Using Structured Observations to Evaluate the Effects of a Personalized Music Intervention on Agitated Behaviors and Mood in Nursing Home Residents With Dementia: Results From an Embedded, Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this research was to determine if a personalized music intervention reduced the frequency of agitated behaviors as measured by structured observations of nursing home (NH) residents with dementia. DESIGN: The design was a parallel, cluster-randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: The setting was 54 NH (27 intervention, 27 control) from four geographically-diverse, multifacility NH corporations. PARTICIPANTS: The participants were 976 NH residents (483 intervention, 493 control) with Alzheimer's disease or related dementias (66% with moderate to severe symptoms); average age 80.3 years (SD: 12.3) and 25.1% were Black. INTERVENTION: The intervention was individuals' preferred music delivered via a personalized music device. MEASUREMENT: The measurement tool was the Agitated Behavior Mapping Instrument, which captures the frequency of 13 agitated behaviors and five mood states during 3-minute observations. RESULTS: The results show that no verbally agitated behaviors were reported in a higher proportion of observations among residents in NHs randomized to receive the intervention compared to similar residents in NHs randomized to usual care (marginal interaction effect (MIE): 0.061, 95% CI: 0.028-0.061). Residents in NHs randomized to receive the intervention were also more likely to be observed experiencing pleasure compared to residents in usual care NHs (MIE: 0.038; 95% CI: 0.008-0.073)). There was no significant effect of the intervention on physically agitated behaviors, anger, fear, alertness, or sadness. CONCLUSIONS: The conclusions are that personalized music may be effective at reducing verbally-agitated behaviors. Using structured observations to measure behaviors may avoid biases of staff-reported measures.

Modifications of the readiness assessment for pragmatic trials tool for appropriate use with Indigenous populations.

BACKGROUND: Inequities in health access and outcomes exist between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations. Embedded pragmatic randomized, controlled trials (ePCTs) can test the real-world effectiveness of health care interventions. Assessing readiness for ePCT, with tools such as the Readiness Assessment for Pragmatic Trials (RAPT) model, is an important component. Although equity must be explicitly incorporated in the design, testing, and widespread implementation of any health care intervention to achieve equity, RAPT does not explicitly consider equity. This study aimed to identify adaptions necessary for the application of the 'Readiness Assessment for Pragmatic Trials' (RAPT) tool in embedded pragmatic randomized, controlled trials (ePCTs) with Indigenous communities. METHODS: We surveyed and interviewed participants (researchers with experience in research involving Indigenous communities) over three phases (July-December 2022) in this mixed-methods study to explore the appropriateness and recommended adaptions of current RAPT domains and to identify new domains that would be appropriate to include. We thematically analyzed responses and used an iterative process to modify RAPT. RESULTS: The 21 participants identified that RAPT needed to be modified to strengthen readiness assessment in Indigenous research. In addition, five new domains were proposed to support Indigenous communities' power within the research processes: Indigenous Data Sovereignty; Acceptability - Indigenous Communities; Risk of Research; Research Team Experience; Established Partnership). We propose a modified tool, RAPT-Indigenous (RAPT-I) for use in research with Indigenous communities to increase the robustness and cultural appropriateness of readiness assessment for ePCT. In addition to producing a tool for use, it outlines a methodological approach to adopting research tools for use in and with Indigenous communities by drawing on the experience of researchers who are part of, and/or working with, Indigenous communities to undertake interventional research, as well as those with expertise in health equity, implementation science, and public health. CONCLUSION: RAPT-I has the potential to provide a useful framework for readiness assessment prior to ePCT in Indigenous communities. RAPT-I also has potential use by bodies charged with critically reviewing proposed pragmatic research including funding and ethics review boards.

Identifying strategies that promote staff and resident influenza and COVID-19 vaccination in nursing homes: Perspectives from nursing home staff.

