Perspectives on Deprescribing in long-term care: qualitative findings from nurses, aides, residents, and proxies.

BACKGROUND: Deprescribing initiatives in the long-term care (LTC) setting are often unsuccessful or not sustained. Prior research has considered how physicians and pharmacists feel about deprescribing, yet little is known about the perspectives of frontline nursing staff and residents. Our aim was to elicit perspectives from LTC nursing staff, patients, and proxies regarding their experiences and preferences for deprescribing in order to inform future deprescribing efforts in LTC. METHODS: This study was a qualitative analysis of interviews with nurses, nurse aides, a nurse practitioner, residents, and proxies (family member and/or responsible party) from three LTC facilities. The research team used semi-structured interviews. Guides were designed to inform an injury prevention intervention. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. A qualitative framework analysis was used to summarize themes related to deprescribing. The full study team reviewed the summary to identify actionable, clinical implications. RESULTS: Twenty-six interviews with 28 participants were completed, including 11 nurse aides, three residents, seven proxies, one nurse practitioner, and six nurses. Three themes emerged that were consistent across facilities: 1) build trust with team members, including residents and proxies; 2) identify motivating factors that lead to resident, proxy, nurse practitioner, and staff acceptance of deprescribing; 3) standardize supportive processes to encourage deprescribing. These themes suggest several actionable steps to improve deprescribing initiatives including: 1) tell stories about successful deprescribing, 2) provide deprescribing education to frontline staff, 3) align medication risk/benefit discussions with what matters most to the resident, 4) standardize deprescribing monitoring protocols, 5) standardize interprofessional team huddles and care plan meetings to include deprescribing conversations, and 6) strengthen non-pharmacologic treatment programs. CONCLUSIONS: By interviewing LTC stakeholders, we identified three important themes regarding successful deprescribing: Trust, Motivating Factors, and Supportive Processes. These themes may translate into actionable steps for clinicians and researchers to improve and sustain person-centered deprescribing initiatives. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04242186.

Improving shared decision-making for osteoporosis pharmacologic therapy in nursing homes: a qualitative analysis.

Decisions on whether to use pharmacologic osteoporosis therapy in skilled nursing facility residents are complex and require shared decision-making. Residents, proxies, and staff desire individualized fracture risk estimates that consider advanced age, dementia, and mobility. They want options for reducing administration burden, monitoring instructions, and periodic reassessment of risk vs. benefit. PURPOSE: Decisions about pharmacologic osteoporosis treatment in nursing home (NH) residents with advanced age and multimorbidity are complex and should occur using shared decision-making. Our objective was to identify processes and tools to improve shared decision-making about pharmacologic osteoporosis treatment in NHs. METHODS: Qualitative analysis of data collected in three NHs from residents at high fracture risk, their proxies, nursing assistants, nurses, and one nurse practitioner (n = 28). Interviews explored participants' stories, attitudes, and experiences with oral osteoporosis medication management. Framework analysis was used to identify barriers to shared decision-making regarding osteoporosis treatment in this setting. RESULTS: Participants wanted individualized fracture risk estimates that consider immobility, advanced age, and comorbid dementia. Residents and proxies expected nursing staff to be involved in the decision-making; nursing staff wished to be informed on the relative risks vs. benefits of medications and given monitoring instructions. Two important competing demands to address during the shared decision-making process were burdensome administration requirements and polypharmacy. Participants wanted to reassess pharmacologic treatment appropriateness over time as clinical status or goals of care change. CONCLUSIONS: Shared decision-making using strategies and tools identified in this analysis may move osteoporosis pharmacologic treatment in NHs and for other older adults with multimorbidity from inappropriate inertia to appropriate prescribing or appropriate inaction.

Strengthening Resident, Proxy, and Staff Engagement in Injury Prevention in Skilled Nursing Facilities.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Engaging residents, their proxies, and skilled nursing facility (SNF) staff through effective communication has potential for improving fall-related injury prevention. The purpose of this study was to understand how multiple stakeholders develop and communicate fall-related injury prevention plans to enhance sustained implementation. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Descriptive qualitative study using framework analysis applied to open-ended semistructured interviews (n = 28) regarding experiences of communication regarding fall-related injury prevention, guided by the Patient and Family Engaged Care framework. Participants included residents at high risk of injury and their proxies, nursing assistants, nurses, and a nurse practitioner from 3 SNFs in the Eastern United States (Massachusetts and North Carolina). RESULTS: Interdisciplinary teams were viewed as essential for injury prevention. However, the roles of the interdisciplinary team members were sometimes unclear. Communication structures were often hierarchical, which reduced engagement of nursing assistants and frustrated proxies. Practices that enhanced engagement included knowing the residents, active listening skills, and use of strategies for respecting autonomy. Engagement was inhibited by time constraints, lack of proactive communication among staff, and by challenges eliciting the perspectives of residents with dementia. Resident barriers included desire for autonomy, strong preferences, and language differences. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Strengthening team meeting processes and cultivating open communication and collaboration could facilitate staff, resident, and proxy engagement in injury prevention planning and implementation. Skill building and targeting resources to improve communication can address barriers related to staff practices, resident characteristics, and time constraints.

