Hospitalisation of older people before and after long-term care entry in Auckland, New Zealand.

INTRODUCTION: global population projections forecast large growth in demand for long-term care (LTC) and acute hospital services for older people. Few studies report changes in hospitalisation rates before and after entry into LTC. This study compares hospitalisation rates 1 year before and after LTC entry. METHODS: the Older Persons' Ability Level (OPAL) study was a 2008 census-type survey of LTC facilities in Auckland, New Zealand. OPAL resident hospital admissions and deaths were obtained from routinely collected national databases. RESULTS: all 2,244 residents (66% = female) who entered LTC within 12 months prior to OPAL were included. There were 3,363 hospitalisations, 2,424 in 12 months before and 939 in 12 months after entry, and 364 deaths. In the 6 to 12 months before LTC entry, the hospitalisation rate/100 person-years was 67.3 (95% confidence interval [CI] 62.5-72.1). Weekly rates then rose steeply to over 450/100 person-years in the 6 months immediately before LTC entry. In the 6 months after LTC entry, the rate fell to 49.1 (CI 44.9-53.3; RR 0.73 (CI 0.65-0.82, P < 0.0001)) and decreased further 6 to 12 months after entry to 41.1 (CI 37.1-45.1; rate ratio [RR] 0.61 (CI 0.54-0.69, P < 0.0001)). CONCLUSIONS: increased hospitalisations a few months before LTC entry suggest functional and medical instability precipitates LTC entry. New residents utilise hospital beds less frequently than when at home before that unstable period. Further research is needed to determine effective interventions to avoid some hospitalisations and possibly also LTC entry.

The 'Big Five'. Hypothesis generation: a multidisciplinary intervention package reduces disease-specific hospitalisations from long-term care: a post hoc analysis of the ARCHUS cluster-randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: long-term care (LTC) residents have higher hospitalisation rates than non-LTC residents. Rapid decline may follow hospitalisations, hence the importance of preventing unnecessary hospitalisations. Literature describes diagnosis-specific interventions (for cardiac failure, ischaemic heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, stroke, pneumonia-termed 'big five' diagnoses), impacting on hospitalisations of older community-dwellers, but few RCTs show reductions in acute admissions from LTC. METHODS: LTC facilities with higher than expected hospitalisations were recruited for a cluster-randomised controlled trial (RCT) of facility-based complex, non-disease-specific, 9-month intervention comprising gerontology nurse specialist (GNS)-led staff education, facility benchmarking, GNS resident review and multidisciplinary discussion of residents selected using standard criteria. In this post hoc exploratory analysis, the outcome was acute hospitalisations for 'big five' diagnoses. Re-randomisation analyses were used for end points during months 1-14. For end points during months 4-14, proportional hazards models are adjusted for within-facility clustering. RESULTS: we recruited 36 facilities with 1,998 residents (1,408 female; mean age 82.9 years); 1,924 were alive at 3 months. The intervention did not impact overall rates of acute hospitalisations or mortality (previously published), but resulted in fewer 'big five' admissions (RR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.54-0.99; P = 0.043) with no significant difference in the rate of other acute admissions. When considering events occurring after 3 months (only), the intervention group were 34.7% (HR = 0.65; 95% CI = 0.49-0.88; P = 0.005) less likely to have a 'big five' acute admission than controls, with no differences in likelihood of acute admissions for other diagnoses (P = 0.96). CONCLUSIONS: this generic intervention may reduce admissions for common conditions which the literature shows are impacted by disease-specific admission reduction strategies.