Building evidence to advance health equity: a systematic review on care-related outcomes for older, minoritised populations in long-term care homes.

BACKGROUND: Advancing health equity requires more contextualised evidence. OBJECTIVES: To synthesise published evidence using an existing framework on the origins of health disparities and determine care-related outcome disparities for residents of long-term care, comparing minoritised populations to the context-specific dominant population. DESIGN: Systematic review. SUBJECTS: Residents of 24-hour long-term care homes. METHODS: The protocol was registered a priori with PROSPERO (CRD42021269489). Literature published between 1 January 2000 and 26 September 2021, was searched, including studies comparing baseline characteristics and outcomes in minoritised versus dominant populations. Dual screening, two-reviewer verification for extraction, and risk of bias assessments were conducted to ensure rigour. Studies were synthesized using a conceptual framework to contextualise evidence according to multi-level factors contributing to the development of care disparities. RESULTS: Twenty-one of 34 included studies demonstrated disparities in care outcomes for minoritised groups compared to majority groups. Thirty-one studies observed differences in individual-level characteristics (e.g. age, education, underlying conditions) upon entry to homes, with several outcome disparities (e.g. restraint use, number of medications) present at baseline and remaining or worsening over time. Significant gaps in evidence were identified, particularly an absence of literature on provider information and evidence on the experience of intersecting minority identities that contribute to care-related outcome disparities in long-term care. CONCLUSION: This review found differences in minoritised populations' care-related outcomes. The findings provide guidance for future health equity policy and research-supporting diverse and intersectional capacity building in long-term care.

Estimated mortality risk and use of palliative care services among home care clients during the last 6 months of life: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In Canada, only 15% of patients requiring palliative care receive such services in the year before death. We describe health care utilization patterns among home care users in their last 6 months of life to inform care planning for older people with varying mortality risks and evolving care needs as they decline. METHODS: Using population health administrative data from Ontario, we performed a retrospective cohort study involving home care clients aged 50 years and older who received at least 1 interRAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) Home Care assessment between April 2018 and September 2019. We report the proportion of clients who used acute care, long-term care, and palliative home care services within 6 months of their assessment, stratified by their predicted 6-month mortality risk using a prognostic tool called the Risk Evaluation for Support: Predictions for Elder-life in their Communities Tool (RESPECT) and vital status. RESULTS: The cohort included 247 377 adults, 11.9% of whom died within 6 months of an assessment. Among decedents, 50.6% of those with a RESPECT-estimated median survival of fewer than 3 months received at least 1 nonphysician palliative home care visit before death. This proportion declined to 38.7% and 29.5% among decedents with an estimated median survival between 3 and 6 months and between 6 and 12 months, respectively. INTERPRETATION: Many older adults in Ontario do not receive any palliative home care before death. Prognostic tools such as RESPECT may improve recognition of reduced life expectancies and palliative care needs of individuals in their final years of life.

Nurse practitioner and physician end-of-life home visits and end-of-life outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Physicians and nurse practitioners (NPs) play critical roles in supporting palliative and end-of-life care in the community. We examined healthcare outcomes among patients who received home visits from physicians and NPs in the 90 days before death. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using linked data of adult home care users in Ontario, Canada, who died between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2019. Healthcare outcomes included medications for pain and symptom management, emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalisations and a community-based death. We compared the characteristics of and outcomes in decedents who received a home visit from an NP, physician and both to those who did not receive a home visit. RESULTS: Half (56.9%) of adult decedents in Ontario did not receive a home visit from a provider in the last 90 days of life; 34.5% received at least one visit from a physician, 3.8% from an NP and 4.9% from both. Compared with those without any visits, having at least one home visit reduced the odds of hospitalisation and ED visits, and increased the odds of receiving medications for pain and symptom management and achieving a community-based death. Observed effects were larger in patients who received at least one visit from both. CONCLUSIONS: Beyond home care, receiving home visits from primary care providers near the end of life may be associated with better outcomes that are aligned with patients' preferences-emphasising the importance of NPs and physicians' role in supporting people near the end of life.

Exploring COVID-19 education to support vaccine confidence amongst the general adult population with special considerations for healthcare and long-term care staff: A scoping review.