Resident and staff influenza and COVID-19 vaccination are critical components of infection prevention in nursing homes. Our study sought to characterize strategies that nursing home staff use to promote vaccination. Twenty-six telephone/videoconference interviews were conducted with administrators, directors of nursing, infection preventionists, and Minimum Data Set coordinators at 14 nursing homes across the US. Transcripts were analyzed using content analysis and a detailed audit trail was maintained. Staff described resident and staff influenza and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and confidence as well as varying approaches to promote vaccination. These included incentives, education efforts, and having a "vaccine champion" responsible for vaccine promotion. While many strategies had been in place prior to COVID-19 in support of improving influenza vaccination, participants reported implementing additional approaches to promote COVID-19 vaccination. Findings may inform future efforts to promote vaccination, which will be critical to mitigate the burden of influenza and COVID-19 in nursing homes.

Interventions to Reduce Hospital and Emergency Department Utilization Among People With Alcohol and Substance Use Disorders: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Substance use disorders (SUDs), prevalent worldwide, are associated with significant morbidity and health care utilization. OBJECTIVES: To identify interventions addressing hospital and emergency department utilization among people with substance use, to summarize findings for those seeking to implement such interventions, and to articulate gaps that can be addressed by future research. RESEARCH DESIGN: A scoping review of the literature. We searched PubMed, PsycInfo, and Google Scholar for any articles published from January 2010 to June 2020. The main search terms included the target population of adults with substance use or SUDs, the outcomes of hospital and emergency department utilization, and interventions aimed at improving these outcomes in the target population. SUBJECTS: Adults with substance use or SUDs, including alcohol use. MEASURES: Hospital and emergency department utilization. RESULTS: Our initial search identified 1807 titles, from which 44 articles were included in the review. Most interventions were implemented in the United States (n=35). Half focused on people using any substance (n=22) and a quarter on opioids (n=12). The tested approaches varied and included postdischarge services, medications, legislation, and counseling, among others. The majority of study designs were retrospective cohort studies (n=31). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we found few studies assessing interventions to reduce health care utilization among people with SUDs. The studies that we did identify differed across multiple domains and included few randomized trials. Study heterogeneity limits our ability to compare interventions or to recommend one specific approach to reducing health care utilization among this high-risk population.

Persistence of Racial Inequities in Receipt of Influenza Vaccination Among Nursing Home Residents in the United States.

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine if racial differences in influenza vaccination among nursing home (NH) residents during the 2008-2009 influenza season persisted in 2018-2019. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of NHs certified by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services during the 2018-2019 influenza season in US states with ≥1% Black NH residents and a White-Black gap in influenza vaccination of NH residents (N = 2 233 392) of at least 1 percentage point (N = 40 states). NH residents during 1 October 2018 through 31 March 2019 aged ≥18 years and self-identified as being of Black or White race were included. Residents' influenza vaccination status (vaccinated, refused, and not offered) was assessed. Multilevel modeling was used to estimate facility-level vaccination status and inequities by state. RESULTS: The White-Black gap in influenza vaccination was 9.9 percentage points. In adjusted analyses, racial inequities in vaccination were more prominent at the facility level than at the state level. Black residents disproportionately lived in NHs that had a majority of Blacks residents, which generally had the lowest vaccination. Inequities were most concentrated in the Midwestern region, also the most segregated. Not being offered the vaccine was negligible in absolute percentage points between White residents (2.6%) and Black residents (4.8%), whereas refusals were higher among Black (28.7%) than White residents (21.0%). CONCLUSIONS: The increase in the White-Black vaccination gap among NH residents is occurring at the facility level in more states, especially those with the most segregation.

Enhancing sleep quality for nursing home residents with dementia: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial of an evidence-based frontline huddling program.

BACKGROUND: Disturbed sleep places older adults at higher risk for frailty, morbidity, and even mortality. Yet, nursing home routines frequently disturb residents' sleep through use of noise, light, or efforts to reduce incontinence. Nursing home residents with Alzheimer's disease and or related dementias-almost two-thirds of long-stay nursing home residents-are likely to be particularly affected by sleep disturbance. Addressing these issues, this study protocol implements an evidence-based intervention to improve sleep: a nursing home frontline staff huddling program known as LOCK. The LOCK program is derived from evidence supporting strengths-based learning, systematic observation, relationship-based teamwork, and efficiency. METHODS: This study protocol outlines a NIH Stage III, real-world hybrid efficacy-effectiveness pragmatic trial of the LOCK sleep intervention. Over two phases, in a total of 27 non-VA nursing homes from 3 corporations, the study will (1) refine the LOCK program to focus on sleep for residents with dementia, (2) test the impact of the LOCK sleep intervention for nursing home residents with dementia, and (3) evaluate the intervention's sustainability. Phase 1 (1 year; n = 3 nursing homes; 1 per corporation) will refine the intervention and train-the-trainer protocol and pilot-tests all study methods. Phase 2 (4 years; n = 24 nursing homes; 8 per corporation) will use the refined intervention to conduct a wedge-design randomized, controlled, clinical trial. Phase 2 results will measure the LOCK sleep intervention's impact on sleep (primary outcome) and on psychotropic medication use, pain and analgesic medication use, and activities of daily living decline (secondary outcomes). Findings will point to inter-facility variation in the program's implementation and sustainability. DISCUSSION: This is the first study to our knowledge that applies a dementia sleep intervention to systematically address known barriers to nursing home quality improvement efforts. This innovative study has future potential to address clinical issues beyond sleep (safety, infection control) and expand to other settings (assisted living, inpatient mental health). The study's strong team, careful consideration of design challenges, and resulting rigorous, pragmatic approach will ensure success of this promising intervention for nursing home residents with dementia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04533815 , ClinicalTrials.gov , August 20, 2020.

Nursing home leaders' perceptions of a research partnership.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Partnerships between healthcare providers and researchers may accelerate the translation of interventions into widespread practice by testing them under real-world conditions, but depend on provider's willingness to engage with researchers and ability to fully implement an intervention. AIM: To understand nursing home leader's motivations for participating in a research study and perceptions of the process and value. METHODS: After a feasibility study of tuned lighting in a nursing home, we conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with six facility leaders. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and independently coded by four investigators. RESULTS: Three themes emerged: (1) The importance of the nursing home's culture and context: the facility had stable leadership, clear processes for prioritizing and implementing new initiatives, and an established interest in the study's topic. (2) The importance of leader's belief in the value of the intervention: leaders perceived research generally and the intervention specifically as positively impacting their facility and residents. (3) The importance of ongoing collaboration and flexibility throughout the study period: leaders served as champions to catalyze the project and overcome implementation barriers. CONCLUSION: Nursing home leader's perspectives about their participation in a feasibility study underscore the importance of establishing strong researcher-provider partnerships, understanding the environment in which the intervention will be implemented, and employing pragmatic methods that allow for flexibility in response to real-world implementation barriers. We recommend eliciting qualitative information to understand the environment in which an intervention will be implemented and to engage opinion leaders who can inform the protocol and champion its success.

The SHIELD Orange County Project: Multidrug-resistant Organism Prevalence in 21 Nursing Homes and Long-term Acute Care Facilities in Southern California.

BACKGROUND: Multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) spread between hospitals, nursing homes (NHs), and long-term acute care facilities (LTACs) via patient transfers. The Shared Healthcare Intervention to Eliminate Life-threatening Dissemination of MDROs in Orange County is a regional public health collaborative involving decolonization at 38 healthcare facilities selected based on their high degree of patient sharing. We report baseline MDRO prevalence in 21 NHs/LTACs. METHODS: A random sample of 50 adults for 21 NHs/LTACs (18 NHs, 3 LTACs) were screened for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp. (VRE), extended-spectrum ß-lactamase-producing organisms (ESBL), and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) using nares, skin (axilla/groin), and peri-rectal swabs. Facility and resident characteristics associated with MDRO carriage were assessed using multivariable models clustering by person and facility. RESULTS: Prevalence of MDROs was 65% in NHs and 80% in LTACs. The most common MDROs in NHs were MRSA (42%) and ESBL (34%); in LTACs they were VRE (55%) and ESBL (38%). CRE prevalence was higher in facilities that manage ventilated LTAC patients and NH residents (8% vs <1%, P < .001). MDRO status was known for 18% of NH residents and 49% of LTAC patients. MDRO-colonized adults commonly harbored additional MDROs (54% MDRO+ NH residents and 62% MDRO+ LTACs patients). History of MRSA (odds ratio [OR] = 1.7; confidence interval [CI]: 1.2, 2.4; P = .004), VRE (OR = 2.1; CI: 1.2, 3.8; P = .01), ESBL (OR = 1.6; CI: 1.1, 2.3; P = .03), and diabetes (OR = 1.3; CI: 1.0, 1.7; P = .03) were associated with any MDRO carriage. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of NH residents and LTAC patients harbor MDROs. MDRO status is frequently unknown to the facility. The high MDRO prevalence highlights the need for prevention efforts in NHs/LTACs as part of regional efforts to control MDRO spread.

Readiness assessment for pragmatic trials (RAPT): a model to assess the readiness of an intervention for testing in a pragmatic trial.

BACKGROUND: Pragmatic randomized, controlled trials (PCTs) test the effectiveness of interventions implemented in routine clinical practice. Because PCT findings are generalizable, this approach is gaining momentum among interventionists and funding agencies seeking to accelerate the testing and adoption of evidence-based strategies to improve care and outcomes. Particular attention is being paid to non-pharmacological interventions, which are often complex and may be difficult to uniformly implement across multiple sites. While many such non-pharmacological interventions have proven efficacious in small trials, most have not been widely adopted. PCTs could accelerate effectiveness testing and adoption, yet there are no established criteria to identify interventions ready for testing in a PCT. METHODS: We convened 30 interventionists and healthcare leaders to identify criteria to assess the readiness of non-pharmacological interventions for PCTs. Based on this discussion, we created a model with multiple domains, qualitative scoring guidelines for each domain, and a graphical summary of readiness assessments. All workshop participants had an opportunity to review and comment on the resulting model; three piloted it with their own interventions. Several other experts also provided input. RESULTS: The Readiness Assessment for Pragmatic Trials (RAPT) model enables interventionists to assess an intervention's readiness for PCTs. RAPT includes nine domains: implementation protocol, evidence, risk, feasibility, measurement, cost, acceptability, alignment, and impact. Domains reflect a range of considerations regarding the feasibility of successfully employing PCT methods and the prospect of an intervention's widespread adoption, if proven effective. Individuals evaluating an intervention are asked to qualitatively assess each domain from low to high readiness. In this report, we provide assessment guidelines and examples of scored interventions. CONCLUSIONS: RAPT is the first model to help interventionists and funders assess the extent to which interventions are ready for PCTs. Scoring efficacious interventions using RAPT can inform research team discussions regarding whether or not to advance an intervention to effectiveness testing using a PCT and how do design that PCTs.

Examining the Impact of Board-Certified Registered Nurses in Skilled Nursing Facilities Using National and State Quality and Clinical Indicators.

A convenience sample of skilled nursing facilities was selected from a sample of graduates of an online training program for RNs who subsequently achieved board certification in gerontological nursing (RN-BC). Facilities that employed one or more RN-BC were pair-matched using 11 organizational characteristics with facilities that did not employ a RN-BC. Facility data were collected at two time points, and differences between time points and between facility type (RN-BC versus non-RN-BC) were analyzed. Findings showed that there were no statistically significant differences between RN-BC and non-RN-BC facilities with respect to quality ratings and nurse sensitive clinical indicators (e.g., restraint use, urinary tract infections, falls, antipsychotic medication use) between the two time periods; however, in the second time period, RN-BC facilities showed greater improvement versus non-RN-BC facilities in seven of nine outcomes, achieving significance in Overall (4.10 vs. 3.55, p < 0.01) and Survey (3.48 vs. 2.86, p < 0.01) 5-Star ratings. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 45(11), 39-45.].

"Why Is This Patient Being Sent Here?": Communication from Urgent Care to the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Despite patients' increasing use of urgent care centers (UCC), little is known about how urgent care clinicians communicate with the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVES: To assess ED clinicians' perceptions of the quality and consistency of communication when patients are referred from UCCs to EDs. METHODS: Emergency medicine department chairs distributed a brief, electronic survey to a statewide sample of ED clinicians via e-mail. The survey included multiple-choice and free-text questions focused on types of communication desired and received from UCCs, types of test results available on transfer, and suggestions for improvement. RESULTS: Of 199 ED clinicians, 102 (51.3%) responded. More than four out of five respondents "somewhat" or "strongly agreed" that each of the following would be helpful: a telephone call, the reason for referral, specific concern, a copy of the chart, and UCC contact information. However, ED clinicians reported not consistently receiving these: only a fifth (21.6%) of clinicians reported receiving the specific concern for their last 5 patients transferred from a UCC, and 34.3% recalled receiving a copy of the chart. Overall, 54.9% reported receiving laboratory test results "often or almost always," 49.0% electrocardiograms, and 44.1% imaging reports. Qualitative analysis revealed several themes: incomplete data when patients are referred; barriers to discussion between ED and urgent care clinicians; and possible solutions to improve communication. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight variation in communication from UCCs to EDs, indicating a need to improve communication standards and practices. We identify several potential ways to improve this clinical information hand-off.

A qualitative study of choosing home health care after hospitalization: the unintended consequences of 'patient choice' requirements.

BACKGROUND: Although hospitals are increasingly held accountable for patients' post-discharge outcomes, giving them incentive to help patients choose high-performing home health agencies, little is known about how quality reports inform decision making. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to learn how quality reports are used when choosing home care in one northeast state (Rhode Island) . DESIGN: The study consisted of focus groups with home health consumers and structured interviews with hospital case managers. PARTICIPANTS: Thirteen consumers and 28 case managers from five hospitals participated in the study. APPROACH: We identified key themes and illustrative quotes by audiotaping each session, and then three independent reviewers conducted repeated examination and content analysis. KEY RESULTS: No participants were aware of existing state or Medicare home health agency public reports. Case managers provided agency lists to consumers, who routinely asked case managers to tell them which agencies to choose or which were best; but case managers felt unable to directly respond to consumers' requests for help in making the choice, because they did not have additional information to provide and because they feared violating federal laws requiring freedom of patient choice. Case managers also felt that there was little difference in agency quality, although they acknowledged they might not be aware of problems related to post-hospital care. CONCLUSIONS: Home health consumers and hospital case managers were unaware of public reports about home health quality, which limited consumers' ability to make informed decisions and case managers' ability to assist them in that decision-making process. Case managers were otherwise prohibited from recommending specific providers to patients and viewed the 'patient choice' laws as restricting their ability to respond to patients' requests for help in choosing home health agencies. Public reports can be marketed as tools that case managers can use to help patients differentiate among providers, while supporting patient autonomy.

Is implementation of the care transitions intervention associated with cost avoidance after hospital discharge?

BACKGROUND: Poorly-executed transitions out of the hospital contribute significant costs to the healthcare system. Several evidence-based interventions can reduce post-discharge utilization. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost avoidance associated with implementation of the Care Transitions Intervention (CTI). DESIGN: A quasi-experimental cohort study using consecutive convenience sampling. PATIENTS: Fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized from 1 January 2009 to 31 May 2011 in six Rhode Island hospitals. INTERVENTION: The CTI is a patient-centered coaching intervention to empower individuals to better manage their health. It begins in-hospital and continues for 30 days, including one home visit and one to two phone calls. MAIN MEASURES: We examined post-discharge total utilization and costs for patients who received coaching (intervention group), who declined or were lost to follow-up (internal control group), and who were eligible, but not approached (external control group), using propensity score matching to control for baseline differences. KEY RESULTS: Compared to matched internal controls (N = 321), the intervention group had significantly lower utilization in the 6 months after discharge and lower mean total health care costs ($14,729 vs. $18,779, P = 0.03). The cost avoided per patient receiving the intervention was $3,752, compared to internal controls. Results for the external control group were similar. Shifting of costs to other utilization types was not observed. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrates that the CTI generates meaningful cost avoidance for at least 6 months post-hospitalization, and also provides useful metrics to evaluate the impact and cost avoidance of hospital readmission reduction programs.

Improving the quality of care and communication during patient transitions: best practices for urgent care centers.

BACKGROUND: Although high-quality care transitions require timely and accurate communication of clinical information between providers, such communication is inconsistent, and there are few established guidelines outside the hospital setting. METHODS: Using a systematic, collaborative quality improvement process, Healthcentric Advisors (Providence, Rhode Island) undertook a multistage approach to define best practices for care transitions in the urgent care setting. This approach entailed review of the medical literature to identify processes that improve care transitions outcomes, gathering of information about clinicians' preferences, and a statewide community meeting with urgent care clinicians and other stakeholders to vet draft guidelines and obtain consensus on the concepts. RESULTS: Because of an inability to identify any guidelines or research that globally addressed care transitions from the urgent care setting, information was gathered from studies on patient discharge instructions and extrapolated from the evidence base available for related settings. The resulting set of eight best practices for urgent care center transitions focuses on clinician-to-clinician communication and patient activation, which can be implemented to establish measurable, communitywide expectations for communication. CONCLUSION: This set of best practices constitutes the first known guidelines to establish expectations and measures tailored specifically to transitions from the urgent care setting to the emergency department or primary care office. They can serve as a resource and a framework for urgent care clinicians expanding their collaboration with community partners, such as emergency departments and primary care providers, particularly in the context of emerging payment models.

Pragmatic Implementation of a Music Intervention in Nursing Homes Before and During COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: We conducted 2 trials of a music intervention for managing behaviors in nursing home (NH) residents with dementia, before (2019) and during (2021) the pandemic. In this report, we compare adherence fidelity across the trials using the Framework for Implementation Fidelity (FIF). DESIGN: Cross-sectional, descriptive implementation comparison. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-four NHs randomized to receive the intervention (27 pre-COVID, 27 during COVID) METHODS: We compare the trials on the following FIF criteria: coverage (number of residents receiving the intervention); duration (minutes of music received per exposed day); frequency (percentage of residents with nursing staff use of music in the past week); and details of content (adherence to core components of the intervention). We report NH-level performance in each domain and compare characteristics of NHs in the bottom (low) and top (high) terciles of adherence. RESULTS: Across FIF domains, adherence fidelity was lower during COVID compared with pre-COVID: coverage, residents exposed (COVID: 7.5, SD 5.6; pre-COVID: 12.7, SD 3.6); duration, music minutes per exposed day (COVID: 2.5, SD 5.1; pre-COVID: 27.1, SD 23.9); frequency, percentage of residents with nursing use of intervention in the past week (COVID: 15.0, SD 31.5; pre-COVID 40.4, SD 25.6); and details of content, compliance with core components of the intervention (COVID: 8.3, SD 1.9; pre-COVID 9.6, SD 2.0). In both trials, high-adherence fidelity NHs had better nursing staff ratios, greater percentages of Medicare residents, and lower percentages of Black residents, compared with low-fidelity NHs. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Adherence fidelity was worse in the COVID vs pre-COVID trial, despite adaptations between trials intended to reduce staff burden and increase clinical targeting of the intervention. Results may point to the long-term effects of COVID on quality improvement capacity in NHs and/or a lack of available resources in most NHs to implement complex behavioral interventions without direct research support.

Ready or Not: A Conceptual Model of Organizational Readiness for Embedded Pragmatic Dementia Research.

The National Institute on Aging Alzheimer's Disease/Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias Research Implementation Milestones emphasize the need for implementation research that maximizes up-take and scale-up of evidence-based dementia care practices across settings, diverse populations, and disease trajectories. Organizational readiness for implementation is a salient consideration when planning and conducting embedded pragmatic trials, in which interventions are implemented by provider staff. The current article examines the conceptual and theoretical underpinnings of organizational readiness for implementation and the operationalization of this construct. We offer a preliminary conceptual model for explicating and measuring organizational readiness and describe the unique characteristics and demands of implementing evidence-based interventions targeting persons with dementia and/or their care partners. [Research in Gerontological Nursing, 17(3), 149-160.].

Using Hybrid Effectiveness Studies to Facilitate Implementation in Community-Based Settings: Three Case Studies in Dementia Care Research.

The pipeline from discovery to testing and then implementing evidence-based innovations in real-world contexts may take 2 decades or more to achieve. Implementation science innovations, such as hybrid studies that combine effectiveness and implementation research questions, may help to bridge the chasm between intervention testing and implementation in dementia care. This paper describes hybrid effectiveness studies and presents 3 examples of dementia care interventions conducted in various community-based settings. Studies that focus on outcomes and implementation processes simultaneously may result in a truncated and more efficient implementation pipeline, thereby providing older persons, their families, health care providers, and communities with the best evidence to improve quality of life and care more rapidly. We offer post-acute and long-term care researchers considerations related to study design, sampling, data collection, and analysis that they can apply to their own dementia and other chronic disease care investigations.

Broad immunogenicity to prior SARS-CoV-2 strains and JN.1 variant elicited by XBB.1.5 vaccination in nursing home residents.

Background: SARS-CoV-2 vaccination has reduced hospitalization and mortality for nursing home residents (NHRs). However, emerging variants coupled with waning immunity, immunosenescence, and variability of vaccine efficacy undermine vaccine effectiveness. We therefore need to update our understanding of the immunogenicity of the most recent XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccine to variant strains among NHRs. Methods: The current study focuses on a subset of participants from a longitudinal study of consented NHRs and HCWs who have received serial blood draws to assess immunogenicity with each SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine dose. We report data on participants who received the XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccine after FDA approval in Fall 2023. NHRs were classified based on whether they had an interval SARS-CoV-2 infection between their first bivalent vaccine dose and their XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccination. Results: The sample included 61 NHRs [median age 76 (IQR 68-86), 51% female] and 28 HCWs [median age 45 (IQR 31-58), 46% female). Following XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccination, there was a robust geometric mean fold rise (GMFR) in XBB.1.5-specific neutralizing antibody titers of 17.3 (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.3, 32.4) and 11.3 (95% CI 5, 25.4) in NHRs with and without interval infection, respectively. The GMFR in HCWs was 13.6 (95% CI 8.4,22). Similarly, we noted a robust GMFR in JN.1-specific neutralizing antibody titers of 14.9 (95% CI 7.9, 28) and 6.5 (95% CI 3.3, 13.1) among NHRs with and without interval infection, and a GMFR of 11.4 (95% CI 6.2, 20.9) in HCWs. NHRs with interval SARS-CoV-2 infection had higher neutralizing antibody titers across all analyzed strains following XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccination, compared to NHRs without interval infection. Conclusion: The XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccine significantly elevates Omicron-specific neutralizing antibody titers to XBB.1.5 and JN.1 strains in both NHRs and HCWs. This response was more pronounced in individuals known to be infected with SARS-CoV-2 since bivalent vaccination. Impact Statement: All authors certify that this work entitled " Broad immunogenicity to prior strains and JN.1 variant elicited by XBB.1.5 vaccination in nursing home residents " is novel. It shows that the XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccine significantly elevates Omicron-specific neutralizing antibody titers in both nursing home residents and healthcare workers to XBB and BA.28.6/JN.1 strains. This work is important since JN.1 increased from less than 0.1% to 94% of COVID-19 cases from October 2023 to February 2024 in the US. This information is timely given the CDC's latest recommendation that adults age 65 and older receive a Spring 2024 XBB booster. Since the XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccine produces compelling immunogenicity to the most prevalent circulating JN.1 strain in nursing home residents, our findings add important support and rationale to encourage vaccine uptake. Key Points: Emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants together with waning immunity, immunosenescence, and variable vaccine efficacy reduce SARS-CoV-2 vaccine effectiveness in nursing home residents.XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccination elicited robust response in both XBB.1.5 and JN.1 neutralizing antibodies in nursing home residents and healthcare workers, although the absolute titers to JN.1 were less than titers to XBB.1.5Why does this paper matter? Among nursing home residents, the XBB.1.5 monovalent SARS-CoV-2 vaccine produces compelling immunogenicity to the JN.1 strain, which represents 94% of all COVID-19 cases in the U.S. as of February 2024.

Broad immunogenicity to prior SARS-CoV-2 strains and JN.1 variant elicited by XBB.1.5 vaccination in nursing home residents.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination has reduced hospitalization and mortality for nursing home residents (NHRs) but emerging variants and waning immunity challenge vaccine effectiveness. This study assesses the immunogenicity of the most recent XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccine to variant strains among NHRs. Participants were subset of a longitudinal study of consented NHRs and Healthcare workers (HCWs) who have received serial blood draws to assess immunogenicity with each SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine dose. We report data on participants who received the XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccine post-FDA approval in Fall 2023. NHRs were categorized by whether they had an interval SARS-CoV-2 infection between their first bivalent vaccine dose and their XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccination. The sample included 61 NHRs [median age 76 (IQR 68-86), 51% female] and 28 HCWs [median age 45 (IQR 31-58), 46% female). After XBB.1.5 vaccination, a robust geometric mean fold rise (GMFR) in XBB.1.5-specific neutralizing antibody titers was observed:17.3 (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.3, 32.4) and NHRs with interval infection and 11.3 (95% CI 5, 25.4) in those without and 13.6 (95% CI 8.4,22) in HCWs. For JN.1-specific titers, GMFRs were 14.9 (95% CI 7.9, 28) and 6.5 (95% CI 3.3, 13.1) in NHRs with and without interval infection, and 11.4 (95% CI 6.2, 20.9) in HCWs. NHRs with interval SARS-CoV-2 infection had higher titers across all analyzed strains analyzed. The XBB.1.5 vaccine significantly elevates Omicron-specific neutralizing antibody titers to XBB.1.5 and JN.1 strains in both NHRs and HCWs with more pronounced in those previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 since bivalent vaccination.

Closing the loop: best practices for cross-setting communication at ED discharge.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to develop emergency department best practice guidelines for improved communication during patient care transitions. BASIC PROCEDURES: To our knowledge, there are no specific guidelines for communication at the point of transition from the emergency department to the community. In Rhode Island, we used a multistage collaborative quality improvement process to define best practices for emergency department care transitions. We reviewed the medical literature, consensus statements, and materials from national campaigns; gathered preferences from emergency medicine and primary care clinicians; and created guidelines that we vetted with emergency medicine clinicians and other key stakeholders. MAIN FINDINGS: Because we did not find any guidelines that globally addressed care transitions from the emergency department, we drew from studies on patient discharge instructions and extrapolated from the evidence base available for other, related settings. Our key outcome is a set of care transition best practices for emergency departments, which can be implemented to establish measurable, communitywide expectations for cross-setting clinician-to-clinician communication. They include obtaining information about patients' outpatient clinicians, sending summary clinical information to downstream clinicians, performing modified medication reconciliation, and providing patients with effective education and written discharge instructions. PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS: The best practices provide feasible standards for evaluating and improving how patients transition out of the emergency department and can provide a framework for emergency department leaders expanding their collaboration with community partners, particularly in the context of emerging payment models. They also catalyze introspection and debate about how to improve communication and accountability across the care continuum.