Analysis of the impact of COVID-19 on Scotland's care-homes from March 2020 to October 2021: national linked data cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on long-term care residents remains of wide interest, but most analyses focus on the initial wave of infections. OBJECTIVE: To examine change over time in: (i) The size, duration, classification and pattern of care-home outbreaks of COVID-19 and associated mortality and (ii) characteristics associated with an outbreak. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort study using routinely-collected data. SETTING: All adult care-homes in Scotland (1,092 homes, 41,299 places). METHODS: Analysis was undertaken at care-home level, over three periods. Period (P)1 01/03/2020-31/08/2020; P2 01/09/2020-31/05/2021 and P3 01/06/2021-31/10/2021. Outcomes were the presence and characteristics of outbreaks and mortality within the care-home. Cluster analysis was used to compare the pattern of outbreaks. Logistic regression examined care-home characteristics associated with outbreaks. RESULTS: In total 296 (27.1%) care-homes had one outbreak, 220 (20.1%) had two, 91 (8.3%) had three, and 68 (6.2%) had four or more. There were 1,313 outbreaks involving residents: 431 outbreaks in P1, 559 in P2 and 323 in P3. The COVID-19 mortality rate per 1,000 beds fell from 45.8 in P1, to 29.3 in P2, and 3.5 in P3. Larger care-homes were much more likely to have an outbreak, but associations between size and outbreaks were weaker in later periods. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 mitigation measures appear to have been beneficial, although the impact on residents remained severe until early 2021. Care-home residents, staff, relatives and providers are critical groups for consideration and involvement in future pandemic planning.

Listening and learning: a qualitative study of Scottish care home staff experiences of managing COVID-19 between March 2020-August 2022.

BACKGROUND: The serious outcomes of outbreaks of COVID-19 in care homes have been described internationally. The experiences of professionals working through outbreaks has received less attention, missing opportunities to acknowledge and learn lessons. Our aim was to explore the experiences of care home staff in Scotland of managing COVID-19 within their homes to help inform understanding and future practice. METHODS: From April to August 2022, 34 individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with care home staff working in homes which experienced an outbreak(s) of COVID-19. Reflexive thematic methods were used to analyse verbatim deidentified transcripts. FINDINGS: There was no singular experience of COVID-19 outbreaks within care homes. We identified four broad groupings of homes with outbreaks (significant outbreaks, managed outbreaks, outbreaks in remote/rural homes & outbreaks in homes supporting younger adults), with overlaps in timing and severity and variation in the support received and impact. The national response to the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in fundamental change to care home relationships. Staff responded by adaptation in uncertainty. However, they were challenged by emerging inequalities influencing residents' care. There were tensions between staff experience and evolving external approaches to regulation and oversight. All this change resulted in psychological impacts on staff. However, there was also widespread evidence of compassionate leadership and teamwork in their responses. Effective sources of support were underpinned by respectful relationships and continuity, tailored to individual contexts. CONCLUSIONS: The lived experiences of care home staff during the COVID-19 pandemic provide valuable insights applicable beyond the pandemic context. This includes: recognition of the specialism, complexity and diversity of care home practice; the value afforded by embedding genuine representation and involvement in planning, policy-making and research; the need for individualising to people in their contexts and the value of fostering respectful relationships across professional groups to support residents.

Outcome measures from international older adult care home intervention research: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Care homes are increasingly important settings for intervention research to enhance evidence-informed care. For such research to demonstrate effectiveness, it is essential that measures are appropriate for the population, setting and practice contexts. OBJECTIVE: To identify care home intervention studies and describe the resident outcome measures used. DESIGN: Scoping review. METHODS: We reviewed international care home research published from 2015 to August 2022. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and ASSIA. We included any intervention study conducted in a care home, reporting resident outcomes. We extracted resident outcome measures, organised these using the domains of an adapted framework and described their use. RESULTS: From 7,330 records screened, we included 396 datasets reported in 436 publications. These included 12,167 care homes and 836,842 residents, with an average of 80 residents per study. The studies evaluated 859 unique resident outcomes 2,030 times using 732 outcome measures. Outcomes were evaluated between 1 and 112 times, with 75.1% of outcomes evaluated only once. Outcome measures were used 1-120 times, with 68.4% of measures used only once. Only 14 measures were used ≥20 times. Functional status, mood & behaviour and medications were the commonest outcome domains assessed. More than half of outcomes were assessed using scales, with a fifth using existing records or administrative data. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant heterogeneity in the choice and assessment of outcomes for intervention research in care homes. There is an urgent need to develop a consensus on useful and sensitive tools for care homes, working with residents, families and friends and staff.

