Geriatric Care in the Community Setting: When Older Adults Can No Longer Live Alone at Home.

Older adults living alone at home are at risk of many adverse outcomes, including injuries from falls, firearms, and driving; adverse drug events due to drug errors; and self-neglect or elder abuse. An estimated 4.5 million Medicare beneficiaries became homebound between 2012 and 2018. Becoming homebound increases the risk of harm for older adults. Clinicians should evaluate the home safety of older adult patients, which requires assessing their medical conditions, home physical environment, and social circumstances. Identified problems should be addressed with interventions that allow patients to live safely in the least restrictive environment possible. The least restrictive interventions are in-home modifications (eg, installation of handrails and grab bars) and use of remote monitoring, in-home services, and shopping and transportation services. Daytime participation in senior centers or adult day care also can be useful. Some patients will require a change in living situation, with a move to senior housing or retirement communities, group homes, assisted living communities, skilled nursing facilities, or the home of a family member. Some of these alternative living situations require financial resources that a patient or family members may not have. Public assistance is available in some cases, if patients meet eligibility requirements.

U.S. Nursing Home Quality Ratings Associated with COVID-19 Cases and Deaths.

OBJECTIVES: To inform future policies and disaster preparedness plans in the vulnerable nursing home setting, we need greater insight into the relationship between nursing homes' (NHs') quality and the spread and severity of COVID-19 in NH facilities. We therefore extend current evidence on the relationships between NH quality and resident COVID-19 infection rates and deaths, taking into account NH structural characteristics and community characteristics. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 15,390 Medicaid- and Medicare-certified NHs. METHODS: We obtained and merged the following data sets: (1) COVID-19 weekly data reported by each nursing home to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Healthcare Safety Network, (2) Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Five Star Quality Rating System, (3) county-level COVID-19 case counts, (4) county-level population data, and (5) county-level sociodemographic data. RESULTS: Among 1-star NHs, there were an average of 13.19 cases and 2.42 deaths per 1000 residents per week between May 25 and December 20, 2020. Among 5-star NHs, there were an average of 9.99 cases and 1.83 deaths per 1000 residents per week. The rate of confirmed cases of COVID-19 was 31% higher among 1-star NHs compared with 5-star NHs [model 1: incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23-1.39], and the rate of COVID-19 deaths was 30% higher (IRR 1.30, 95% CI 1.20, 1.41). These associations were only partially explained by differences in community spread of COVID-19, case mix, and the for-profit status and size of NHs. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: We found that COVID-19 case and death rates were substantially higher among NHs with lower star ratings, suggesting that NHs with quality much below average are more susceptible to the spread of COVID-19. This relationship, particularly with regard to case rates, can be partially attributed to external factors: lower-rated NHs are often located in areas with greater COVID-19 community spread and serve more socioeconomically vulnerable residents than higher-rated NHs.

Validation of a 5-Year Mortality Prediction Model among U.S. Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: A claims-based model predicting 5-year mortality (Lund-Lewis) was developed in a 2008 cohort of North Carolina (NC) Medicare beneficiaries and included indicators of comorbid conditions, frailty, disability, and functional impairment. The objective of this study was to validate the Lund-Lewis model externally within a nationwide sample of Medicare beneficiaries. DESIGN: Retrospective validation study. SETTING: U.S. Medicare population. PARTICIPANTS: From a random sample of Medicare beneficiaries, we created four annual cohorts from 2008 to 2011 of individuals aged 66 and older with an office visit in that year. The annual cohorts ranged from 1.13 to 1.18 million beneficiaries. MEASUREMENTS: The outcome was 5-year all-cause mortality. We assessed clinical indicators in the 12 months before the qualifying office visit and estimated predicted 5-year mortality for each beneficiary in the nationwide sample by applying estimates derived in the original NC cohort. Model performance was assessed by quantifying discrimination, calibration, and reclassification metrics compared with a model fit on a comorbidity score. RESULTS: Across the annual cohorts, 5-year mortality ranged from 24.4% to 25.5%. The model had strong discrimination (C-statistics ranged across cohorts from .823 to .826). Reclassification measures showed improvement over a comorbidity score model for beneficiaries who died but reduced performance among beneficiaries who survived. The calibration slope ranged from .83 to .86; the model generally predicted a higher risk than observed. CONCLUSION: The Lund-Lewis model showed strong and consistent discrimination in a national U.S. Medicare sample, although calibration indicated slight overfitting. Future work should investigate methods for improving model calibration and evaluating performance within specific disease settings.

Development and validation of a 5-year mortality prediction model using regularized regression and Medicare data.

PURPOSE: De-implementation of low-value services among patients with limited life expectancy is challenging. Robust mortality prediction models using routinely collected health care data can enhance health care stakeholders' ability to identify populations with limited life expectancy. We developed and validated a claims-based prediction model for 5-year mortality using regularized regression methods. METHODS: Medicare beneficiaries age 66 or older with an office visit and at least 12 months of pre-visit continuous Medicare A/B enrollment were identified in 2008. Five-year mortality was assessed through 2013. Secondary outcomes included 30-, 90-, and 180-day and 1-year mortality. Claims-based predictors, including comorbidities and indicators of disability, frailty, and functional impairment, were selected using regularized logistic regression, applying the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) in a random 80% training sample. Model performance was assessed and compared with the Gagne comorbidity score in the 20% validation sample. RESULTS: Overall, 183 204 (24%) individuals died. In addition to demographics, 161 indicators of comorbidity and function were included in the final model. In the validation sample, the c-statistic was 0.825 (0.823-0.828). Median-predicted probability of 5-year mortality was 14%; almost 4% of the cohort had a predicted probability greater than 80%. Compared with the Gagne score, the LASSO model led to improved 5-year mortality classification (net reclassification index = 9.9%; integrated discrimination index = 5.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Our claims-based model predicting 5-year mortality showed excellent discrimination and calibration, similar to the Gagne score model, but resulted in improved mortality classification. Regularized regression is a feasible approach for developing prediction tools that could enhance health care research and evaluation of care quality.

