Outcomes for Long-Stay Nursing Facility Residents Following On-Site Acute Care under a CMS Initiative.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to describe outcomes of long-term nursing facility (NF) residents treated for one of 6 conditions on-site in the NF and to compare outcomes to those treated for the same conditions in the hospital. DESIGN: Cross-sectional retrospective study. SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Initiative to Reduce Avoidable Hospitalizations among Nursing Facility Residents-Payment Reform enabled participating NFs to bill Medicare for providing on-site care to eligible long-stay residents meeting specified severity criteria due to any of 6 medical conditions, as an alternative to hospitalization. For billing purposes, residents were required to meet clinical criteria severe enough to warrant hospitalization. METHODS: We used the Minimum Data Set assessments to identify eligible long-stay NF residents. We used Medicare data to identify residents who were treated, either on-site or in the hospital, for the 6 conditions and measure outcomes including subsequent hospitalization and death. To compare residents treated in the 2 modes, we used logistic regression models and adjusted for demographics, functional and cognitive status, and comorbidities. RESULTS: Among residents treated on-site for the 6 conditions, 13.6% were subsequently hospitalized and 7.8% died, within 30 days, compared to 26.5% and 17.0%, respectively, among those treated in the hospital. Based on multivariate analysis, those treated in the hospital were more likely to be readmitted (OR = 1.666, P < .001) or to die (OR = 2.251, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Although unable to fully account for differences in unobserved severity of illness between residents treated on-site vs in the hospital, our results do not indicate any harm, but rather a possible benefit, to being treated on-site.

What Drove Program Participants to Initially Attend Congregate Meals? Socialization, Health, and Other Reasons.

The Congregate Nutrition Services support efforts to keep older Americans independent and engaged in their communities. We examined participants' self-reported reasons for initially attending the congregate meals program and whether reasons differed by participant characteristics. Descriptive statistics and tests of differences were used to compare participants (n = 1,072). Individuals attended congregate meals for several reasons, with the top two being socialization (36.3%) and age- or health-related reasons (18.7%). Those attending for socialization were less likely to be lower income, have food insecurity, or live with 3+ ADL limitations while participants who first attended due to age or health-related reasons were more likely to be low income, food insecure, and from historically marginalized populations. Health and social service professionals and community organizations could expand data collection on older adults in their communities and partner with congregate meal providers to encourage participation for individuals with unmet nutritional, health, and socialization needs.

Assessing Disparities in Medicaid Home- and Community-Based Services: A Systematic Review.

In recent years, expansion of home and community-based services (HCBS) for older adults and persons with disabilities has become a national priority in the U.S. In addition, lawmakers and health-care providers are pursuing opportunities to minimize disparities in healthcare service delivery. Marrying these priorities will require policymakers to identify existing Medicaid HCBS disparities toward development of new, more equitable policies. This study provides a systematic literature review using an adapted theoretical framework to describe disparities in Medicaid HCBS. Key findings are organized into four domains: availability, accessibility, accommodation, and acceptability. We found a lack of concerted research effort targeting Medicaid HCBS disparities in the context of all four domains, with an especially notable dearth of content related to acceptability. We also identified very few articles that focused on specific marginalized groups, suggesting a need for more research into whether Medicaid HCBS are available, accessible, accommodating, and acceptable for a variety of diverse populations. Our findings underscore the need for researchers and policymakers to conceptualize and evaluate existing Medicaid HCBS policy toward development of a more equitable Medicaid HCBS program design in the future.

Implementation of a CMS Nursing Facility Initiative: Differences by Racial Minority Resident Population.

Objectives: The CMS Initiative to Reduce Avoidable Hospitalizations Among Nursing Facility Residents: Payment Reform (NFI 2) provided billing opportunities to incentivize participating facilities to keep long-stay residents onsite for acute care, rather than hospitalizing them. We examined cross-facility differences in NFI 2 implementation by racial composition of facility resident populations. Methods: We analyzed Medicare claims in conjunction with in-person and telephone interviews among facility staff to assess NFI 2 engagement in relation to racial minority resident population. Results: Participating facilities with larger racial minority resident populations faced additional barriers to NFI 2 implementation. These facilities submitted fewer NFI 2 claims, reported more challenges engaging resident families, and experienced greater facility staff and leadership instability, compared to facilities with predominantly white resident populations. Discussion: Addressing structural differences within facilities with larger populations of racial minority residents may encourage future development of targeted programs to support diverse nursing facilities.