Understanding Pathways into Care homes using Data (UnPiCD study): a retrospective cohort study using national linked health and social care data.

BACKGROUND: Pathways into care are poorly understood but important life events for individuals and their families. UK policy is to avoid moving-in to care homes from acute hospital settings. This assumes that moves from secondary care represent a system failure. However, those moving to care homes from community and hospital settings may be fundamentally different groups, each requiring differing care approaches. OBJECTIVE: To characterise individuals who move-in to a care home from hospital and compare with those moving-in from the community. DESIGN AND SETTING: A retrospective cohort study using cross-sectoral data linkage of care home data. METHODS: We included adults moving-in to care homes between 1/4/13 and 31/3/16, recorded in the Scottish Care Home Census. Care home data were linked to general and psychiatric hospital admissions, community prescribing and mortality records to ascertain comorbidities, significant diagnoses, hospital resource use, polypharmacy and frailty. Multivariate logistic regression identified predictors of moving-in from hospital compared to from community. RESULTS: We included 23,892 individuals moving-in to a care home, 13,564 (56.8%) from hospital and 10,328 (43.2%) from the community. High frailty risk adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) 5.11 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 4.60-5.68), hospital discharge with diagnosis of fracture aOR 3.91 (95%CI: 3.41-4.47) or stroke aOR 8.42 (95%CI: 6.90-10.29) were associated with moving-in from hospital. Discharge from in-patient psychiatry was also a highly significant predictor aOR 19.12 (95%CI: 16.26-22.48). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals moving-in to care homes directly from hospital are clinically distinct from those from the community. Linkage of cross-sectoral data can allow exploration of pathways into care at scale.

Developing a minimum data set for older adult care homes in the UK: exploring the concept and defining early core principles.

Reforms to social care in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, in the UK and internationally, place data at the heart of proposed innovations and solutions. The principles are not well established of what constitutes core, or minimum, data to support care home residents. Often, what is included privileges data on resident health over day-to-day care priorities and quality of life. This Personal View argues for evidence-based principles on which to base the development of a UK minimum data set (MDS) for care homes. Co-produced work involving care home staff and older people working with stakeholders is required to define and agree the format, content, structure, and operationalisation of the MDS. Implementation decisions will determine the success of the MDS, affecting aspects including data quality, completeness, and usability. Care home staff who collect the data need to benefit from the MDS and see value in their contribution, and residents must derive benefit from data collection and synthesis.

The uptake and use of a minimum data set (MDS) for older people living and dying in care homes: a realist review.

BACKGROUND: Care homes provide long term care for older people. Countries with standardised approaches to residents' assessment, care planning and review (known as minimum data sets (MDS)) use the aggregate data to guide resource allocation, monitor quality, and for research. Less is known about how an MDS affects how staff assess, provide and review residents' everyday care. The review aimed to develop a theory-driven understanding of how care home staff can effectively implement and use MDS to plan and deliver care for residents. METHODS: The realist review was organised according to RAMESES (Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: and Evolving Standards) guidelines. There were three overlapping stages: 1) defining the scope of the review and theory development on the use of minimum data set 2) testing and refining candidate programme theories through iterative literature searches and stakeholders' consultations as well as discussion among the research team; and 3) data synthesis from stages 1 and 2. The following databases were used MEDLINE via OVID, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), ASSIA [Applied Social Sciences Citation Index and Abstracts]) and sources of grey literature. RESULTS: Fifty-one papers informed the development of three key interlinked theoretical propositions: motivation (mandates and incentives for Minimum Data Set completion); frontline staff monitoring (when Minimum Data Set completion is built into the working practices of the care home); and embedded recording systems (Minimum Data Set recording system is integral to collecting residents' data). By valuing the contributions of staff and building on existing ways of working, the uptake and use of an MDS could enable all staff to learn with and from each other about what is important for residents' care CONCLUSIONS: Minimum Data Sets provides commissioners service providers and researchers with standardised information useful for commissioning planning and analysis. For it to be equally useful for care home staff it requires key activities that address the staff experiences of care, their work with others and the use of digital technology. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number CRD42020171323.