Lessons learned from frontline skilled nursing facility staff regarding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

BACKGROUND: Presently a median of 37.5% of the U.S. skilled nursing facility (SNF) workforce has been vaccinated for COVID-19. It is essential to understand vaccine hesitancy among SNF workers to inform vaccine campaigns going forward. OBJECTIVE: To describe the concerns raised among healthcare workers and staff from SNFs during town hall meetings. DESIGN: Sixty-three SNFs from four corporations were invited to send Opinion Leaders, outspoken staff from nursing, nurse aid, dietary, housekeeping or recreational therapy, to attend a 1-h virtual town hall meeting. Meetings used a similar format where the moderator solicited concerns that the attendees themselves had or had heard from others in the facility about the COVID-19 vaccine. Physicians and moderators used personal stories to address concerns and reaffirmed positive emotions. SETTING: Twenty-six video town hall meetings with SNF staff. PARTICIPANTS: Healthcare workers and staff, with physicians serving as content experts. MEASUREMENT: Questions and comments about the COVID-19 vaccines noted by physicians. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety three staff from 50 facilities participated in 26 meetings between December 30, 2020 and January 15, 2021. Most staff reported getting information about the vaccine from friends or social media. Concerns about how rapidly the vaccines were developed and side effects, including infertility or pregnancy related concerns, were frequently raised. There were no differences in concerns raised by discipline. Questions about returning to prior activities after being vaccinated were common and offered the opportunity to build on positive emotions to reduce vaccine hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS: Misinformation about the COVID-19 vaccine was widespread among SNF staff. Sharing positive emotions and stories may be more effective than sharing data when attempting to reduce vaccine hesitancy in SNF staff.

Stemming the Tide of COVID-19 Infections in Massachusetts Nursing Homes.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: In April 2020, Massachusetts nursing homes (NHs) became a hotspot for COVID-19 infections and associated deaths. In response, Governor Charles Baker allocated $130 million in additional funding for 2 months contingent on compliance with a new set of care criteria including mandatory testing of all residents and staff, and a 28-point infection control checklist. We aimed to describe the Massachusetts effort and associated outcomes. DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort study. SETTING: A total of 360 Massachusetts NHs. PARTICIPANTS: The Massachusetts Senior Care Association and Hebrew SeniorLife rapidly organized a Central Command team, targeted 123 "special focus" facilities with infection control deficiencies for on-site and virtual consultations, and offered all 360 facilities weekly webinars and answers to questions regarding infection control procedures. The facilities were also informed of resources for the acquisition of personal protective equipment (PPE), backup staff, and SARS-CoV-2 testing. MEASUREMENTS: We used two data sources: (1) four state audits of all NHs, and (2) weekly NH reports to the Massachusetts Center for Health Information and Analysis. Primary independent process measures were the checklist scores and adherence to each of its six core competencies. Primary outcomes were the average weekly rates of new infections, hospitalizations, and deaths in residents and staff. We used a hurdle mixed effects model adjusted for county COVID-19 prevalence to estimate relationships between infection control process measures and rates of new infections or deaths. RESULTS: Both resident and staff infection rates started higher in special focus facilities, then rapidly declined to the same low level in both groups. Adherence to infection control processes, especially proper wearing of PPE and cohorting, was significantly associated with declines in weekly infection and mortality rates. CONCLUSION: This statewide effort could serve as a national model for other states to prevent the devastating effects of pandemics such as COVID-19 in frail NH residents.

Engaging Stakeholders in the Design and Conduct of Embedded Pragmatic Clinical Trials for Alzheimer's Disease and Alzheimer's Disease-Related Dementias.