CMS Initiative to Reduce Potentially Avoidable Hospitalizations Among Long-Stay Nursing Facility Residents: Lessons Learned.

Policy Points Misaligned incentives between Medicare and Medicaid may result in avoidable hospitalizations among long-stay nursing home residents. Providing nursing homes with clinical staff, such as nurse practitioners, was more effective in reducing resident hospitalizations than providing Medicare incentive payments alone. CONTEXT: In 2012, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services implemented the Initiative to Reduce Avoidable Hospitalizations Among Nursing Facility Residents. In Phase 1 (2012 to 2016), clinical or education-based interventions (Clinical-Only) aimed to reduce hospitalizations among long-stay nursing home residents. In Phase 2 (2016 to 2020), the Initiative also included a Medicare payment incentive for treating residents with certain conditions within the nursing home. Nursing homes participating in Phase 1 continued their previous interventions and received the incentive (Clinical + Payment) and others received the incentive only (Payment-Only). METHODS: Mixed methods were used to determine the effectiveness of the Initiative and explore facilitators of and barriers to implementation that participating nursing homes experienced. We used telephone and in-person interviews to investigate aspects of implementation and a difference-in-differences regression model framework comparing residents in participating and nonparticipating nursing homes to determine the effect of the Initiative on measures of utilization, expenditures, and quality. FINDINGS: Three key components were necessary for successful implementation of the Initiative-staff retention and leadership stability, leadership and staff support, and provider engagement and support. Nursing homes that lacked one or more of these three components experienced greater challenges. The Clinical-Only intervention in Phase 1 was successful in reducing hospitalizations. We did not find evidence that the Clinical + Payment or Payment-Only interventions were successful in reducing hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: Reducing hospitalizations among nursing home residents hinges upon the availability and support of clinical staff who can provide ongoing education to direct-care staff in the nursing home, as well as hands-on care. Use of Medicare payment incentives alone to encourage on-site treatment of residents was insufficient to reduce hospitalizations. Unless nursing homes are adequately staffed to treat residents with acute care needs, further reductions in hospitalizations will be difficult to achieve.

Trends in the Use of Residential Settings Among Older Adults.

OBJECTIVES: As the U.S. population ages, the prevalence of disability and functional limitations, and demand for long-term services and supports (LTSS), will increase. This study identified the distribution of older adults across different residential settings, and how their health characteristics have changed over time. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of older adults residing in traditional housing, community-based residential facilities (CBRFs), and nursing facilities using 3 data sources: the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS), 2008 and 2013; the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), 2008 and 2014; and the National Health and Aging Trends Study, 2011 and 2015. We calculated the age-standardized prevalence of older adults by setting, functional limitations, and comorbidities and tested for health characteristics changes relative to the baseline year (2002). RESULTS: The proportion of older adults in traditional housing increased over time, relative to baseline (p < .05), while the proportion of older adults in CBRFs was unchanged. The proportion of nursing facility residents declined from 2002 to 2013 in the MCBS (p < .05). The prevalence of dementia and functional limitations among traditional housing residents increased, relative to the baseline year in the HRS and MCBS (p < .05). DISCUSSION: The proportion of older adults residing in traditional housing is increasing, while the nursing facility population is decreasing. This change may not be due to better health; rather, older adults may be relying on noninstitutional LTSS.