Care-home outbreaks of COVID-19 in Scotland March to May 2020: National linked data cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: understanding care-home outbreaks of COVID-19 is a key public health priority in the ongoing pandemic to help protect vulnerable residents. OBJECTIVE: to describe all outbreaks of COVID-19 infection in Scottish care-homes for older people between 01/03/2020 and 31/03/2020, with follow-up to 30/06/2020. DESIGN AND SETTING: National linked data cohort analysis of Scottish care-homes for older people. METHODS: data linkage was used to identify outbreaks of COVID-19 in care-homes. Care-home characteristics associated with the presence of an outbreak were examined using logistic regression. Size of outbreaks was modelled using negative binomial regression. RESULTS: 334 (41%) Scottish care-homes for older people experienced an outbreak, with heterogeneity in outbreak size (1-63 cases; median = 6) and duration (1-94 days, median = 31.5 days). Four distinct patterns of outbreak were identified: 'typical' (38% of outbreaks, mean 11.2 cases and 48 days duration), severe (11%, mean 29.7 cases and 60 days), contained (37%, mean 3.5 cases and 13 days) and late-onset (14%, mean 5.4 cases and 17 days). Risk of a COVID-19 outbreak increased with increasing care-home size (for ≥90 beds vs <20, adjusted OR = 55.4, 95% CI 15.0-251.7) and rising community prevalence (OR = 1.2 [1.0-1.4] per 100 cases/100,000 population increase). No routinely available care-home characteristic was associated with outbreak size. CONCLUSIONS: reducing community prevalence of COVID-19 infection is essential to protect those living in care-homes. More systematic national data collection to understand care-home residents and the homes in which they live is a priority in ensuring we can respond more effectively in future.

Protocol for the development of a repository of individual participant data from randomised controlled trials conducted in adult care homes (the Virtual International Care Homes Trials Archive (VICHTA)).

BACKGROUND: Approximately 418,000 people live in care homes in the UK, yet accessible, robust data on care home populations and organisation are lacking. This hampers our ability to plan, allocate resources or prevent risk. Large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in care homes offer a potential solution. The value of detailed data on residents' demographics, outcomes and contextual information captured in RCTs has yet to be fully realised. Irrespective of the intervention tested, much of the trial data collected overlaps in terms of structured assessments and descriptive information. Given the time and costs required to prospectively collect data in these populations, pooling anonymised RCT data into a structured repository offers benefit; secondary analyses of pooled RCT data can improve understanding of this under-researched population and enhance the future trial design. This protocol describes the creation of a project-specific repository of individual participant data (IPD) from trials conducted in care homes and subsequent expansion into a legacy dataset for wider use, to address the need for accurate, high-quality IPD on this vulnerable population. METHODS: Informed by scoping of relevant literature, the principal investigators of RCTs conducted in adult care homes in the UK since 2010 will be invited to contribute trial IPD. Contributing trialists will form a Steering Committee who will oversee data sharing and remain gatekeepers of their own trial's data. IPD will be cleaned and standardised in consultation with the Steering Committee for accuracy. Planned analyses include a comparison of pooled IPD with point estimates from administrative sources, to assess generalisability of RCT data to the wider care home population. We will also identify key resident characteristics and outcomes from within the trial repository, which will inform the development of a national minimum dataset for care homes. Following project completion, management will migrate to the Virtual Trials Archives, forming a legacy dataset which will be expanded to include international RCTs, and will be accessible to the wider research community for analyses. DISCUSSION: Analysis of pooled IPD has the potential to inform and direct future practice, research and policy at low cost, enhancing the value of existing data and reducing research waste. We aim to create a permanent archive for care home trial data and welcome the contribution of emerging trial datasets.

The burden of psychotropic and anticholinergic medicines use in care homes: population-based analysis in 147 care homes.

