ABSTRACT
Increased engagement of nurse practitioners (NPs) has been recommended as a way to address care delivery challenges in settings that struggle to attract physicians, such as primary care and rural areas. Nursing homes also face such physician shortages. We evaluated the role of state scope of practice regulations on NP practice in nursing homes in 2012-2019. Using linear probability models, we estimated the proportion of NP-delivered visits to patients in nursing homes as a function of state scope of practice regulations. Control variables included county demographic, socioeconomic, and health care workforce characteristics; state fixed effects; and year indicators. The proportion of nursing home visits conducted by NPs increased from 24% in 2012 to 42% in 2019. Expanded scope of practice regulation was associated with a greater proportion and total volume of nursing home visits conducted by NPs in counties with at least 1 NP visit. These relationships were concentrated among short-stay patients in urban counties. Removing scope of practice restrictions on NPs may address clinician shortages in nursing homes in urban areas where NPs already practice in nursing homes. However, improving access to advanced clinician care for long-term care residents and for patients in rural locations may require additional interventions and resources.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To investigate disparities in admissions to highly rated skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) between Medicare beneficiaries with and without opioid use disorder (OUD). DESIGN: Nationwide, retrospective observational cohort. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries aged ≥18 years admitted to SNFs following hospitalization during 2016-2020 (n = 30,922 with OUD and n = 137,454 without OUD). METHODS: Data used were 100% Medicare inpatient claims, nursing home administrative databases, and Nursing Home Compare. We identified hospitalized patients with and without OUD and matched them on age, sex, Part D low-income subsidy (LIS), and residential county. We compared the overall and component (quality, staffing, and health inspections) star ratings of SNFs that beneficiaries entered. Beneficiary-level regression models were conducted adjusting for race and ethnicity, Medicare-Medicaid dual status, comorbidity score, hospital length of stay, and state and year fixed effects. RESULTS: The overall study sample had a mean (SD) age of 71.4 (11.4) years, 63.9% were female, and 57.4% had LIS. Among beneficiaries with OUD, 50.3% entered SNFs with above-average (4 or 5) overall rating compared with 51.3% among those without OUD. Distributions of above-average ratings among beneficiaries with and without OUD were as follows: 63.9% vs 62.2% for quality, 32.8% vs 34.9% for health inspections, and 46.2% vs 45.0% for staffing, respectively. Adjusted regression models indicated that beneficiaries with OUD were less likely to be admitted to facilities with above-average overall (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.87-0.92), health inspection (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.88-0.92), and staffing (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.89-0.94) ratings compared with beneficiaries without OUD, whereas quality (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.94-1.01) ratings did not differ. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Despite mixed results on component ratings, our findings suggest a concerning disparity in the overall quality of SNFs admitting Medicare beneficiaries with OUD. Enhancing equitable access to high-quality SNF care for individuals with OUD is imperative amid rising demand and legal protections under the American Disabilities Act.