Treating in Place: Acute Care for Long-Stay Residents in Nursing Facilities Under a CMS Initiative.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Nursing facility (NF) residents are commonly hospitalized, and many of these hospitalizations may be avoidable. A Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) initiative enables participating NFs to bill Medicare for providing on-site acute care to long-stay residents diagnosed with one of six ambulatory care sensitive conditions (pneumonia, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dehydration, skin infection, and urinary tract infection) that account for many avoidable hospitalizations. This study describes the frequency of initiative-related treatment for the six conditions, both on site and in the hospital, and the health status of residents who were treated. DESIGN: We used the Minimum Data Set V3.0 and Medicare data to identify eligible residents, detect on-site treatment under the initiative as well as in-hospital treatment both before and during the initiative, and measure health status. SETTING: Participating NFs during fiscal years 2017 to 2018. PARTICIPANTS: There were 47,202 long-stay NF residents from 260 facilities in seven states. INTERVENTION: CMS initiative to reduce avoidable hospitalizations among NF residents-payment reform. MEASUREMENTS: Percentage per year who received on-site treatment (2017-2018), and who received in-hospital treatment (2014-2018), for the six conditions. RESULTS: Each year, approximately 20% of residents received treatment on site during 2017 to 2018, and under 10% received treatment in the hospital during 2014 to 2018, with little change over these years. Residents treated on site had less chronic illness than those treated in the hospital. CONCLUSION: Although the initiative sought to reduce hospitalizations, in-hospital treatment for the six conditions did not substantially change after initiative implementation, despite substantial new billing for on-site treatment for those conditions. These findings suggest that many residents treated on site would likely not have been hospitalized even absent the initiative. The residents treated on site tended to have fewer chronic conditions than those treated in the hospital.

Initiative To Reduce Avoidable Hospitalizations Among Nursing Facility Residents Shows Promising Results.

Nursing facility residents are frequently admitted to the hospital, and these hospital stays are often potentially avoidable. Such hospitalizations are detrimental to patients and costly to Medicare and Medicaid. In 2012 the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services launched the Initiative to Reduce Avoidable Hospitalizations among Nursing Facility Residents, using evidence-based clinical and educational interventions among long-stay residents in 143 facilities in seven states. In state-specific analyses, we estimated net reductions in 2015 of 2.2-9.3 percentage points in the probability of an all-cause hospitalization and 1.4-7.2 percentage points in the probability of a potentially avoidable hospitalization for participating facility residents, relative to comparison-group members. In that year, average per resident Medicare expenditures were reduced by $60-$2,248 for all-cause hospitalizations and by $98-$577 for potentially avoidable hospitalizations. The effects for over half of the outcomes in these analyses were significant. Variability in implementation and engagement across the nursing facilities and organizations that customized and implemented the initiative helps explain the variability in the estimated effects. Initiative models that included registered nurses or nurse practitioners who provided consistent clinical care for residents demonstrated higher staff engagement and more positive outcomes, compared to models providing only education or intermittent clinical care. These results provide promising evidence of an effective approach for reducing avoidable hospitalizations among nursing facility residents.

Long-term care: nursing home quality and safety--2005. End of Year Issue Brief.

In 2002, the Government Accountability Office reported that more than 1.7 million senior citizens resided in over 17,000 nursing homes across the United States. A 2003 Administration on Aging report predicted that number would increase dramatically as the "baby-boom" generation ages. Accordingly, legislators and nursing home administrators have striven to develop facilities that provide safe, high-quality eldercare to the nations' growing senior population. The Health Policy Tracking Service (HPTS) published a study in January--2005 Health Care Priorities Report--that depicts state lawmakers' concern for nursing home quality and safety. To policymakers, nursing home quality and safety is a very high priority, second only to Medicaid. The HPTS survey also indicated that 38 states planned to address senior facility safety in 2005 by adopting more stringent employee background checks, higher staffing standards and strict licensure requirements

Long-term care: end of life issues--2005. End of Year Issue Brief.

While end-of-life care encompasses many issues, assisted suicide, chronic pain management and advance health care directives have been key aspects of recent legislation. Assisted suicide poses many ethical issues, while advance care directives gained tremendous attention in the wake of the Terri Schiavo case. In addition, states have worked throughout 2005 to evaluate the best means of promoting policies that assist persons who suffer from chronic pain.

Long-term care: long-term care insurance--2005. End of Year Issue Brief.

As the "Baby Boom" generation approaches retirement, state and federal lawmakers are struggling to ensure that the nation's long-term care system will provide adequate services for the growing number of senior citizens. A 2003 Administration on Aging report predicted that the elderly population will double by 2030. Accordingly, policymakers must prepare for the impending squeeze on public health and Medicaid resources. Many consumers are exploring private long-term care insurance options as a means of preparing for the cost of eldercare. Yet, a lack of market uniformity has rendered the long-term care insurance industry somewhat difficult for consumers to decipher. In addition, senior care insurance is often costly, particularly for those over age 50.