BACKGROUND: older people living in care-homes are particularly vulnerable to adverse effects of psychotropic and anticholinergic drugs. METHODS: anonymised dispensed prescription data from all 4,478 residents aged ≥ 60 years in 147 care-homes in two Scottish health boards were analysed. Psychotropic medicines examined were antipsychotics, antidepressants, hypnotic/anxiolytics, opioids and gabapentinoids. Anticholinergic burden was measured using the modified anticholinergic risk scale (mARS). Variation between care-homes and associations with individual and care-home characteristics were examined using multilevel logistic regression. RESULTS: 63.5% of residents were prescribed at least one psychotropic drug, and 27.0% two or more, most commonly antidepressants (41.6%), opioids (20.3%), hypnotic/anxiolytics (16.9%) and antipsychotics (16.7%). 48.1% were prescribed an anticholinergic drug, and 12.1% had high anticholinergic burden (mARS ≥ 3). Variation between care-homes was high for antipsychotics (intra-cluster correlation coefficient [ICC] 8.2%) and hypnotics/anxiolytics (ICC = 7.3%), and moderate for antidepressants (ICC = 4.7%) and anticholinergics (ICC = 2.8%). Prescribing of all drugs was lower in the oldest old. People with dementia were more likely to be prescribed antipsychotics (adjusted OR = 1.45, 95%CI 1.23-1.71) but less likely to be prescribed anticholinergics (aOR = 0.61, 95%CI 0.51-0.74). Prescribing of antipsychotics was higher in Tayside (aOR = 1.52, 95%CI 1.20-1.92), whereas prescribing of antidepressants (particularly tricyclic-related) was lower (aOR = 0.66, 95%CI 0.56-0.79). There was no association with care-home regulator quality scores. CONCLUSION: care-home residents have high psychotropic and anticholinergic burden, with considerable variation between care-homes that is not related to existing measures of quality of care. Research to better understand variation between care-homes and the interaction with local prescribing cultures is needed.

New horizons in iron deficiency anaemia in older adults.

Iron deficiency anaemia (IDA) is common in older adults and associated with a range of adverse outcomes. Differentiating iron deficiency from other causes of anaemia is important to ensure appropriate investigations and treatment. It is possible to make the diagnosis reliably using simple blood tests. Clinical evaluation and assessment are required to help determine the underlying cause and to initiate appropriate investigations. IDA in men and post-menopausal females is most commonly due to occult gastrointestinal blood loss until proven otherwise, although there is a spectrum of underlying causative pathologies. Investigation decisions should take account of the wishes of the patient and their competing comorbidities, individualising the approach. Management involves supplementation using oral or intravenous (IV) iron then consideration of treatment of the underlying cause of deficiency. Future research areas are outlined including the role of Hepcidin and serum soluble transferrin receptor measurement, quantitative faecal immunochemical testing, alternative dosing regimens and the potential role of IV iron preparations.

Are antidementia drugs associated with reduced mortality after a hospital emergency admission in the population with dementia aged 65 years and older?

INTRODUCTION: People with dementia experience poor outcomes after hospital admission, with mortality being particularly high. There is no cure for dementia; antidementia medications have been shown to improve cognition and function, but their effect on mortality in real-world settings is little known. This study examines associations between treatment with antidementia medication and mortality in older people with dementia after an emergency admission. METHODS: The design is a retrospective cohort study of people aged ≥65 years, with a diagnosis of dementia and an emergency hospital admission between 01/01/2010 and 31/12/2016. Two classes of antidementia medication were considered: the acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and memantine. Mortality was examined using a Cox proportional hazards model with time-varying covariates for the prescribing of antidementia medication before or on admission and during one-year follow-up, adjusted for demographics, comorbidity, and community prescribing including anticholinergic burden. Propensity score analysis was examined for treatment selection bias. RESULTS: There were 9142 patients with known dementia included in this study, of which 45.0% (n = 4110) received an antidementia medication before or on admission; 31.3% (n = 2864) were prescribed one of the acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, 8.7% (n = 798) memantine, and 4.9% (n = 448) both. 32.9% (n = 1352) of these patients died in the year after admission, compared to 42.7% (n = 2148) of those with no antidementia medication on admission. The Cox model showed a significant reduction in mortality in patients treated with acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.78, 95% CI 0.72-0.85) or memantine (HR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.66-0.86) or both (HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.68-0.94). Sensitivity analysis by propensity score matching confirmed the associations between antidementia prescribing and reduced mortality. DISCUSSION: Treatment with antidementia medication is associated with a reduction in risk of death in the year after an emergency hospital admission. Further research is required to determine if there is a causal relationship between treatment and mortality, and whether "symptomatic" therapy for dementia does have a disease-modifying effect.