Embedded pragmatic clinical trials (ePCTs) of nondrug interventions for Alzheimer's disease and Alzheimer's disease-related dementias (AD/ADRD) are conducted in real-world clinical settings and designed to generate an evidence base to inform clinical and policy decisions about care for this vulnerable population. The ePCTs exist within a complex ecosystem of relationships between researchers, payors, policymakers, healthcare systems, direct care staff, advocacy groups, families, caregivers, and people living with dementia (PLWD). Because the rapid increase of the number of Americans with AD/ADRD outpaces curative treatments, there is an urgent need to mobilize the power of these relationships to improve dementia care and address a mounting public health crisis. Stakeholder engagement in ePCTs is essential to generate research questions, establish the relevancy of trials to the intended end users, and understand the factors that influence dissemination and implementation in real-world clinical settings. The process of including stakeholders in ePCTs for dementia is similar to stakeholder engagement in ePCTs for other diseases and conditions; however, the unique nature of embedded research, prevalence of caregiver and provider burden, and the progressive worsening of cognitive impairment in PLWD must be approached with additional strategies. This article presents key considerations of stakeholder engagement for ePCTs in AD/ADRD and main activities of the stakeholder engagement team in the National Institute on Aging IMPACT Collaboratory to move the field forward. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:S62-S67, 2020.

Association of a Communication Training Program With Use of Antipsychotics in Nursing Homes.

Importance: Off-label antipsychotic prescribing in nursing homes (NHs) is common and is associated with increased risk of mortality in older adults. Prior large-scale, controlled trials in the NH setting failed to show meaningful reductions in antipsychotic use. Objective: To quantify the influence of a large-scale communication training program on NH antipsychotic use called OASIS. Design, Setting, and Participants: This investigation was a quasi-experimental longitudinal study of NHs in Massachusetts enrolled in the OASIS intervention. Participants were residents living in NHs between March 1, 2011, and August 31, 2013. The data were analyzed from December 2015, to March 2016, and from November through December 2016. Exposures: The OASIS educational program targets all NH staff (direct care and nondirect care) using a train-the-trainer model. The program goals were to reframe challenging behaviors of residents with cognitive impairment as the communication of unmet needs, to train staff to anticipate resident needs, and to integrate resident strengths into daily care plans. Main Outcomes and Measures: This study used an interrupted time series model of facility-level prevalence of antipsychotic medication use, other psychotropic medication use (antidepressants, anxiolytics, and hypnotics), and behavioral disturbances to evaluate the intervention's effectiveness in participating facilities compared with control NHs in Massachusetts and New York. The 18-month preintervention (baseline) period was compared with a 3-month training period, a 6-month implementation period, and a 3-month maintenance period. Results: This study included 93 NHs enrolled in the OASIS intervention (27 of which had a high prevalence of antipsychotic use) compared with 831 nonintervention NHs. Among OASIS facilities, prevalences of atypical antipsychotic prescribing were 34.1% at baseline and 26.5% at the study end (absolute reduction of 7.6% and relative reduction of 22.3%) compared with a drop of 22.7% to 18.8% in the comparison facilities (absolute reduction of 3.9% and relative reduction of 17.2%). In the OASIS implementation phase, NHs experienced a reduction in antipsychotic use prevalence among OASIS facilities (-1.20%; 95% CI, -1.85% to -0.09% per quarter) greater than that among non-OASIS facilities (-0.23%; 95% CI, -0.47% to 0.01% per quarter), resulting in a net OASIS influence of -0.97% (95% CI, -1.85% to -0.09%; P = .03). A difference in trend was not sustained in the maintenance phase (difference of 0.93%; 95% CI, -0.66% to 2.54%; P = .48). No increases in other psychotropic medication use or behavioral disturbances were observed. Conclusions and Relevance: Antipsychotic use prevalence declined during OASIS implementation of the intervention, but the decreases did not continue in the maintenance phase. Other psychotropic medication use and behavioral disturbances did not increase. This study adds evidence for nonpharmacological programs to treat behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia.

The INTERACT Institute: Observations on Dissemination of the INTERACT Quality Improvement Program Using Certified INTERACT Trainers.

Unnecessary hospitalizations of vulnerable nursing home (NH) residents can lead to hospital-acquired conditions, morbidity, mortality, and excess health care expenditures. Previous research has shown that a substantial percentage of these hospitalizations are preventable. Interventions to reduce acute care transfers (INTERACT) is a quality improvement program that has been adopted by many NHs throughout the United States. The original INTERACT toolkit was first created in a project supported by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The toolkit was further refined and tested in a collaborative quality improvement project involving 30 NHs in 3 states, which resulted in a 17% reduction in all-cause hospitalizations. This study was limited because it was not randomized or controlled. Nevertheless, the data provide evidence that the program, even in the absence of strong regulatory oversight or financial incentives, is feasible to implement and that more active program engagement is associated with higher reductions in hospitalization. This paper describes dissemination of the INTERACT program using a pragmatic and relatively low cost model to prepare certified INTERACT Trainers in collaboration with several professional organizations.

The Interventions to Reduce Acute Care Transfers (INTERACT) quality improvement program: an overview for medical directors and primary care clinicians in long term care.

Interventions to Reduce Acute Care Transfers (INTERACT) is a publicly available quality improvement program that focuses on improving the identification, evaluation, and management of acute changes in condition of nursing home residents. Effective implementation has been associated with substantial reductions in hospitalization of nursing home residents. Familiarity with and support of program implementation by medical directors and primary care clinicians in the nursing home setting are essential to effectiveness and sustainability of the program over time. In addition to helping nursing homes prevent unnecessary hospitalizations and their related complications and costs, and thereby continuing to be or becoming attractive partners for hospitals, health care systems, managed care plans, and accountable care organizations, effective INTERACT implementation will assist nursing homes in meeting the new requirement for a robust quality assurance performance improvement program, which is being rolled out by the federal government over the next year.

Avoidability of hospital transfers of nursing home residents: perspectives of frontline staff.

OBJECTIVES: To describe nursing home (NH) staff perceptions of avoidability of hospital transfers of NH residents. DESIGN: Mixed methods qualitative and quantitative analysis of 1,347 quality improvement (QI) review tools completed by staff at 26 NHs and transcripts of conference calls. SETTING: Twenty-six NHs in three states participating in the Interventions to Reduce Acute Care Transfers (INTERACT II) QI project. PARTICIPANTS: Site coordinators and staff who participated in project orientation and conference calls and completed QI tools. MEASUREMENTS: NH and hospitalization data collected for the INTERACT II project. An interprofessional team coded and quantified reasons for hospital transfer on 1,347 QI review tools. RESULTS: Staff rated 76% of the transfers in the QI review tools as not avoidable. Common reasons for transfers rated as unavoidable were acute change in resident status, family insistence, and physician order for transfer. These same reasons were given for transfers rated as avoidable. Avoidable ratings were associated with a broader set of reasons and recommendations for improvement, including earlier identification and management of changes in clinical status, earlier discussion with family members about advance directives, and more-comprehensive communication with physicians. NHs that were more actively engaged in the INTERACT II interventions rated more transfers as avoidable. Percentage of transfers rated avoidable was not correlated with change in hospitalization rates. CONCLUSION: NH staff rated fewer hospital transfers as avoidable than published estimates. Greater attention to the complex array of reasons that staff provide for hospital transfer should be considered in strategies to reduce avoidable hospitalizations of NH residents.

Interventions to reduce hospitalizations from nursing homes: evaluation of the INTERACT II collaborative quality improvement project.

A substantial proportion of hospitalizations of nursing home (NH) residents may be avoidable. Medicare payment reforms, such as bundled payments for episodes of care and value-based purchasing, will change incentives that favor hospitalization but could result in care quality problems if NHs lack the resources and training to identify and manage acute conditions proactively. Interventions to Reduce Acute Care Transfers (INTERACT) II is a quality improvement intervention that includes a set of tools and strategies designed to assist NH staff in early identification, assessment, communication, and documentation about changes in resident status. INTERACT II was evaluated in 25 NHs in three states in a 6-month quality improvement initiative that provided tools, on-site education, and teleconferences every 2 weeks facilitated by an experienced nurse practitioner. There was a 17% reduction in self-reported hospital admissions in these 25 NHs from the same 6-month period in the previous year. The group of 17 NHs rated as engaged in the initiative had a 24% reduction, compared with 6% in the group of eight NHs rated as not engaged and 3% in a comparison group of 11 NHs. The average cost of the 6-month implementation was $7,700 per NH. The projected savings to Medicare in a 100-bed NH were approximately $125,000 per year. Despite challenges in implementation and caveats about the accuracy of self-reported hospitalization rates and the characteristics of the participating NHs, the trends in these results suggest that INTERACT II should be further evaluated in randomized controlled trials to determine its effect on avoidable hospitalizations and their related morbidity and cost.