Piloting of a minimum data set for older people living in care homes in England: protocol for a longitudinal, mixed-methods study.

INTRODUCTION: Health and care data are routinely collected about care home residents in England, yet there is no way to collate these data to inform benchmarking and improvement. The Developing research resources And minimum data set for Care Homes' Adoption and use study has developed a prototype minimum data set (MDS) for piloting. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A mixed-methods longitudinal pilot study will be conducted in 60 care homes (approximately 960 residents) in 3 regions of England, using resident data from cloud-based digital care home records at two-time points. These will be linked to resident and care home level data held within routine National Health Service and social care data sets. Two rounds of focus groups with care home staff (n=8-10 per region) and additional interviews with external stakeholders (n=3 per region) will explore implementation and the perceived utility of the MDS. Data will be assessed for completeness and timeliness of completion. Descriptive statistics, including percentage floor and ceiling effects, will establish data quality. For validated scales, construct validity will be assessed by hypothesis testing and exploratory factor analysis will establish structural validity. Internal consistency will be established using Cronbach's alpha. Longitudinal analysis of the pilot data will demonstrate the value of the MDS to each region. Qualitative data will be analysed inductively using thematic analysis to understand the complexities of implementing an MDS in care homes for older people. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received ethical approval from the London Queen's Square Research Ethics Committee (22/LO/0250). Informed consent is required for participation. Findings will be disseminated to: academics working on data use and integration in social care, care sector organisations, policy makers and commissioners. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals. Partner NIHR Applied Research Collaborations, the National Care Forum and the British Geriatrics Society will disseminate policy briefs.

Indirect effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospital mortality in patients with hip fracture: a competing risk survival analysis using linked administrative data.

BACKGROUND: Hip fracture is a leading cause of disability and mortality among older people. During the COVID-19 pandemic, orthopaedic care pathways in the National Health Service in England were restructured to manage pressures on hospital capacity. We examined the indirect consequences of the pandemic for hospital mortality among older patients with hip fracture, admitted from care homes or the community. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of linked care home and hospital inpatient data for patients with hip fracture aged 65 years and over admitted to hospitals in England during the first year of the pandemic (1 March 2020 to 28 February 2021) or during the previous year. We performed survival analysis, adjusting for case mix and COVID-19 infection, and considered live discharge as a competing risk. We present cause-specific hazard ratios (HRCS) for the effect of admission year on hospital mortality risk. RESULTS: During the first year of the pandemic, there were 55 648 hip fracture admissions: a 5.2% decrease on the previous year. 9.5% of patients had confirmed or suspected COVID-19. Hospital stays were substantially shorter (p<0.05), and there was a higher daily chance of discharge (HRCS 1.40, 95% CI 1.38 to 1.41). Overall hip fracture inpatient mortality increased (7.2% in 2020/2021 vs 6.4% in 2019/2020), but patients without concomitant COVID-19 infection had lower mortality rates compared with the year before (5.3%). Admission during the pandemic was associated with a 11% increase in the daily risk of hospital death for patients with hip fracture (HRCS 1.11, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.16). CONCLUSIONS: Although COVID-19 infections led to increases in hospital mortality, overall hospital mortality risk for older patients with hip fracture remained largely stable during the first year of the pandemic.

Association between household context and emergency hospital use in older people: a retrospective cohort study on indicators for people living alone or living with somebody with frailty, developed from routine healthcare data in England.

