): e2017533, 2020 Aug 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-712540

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a major threat to nursing homes. During the COVID-19 pandemic wave that hit France in March and April 2020, staff members of some French nursing homes decided to confine themselves with their residents on a voluntary basis to reduce the risk of entry of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 into the facility. OBJECTIVE: To investigate COVID-19-related outcomes in French nursing homes that implemented voluntary staff confinement with residents. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted in French nursing homes from March 1 to May 11, 2020. Participants included residents and staff members of the nursing homes where staff participated in voluntary self-confinement as well as those of the facilities for elderly people where staff did not practice self-confinement. Rates of COVID-19 cases and mortality in the cohort of nursing homes with self confinement were compared with those derived from a population-based survey of nursing homes conducted by French health authorities. EXPOSURES: Nursing homes with staff who self-confined were identified from the media and included if the confinement period of staff with residents was longer than 7 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Mortality related to COVID-19 among residents and COVID-19 cases among residents and staff members. COVID-19 was diagnosed by primary care or hospital physicians on the basis of fever and respiratory signs (eg, cough, dyspnea) or a clinical illness compatible with COVID-19; COVID-19 diagnoses were considered confirmed if real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 on nasopharyngeal swab was positive and considered possible if the test had not been performed or results were negative. Cases of COVID-19 were recorded by a telephone interview with the directors of nursing homes with staff who self-confined and by a nationwide declaration survey to health authorities for all facilities. RESULTS: This study included 17 nursing homes in which 794 staff members confined themselves to the facility with their 1250 residents. The national survey included 9513 facilities with 385 290 staff members and 695 060 residents. Only 1 nursing home with staff who self-confined (5.8%) had cases of COVID-19 among residents, compared with 4599 facilities in the national survey (48.3%) (P < .001). Five residents (0.4%) in the nursing homes with staff who self-confined had confirmed COVID-19, compared with 30 569 residents (4.4%) with confirmed COVID-19 in the national survey (P < .001); no residents of facilities with self-confinement had possible COVID-19, compared with 31 799 residents (4.6%) with possible COVID-19 in the national survey (P < .001). Five residents (0.4%) in the nursing homes with staff who self-confined died of COVID-19, compared with 12 516 (1.8%) in the national survey (odds ratio, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.09-0.53; P < .001). Twelve staff members (1.6%) from the facilties with self-confinement had confirmed or possible COVID-19, compared with 29 463 staff members (7.6%) in the national survey (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cohort study of French nursing homes during the COVID-19 pandemic, mortality rates related to COVID-19 were lower among nursing homes that implemented staff confinement with residents compared with those in a national survey. These findings suggest that self-confinement of staff members with residents may help protect nursing home residents from mortality related to COVID-19 and residents and staff from COVID-19 infection.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Homes for the Aged , Nursing Homes , Nursing Staff , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Social Isolation , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 , Coronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/virology , France/epidemiology , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Skilled Nursing Facilities , Surveys and Questionnaires
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL