A Typology of COVID-19 Data Gaps and Noise From Long-Term Care Facilities: Approximating the True Numbers.

Although there is agreement that COVID-19 has had devastating impacts in long-term care facilities (LTCFs), estimates of cases and deaths have varied widely with little attention to the causes of this variation. We developed a typology of data vulnerabilities and a strategy for approximating the true total of COVID-19 cases and deaths in LTCFs. Based on iterative qualitative consensus, we categorized LTCF reporting vulnerabilities and their potential impacts on accuracy. Concurrently, we compiled one dataset based on LTCF self-reports and one based on confirmatory matching with California's COVID-19 databases, including death certificates. Through March 2021, Alameda County LTCFs reported 6663 COVID-19 cases and 481 deaths. In contrast, our confirmatory matching file includes 5010 cases and 594 deaths, corresponding to 25% fewer cases but 23% more deaths. We argue that the higher (self-report) case total approximates the lower bound of true COVID-19 cases, and the higher (confirmed match) death total approximates the lower bound of true COVID-19 deaths, both of which are higher than state and federal counts. LTCFs other than nursing facilities accounted for 35% of cases and 29% of deaths. Improving the accuracy of COVID-19 figures, particularly across types of LTCFs, would better inform interventions for these vulnerable populations.

COVID-19 Across the Landscape of Long-Term Care in Alameda County: Heterogeneity and Disparities.

Throughout the pandemic, public health and long-term care professionals in our urban California county have linked local and state COVID-19 data and performed observational exploratory analyses of the impacts among our diverse long-term care facilities (LTCFs). Case counts from LTCFs through March 2021 included 4309 (65%) in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), 1667 (25%) in residential care facilities for the elderly (RCFEs), and 273 (4%) in continuing care retirement communities (CCRCs). These cases led to 582 COVID-19 resident deaths and 12 staff deaths based on death certificates. Data on decedents' age, race, education, and country of birth reflected a hierarchy of wealth and socioeconomic status from CCRCs to RCFEs to SNFs. Mortality rates within SNFs were higher for non-Whites than Whites. Staff accounted for 42% of LTCF-associated COVID-19 cases, and over 75% of these staff were unlicensed. For all COVID-19 deaths in our jurisdiction, both LTCF and community, 82% of decedents were age 65 or over. Taking a comprehensive, population-based approach across our heterogenous LTCF landscape, we found socioeconomic disparities within COVID-19 cases and deaths of residents and staff. An improved data infrastructure linking public health and delivery systems would advance our understanding and potentiate life-saving interventions within this vulnerable ecosystem.

Partnering in postacute darkness? CMS has data that will help.

Health systems will improve postacute outcomes when CMS begins sharing its performance data on nursing facility chains.

A case for revisiting peer review: Implications for professional self-regulation and quality improvement.

BACKGROUND: Quality improvement in healthcare has often been promoted as different from and more valuable than peer review and other professional self-regulation processes. In spite of attempts to harmonize these two approaches, the perception of dichotomous opposition has persisted. A sequence of events in the troubled California prison system fortuitously isolated workforce interventions from more typical quality improvement interventions. Our objectives were to (1) evaluate the relative contributions of professional accountability and quality improvement interventions to an observed decrease in population mortality and (2) explore the organizational dynamics that potentiated positive outcomes. METHODS: Our retrospective mixed-methods case study correlated time-series analysis of mortality with the timing of reform interventions. Quantitative and qualitative evidence was drawn from court documents, public use files, internal databases, and other archival documents. RESULTS: Change point analysis reveals with 98% confidence that a significant improvement in age-adjusted natural mortality occurred in 2007, decreasing from 138.7 per 100,000 in the 1998-2006 period to 106.4 in the 2007-2009 period. The improvement in mortality occurred after implementation of accountability processes, prior to implementation of quality improvement interventions. Archival evidence supports the positive impact of physician competency assessments, robust peer review, and replacement of problem physicians. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests that workforce accountability provides a critical quality safeguard, and its neglect in scholarship and practice is unjustified. As with quality improvement, effective professional self-regulation requires systemic implementation of enabling policies, processes, and staff resources. The study adds to evidence that the distribution of physician performance contains a heterogeneous left skew of dyscompetence that is associated with significant harm and suggests that professional self-regulation processes such as peer review can reduce that harm. Beyond their responsibility for direct harm, dyscompetent professionals can have negative impacts on group performance. The optimal integration of professional accountability and quality improvement systems merits further investigation.

The current state of quality of care measurement in the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

The quality of health care in prisons is lacking in many states. In particular, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) is in the midst of an extreme legal remedy to address problems related to access to and quality of care; it now operates under the direction of a federally appointed receiver for medical care. To understand the current state of access and quality measurement and to assess strengths and weaknesses of current activities, the RAND Corporation conducted a series of interviews and site visits in the CDCR and related offices as well as document reviews (December 2008 to February 2009). Findings supported RAND's larger project goals to identify measures for use in a sustainable quality measurement system.

Selecting performance indicators for prison health care.

Improving prison health care requires a robust measurement dashboard that addresses multiple domains of care. We sought to identify tested indicators of clinical quality and access that prison health managers could use to ascertain gaps in performance and guide quality improvement. We used the RAND/UCLA modified Delphi method to select the best indicators for correctional health. An expert panel rated 111 indicators on validity and feasibility. They voted to retain 79 indicators in areas such as access, cardiac conditions, geriatrics, infectious diseases, medication monitoring, metabolic diseases, obstetrics/gynecology, screening/prevention, psychiatric disorders/substance abuse, pulmonary conditions, and urgent conditions. Prison health institutions, like all other large health institutions, need robust measurement systems. The indicators presented here provide a basic library for prison health managers developing such systems.

How clinicians make (or avoid) moral judgments of patients: implications of the evidence for relationships and research.

Physicians, nurses, and other clinicians readily acknowledge being troubled by encounters with patients who trigger moral judgments. For decades social scientists have noted that moral judgment of patients is pervasive, occurring not only in egregious and criminal cases but also in everyday situations in which appraisals of patients' social worth and culpability are routine. There is scant literature, however, on the actual prevalence and dynamics of moral judgment in healthcare. The indirect evidence available suggests that moral appraisals function via a complex calculus that reflects variation in patient characteristics, clinician characteristics, task, and organizational factors. The full impact of moral judgment on healthcare relationships, patient outcomes, and clinicians' own well-being is yet unknown. The paucity of attention to moral judgment, despite its significance for patient-centered care, communication, empathy, professionalism, healthcare education, stereotyping, and outcome disparities, represents a blind spot that merits explanation and repair. New methodologies in social psychology and neuroscience have yielded models for how moral judgment operates in healthcare and how research in this area should proceed. Clinicians, educators, and researchers would do well to recognize both the legitimate and illegitimate moral appraisals that are apt to occur in healthcare settings.

Improving end-of-life care in nursing facilities: the Community State Partnership To Improve End-of-Life Care--California.

BACKGROUND: The California Coalition for Compassionate Care formed in 1998 when activists and organizational leaders in several arenas sought to link their efforts for synergistic impact on end-of-life care and to obtain funding to sustain their forward momentum and collaboration. The Coalition focused on public engagement, professional education, and reforms in skilled nursing facilities. With skilled nursing facilities, the Coalition's work built on the efforts of the ECHO (Extreme Care, Human Options) Long Term Care Task Force, which served as a precursor to the Coalition. OBJECTIVE: The Coalition's objective was to assist committed facilities in devising processes of care that would operationalize basic end-of-life care principles in a manner specific to their particular facility. DESIGN: The Coalition recruited three-member leadership teams from nursing facilities throughout California to attend a 2-day training program, write an action plan, and receive 6 months of modest follow-up support. To assess its success, the group used posttraining evaluations, a follow-up evaluation, a focus group, and informal feedback over several years to assess the dynamics, achievements, and challenges of their efforts. RESULTS: In 2000-2002 the training reached 298 people representing 109 nursing facilities and each district office of the nursing facility surveyors. Response to the training was enthusiastic. Self-reported improvements in 27 care practices were best in the areas of pain assessment and management. Completion of nursing facilities' self-identified action plans varied widely. Participants generally perceived the commitment to improving end-of-life care as a vehicle for improving the overall care and quality management in nursing facilities. CONCLUSIONS: The specific challenges of organizational change in nursing facilities require sustained, focused leadership and hands-on guidance to overcome the inevitable barriers and setbacks. The Coalition's experience confirms that coalitions depend upon personal commitments and relationships, a focus on practical products, and a consistent infrastructure.