OBJECTIVES: To derive two household context factors - living alone and living in a two-person household with a person who is frail - from routine administrative health data and to assess their association with emergency hospital use in people aged 65 or over. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using national pseudonymised hospital data and pseudonymised address data derived from a minimised version of the Master Patient Index, a central database of all patient registrations in England. SETTING: England-wide. PARTICIPANTS: 4 876 285 people aged 65 years or older registered at GP practices in England on 16 December 2018 who were living alone or in a household of up to six people, and with at least one hospital admission in the last 3 years. OUTCOMES: Rates of accident and emergency (A&E) attendance and inpatient emergency admissions over a 1-year follow-up period. RESULTS: Older people living alone had higher rates of A&E attendances (adjusted rate ratio 1.09, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.10) and emergency admissions (1.14, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.15) than older people living in households of 2-6 people. Older people living with someone with frailty in a two-person household had higher rates of A&E attendance (adjusted rate ratio 1.09, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.10) and emergency admissions (1.10, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.11) than other older people living in a two-person household. CONCLUSIONS: We show that household context factors can be derived from linked routine administrative health data and that these are strongly associated with higher emergency hospital use in older people. Using household context factors can improve analyses, as well as support in the understanding of local population needs and in population health management.

Hospital admissions from care homes in England during the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis using linked administrative data.

BACKGROUND: Care home residents have complex healthcare needs but may have faced barriers to accessing hospital treatment during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVES: To examine trends in the number of hospital admissions for care home residents during the first months of the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a national linked dataset on hospital admissions for residential and nursing home residents in England (257,843 residents, 45% in nursing homes) between 20 January 2020 and 28 June 2020, compared to admissions during the corresponding period in 2019 (252,432 residents, 45% in nursing homes). Elective and emergency admission rates, normalised to the time spent in care homes across all residents, were derived across the first three months of the pandemic between 1 March and 31 May 2020 and primary admission reasons for this period were compared across years. RESULTS: Hospital admission rates rapidly declined during early March 2020 and remained substantially lower than in 2019 until the end of June. Between March and May, 2,960 admissions from residential homes (16.2%) and 3,295 admissions from nursing homes (23.7%) were for suspected or confirmed COVID-19. Rates of other emergency admissions decreased by 36% for residential and by 38% for nursing home residents (13,191 fewer admissions in total). Emergency admissions for acute coronary syndromes fell by 43% and 29% (105 fewer admission) and emergency admissions for stroke fell by 17% and 25% (128 fewer admissions) for residential and nursing home residents, respectively. Elective admission rates declined by 64% for residential and by 61% for nursing home residents (3,762 fewer admissions). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study showing that care home residents' hospital use declined during the first wave of COVID-19, potentially resulting in substantial unmet health need that will need to be addressed alongside ongoing pressures from COVID-19.

Effect of an integrated care pathway on use of primary and secondary healthcare by patients at high risk of emergency inpatient admission: a matched control cohort study in Tower Hamlets.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of an integrated care pathway on the use of primary and secondary healthcare by patients at high risk of emergency inpatient admission. DESIGN: Observational study of a real-life deployment of integrated care, using patient-level administrative data. Regression analysis was used to compare integrated care patients with matched controls. SETTING: A deprived, inner city London borough (Tower Hamlets). PARTICIPANTS: 1720 patients aged 50+ years registered with a general practitioner in Tower Hamlets and at high risk of emergency inpatient admission enrolled onto integrated care during 2014. These patients were matched to control patients, also selected from Tower Hamlets, with respect to demographics, diagnoses of health conditions, previous hospital use and risk score. INTERVENTIONS: Enrolled patients were eligible for a range of interventions, such as case management, support with self-care and enhanced care coordination. Control patients received usual care. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ENDPOINTS: Number of emergency inpatient admissions in the year after enrolment onto integrated care. Secondary endpoints included numbers of elective inpatient admissions, inpatient bed days, accident and emergency attendances, outpatient attendances and general practitioner contacts in the year after enrolment. RESULTS: There was no evidence that the integrated care pathway reduced patients' healthcare utilisation in the first year post-enrolment. Matched controls and integrated care patients were similar at baseline. Following enrolment, integrated care patients were more likely than matched controls to experience elective inpatient admissions (adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR)=1.27, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.49, p=0.004). They were also more likely to experience general practitioner contacts (adjusted IRR=1.11, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.16, p<0.001), but other endpoints were not significantly different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The integrated care pathway was not associated with a reduction in healthcare utilisation in the first year, but appeared to have increased elective inpatient admissions and general practitioner workload.