Design of a randomized clinical trial of a colorectal cancer screening decision aid to promote appropriate screening in community-dwelling older adults.

BACKGROUND: Appropriate colorectal cancer screening in older adults should be aligned with the likelihood of net benefit. In general, patient decision aids improve knowledge and values clarity, but in older adults, they may also help patients identify their individual likelihood of benefit and foster individualized decision-making. We report on the design of a randomized clinical trial to understand the effects of a patient decision aid on appropriate colorectal cancer screening. This report includes a description of the baseline characteristics of participants. METHODS: English-speaking primary care patients aged 70-84 years who were not currently up to date with screening were recruited into a randomized clinical trial comparing a tailored colorectal cancer screening decision aid with an attention control. The intervention group received a decision aid that included a values clarification exercise and individualized decision-making worksheet, while the control group received an educational pamphlet on safe driving behaviors. The primary outcome was appropriate screening at 6 months based on chart review. We used a composite measure to define appropriate screening as screening for participants in good health, a discussion about screening for patients in intermediate health, and no screening for patients in poor health. Health state was objectively determined using patients' Charlson Comorbidity Index score and age. RESULTS: A total of 14 practices in central North Carolina participated as part of a practice-based research network. In total, 424 patients were recruited to participate and completed a baseline visit. Overall, 79% of participants were White and 58% female, with a mean age of 76.8 years. Patient characteristics between groups were similar by age, gender, race, education, insurance coverage, or work status. Overall, 70% had some college education or more, 57% were married, and virtually all had Medicare insurance (90%). The three primary medical conditions among the cohort were a history of diabetes, pneumonia, and cancer (28%, 26%, and 21%, respectively). CONCLUSION: We designed a randomized clinical trial to test a novel use of a patient decision aid to promote appropriate colorectal cancer screening and have recruited a diverse study population that seems similar between the intervention and control groups. The study should be able to determine the ability of a patient decision aid to increase individualized and appropriate colorectal cancer screening.

Optimizing Antibiotic Use in Nursing Homes Through Antibiotic Stewardship.

Antibiotic stewardship is becoming a requirement for nursing homes. Programs should be interdisciplinary and multifaceted; should have support from nursing home administrators; and should aim to promote antibiotics only when needed, not just in case. Recommended components include use of evidence-based guidelines; ongoing monitoring of antibiotic prescriptions, cultures, and study results; monitoring of health outcomes; use of nursing home-specific antibiograms; regular reporting and feedback to medical providers and nurses; and education of residents and families.

Lack of follow-up after fecal occult blood testing in older adults: inappropriate screening or failure to follow up?

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether lack of follow-up after screening fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) in older adults is due to screening patients whose comorbidity or preferences do not permit follow-up vs failure to complete follow-up in healthy patients. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of 2410 patients 70 years or older screened with FOBT was conducted at 4 Veteran Affairs (VA) medical centers from January 1 to December 31, 2001. The main outcome measure was receipt of follow-up within 1 year of FOBT based on national VA and Medicare data. For patients with positive FOBT results, age and Charlson comorbidity scores were evaluated as potential predictors of receiving a complete colon evaluation (colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy plus barium enema), and medical records were reviewed to determine reasons for lack of follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 212 patients (9%) had positive FOBT results; 42% received a complete colon evaluation within 1 year. Age and comorbidity were not associated with receipt of a complete follow-up, which was similar among patients 70 to 74 years old with a Charlson score of 0 compared with patients 80 years or older with a Charlson score of 1 or higher (48% vs 41%; P=.28). The VA site, number of positive FOBT cards, and number of VA outpatient visits were predictors. Of 122 patients who did not receive a complete follow-up within 1 year, 38% had documentation that comorbidity or preferences did not permit follow-up, and over the next 5 years 76% never received a complete follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: While follow-up after positive FOBT results was low regardless of age or comorbidity, screening patients in whom complete evaluation would not be pursued substantially contributes to lack of follow-up. Efforts to improve follow-up should address the full chain of decision making, including decisions to screen and decisions to follow up.

Impact of cognitive impairment on screening mammography use in older US women.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated mammography rates for cognitively impaired women in the context of their life expectancies, given that guidelines do not recommend screening mammography in women with limited life expectancies because harms outweigh benefits. METHODS: We evaluated Medicare claims for women aged 70 years or older from the 2002 wave of the Health and Retirement Study to determine which women had screening mammography. We calculated population-based estimates of 2-year screening mammography prevalence and 4-year survival by cognitive status and age. RESULTS: Women with severe cognitive impairment had lower rates of mammography (18%) compared with women with normal cognition (45%). Nationally, an estimated 120,000 screening mammograms were performed among women with severe cognitive impairment despite this group's median survival of 3.3 years (95% confidence interval = 2.8, 3.7). Cognitively impaired women who had high net worth and were married had screening rates approaching 50%. CONCLUSIONS: Although severe cognitive impairment is associated with lower screening mammography rates, certain subgroups with cognitive impairment are often screened despite lack of probable benefit. Given the limited life expectancy of women with severe cognitive impairment, guidelines should explicitly recommend against screening these women.