Background: Despite the demonstrated efficacy of approved COVID-19 vaccines, high levels of hesitancy were observed in the first few months of the COVID-19 vaccines' rollout. Factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy are well-described in the literature. Among the various strategies for promoting vaccine confidence, educational interventions provide a foundationally and widely implemented set of approaches for supporting individuals in their vaccine decisions. However, the evidence around the measurable impact of various educational strategies to improve vaccine confidence is limited. We conducted a scoping review with the aim of exploring and characterizing educational interventions delivered during the pandemic to support COVID-19 vaccine confidence in adults. Methods: We developed a search strategy with a medical information scientist and searched five databases, including Ovid MEDLINE and Web of Science, as well as grey literature. We considered all study designs and reports. Interventions delivered to children or adolescents, interventions on non-COVID-19 vaccines, as well as national or mass vaccination campaigns without documented interaction(s) between facilitator(s) and a specific audience were excluded. Articles were independently screened by three reviewers. After screening 4602 titles and abstracts and 174 full-text articles across two rounds of searches, 22 articles met our inclusion criteria. Ten additional studies were identified through hand searching. Data from included studies were charted and results were described narratively. Results: We included 32 studies and synthesized their educational delivery structure, participants (i.e., facilitators and priority audience), and content. Formal, group-based presentations were the most common type of educational intervention in the included studies (75%). A third of studies (34%) used multiple strategies, with many formal group-based presentations being coupled with additional individual-based interventions (29%). Given the novelty of the COVID-19 vaccines and the unique current context, studies reported personalized conversations, question periods, and addressing misinformation as important components of the educational approaches reviewed. Conclusions: Various educational interventions were delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic, with many initiatives involving multifaceted interventions utilizing both formal and informal approaches that leveraged community (cultural, religious) partnerships when developing and facilitating COVID-19 vaccine education. Train-the-trainer approaches with recognized community members could be of value as trust and personal connections were identified as strong enablers throughout the review.

The cost-effectiveness of a nursing home-based transitional care unit for increasing the potential for independent living in the community among hospitalized older adults.

OBJECTIVE: In Canada, a persistent barrier to achieving healthcare system efficiency has been patient days accumulated by individuals with an alternate level of care (ALC) designation. Transitional care units (TCUs) may address the capacity pressures associated with ALC. We sought to assess the cost-effectiveness of a nursing home (NH) based TCU leveraging existing infrastructure to support a hospitalized older adult's transition to independent living at home. METHODS: This case-control study included frail, older adults who received care within a function-focused TCU following a hospitalization between 1 March 2018 and 30 June 2019. TCU patients were propensity score matched to hospitalized ALC patients ("usual care"). The primary outcome was days without requiring institutional care six months following discharge, defined as institutional-free days. This was calculated by excluding all days in hospitals, rehabilitation facilities, complex continuing care facilities and NHs. Using the total direct cost of care up to discharge from TCU or hospital, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated. RESULTS: TCU patients spent, on average, 162.0 days institution-free (95% CI: 156.3-167.6d) within six months days post-discharge, while usual care patients spent 140.6 days institution-free (95% CI: 132.3-148.8d). TCU recipients had a lower total cost of care, by CAN$1,106 (95% CI: $-6,129-$10,319), due to the reduced hospital length of stay (mean [SD] 15.6d [13.3d] for TCU patients and 28.6d [67.4d] days for usual care). TCU was deemed the more cost-effective model of care. LIMITATIONS: The main limitation was the potential inclusion of patients not eligible for SAFE in our usual group. To minimize this selection bias, we expanded the geographical pool of ALC patients to patients with SAFE admission potential in other area hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Through rehabilitative and restorative care, TCUs can reduce hospital length of stay, increase potential for independent living, and reduce risk for subsequent institutionalization.

A persistent barrier to achieving efficiency within the Canadian healthcare system has been days accumulated by patients who no longer require the intensity of hospital care but are waiting to be discharged to more appropriate care settings. Prolonged hospital stays are known to expose patients to various health risks.Transitional care units are care settings designed to improve care continuation for patients moving between different locations or levels of care. They an opportunity to address the capacity pressures and health risks associated with prolonged hospital stays.Studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of transitional care units to improve outcomes among older adults, such as reducing hospital length of stay, nursing home placement, and falls, as well as improving functional status, quality of life, and likelihood of being discharged home. However, the financial implications of transitional care units, in terms of resources required to operate their services, and value for money are not well understood.This study found that a nursing home-based, function-focused transitional care unit reduced the length of stay in hospitals and the risk for subsequent institutionalization among frail, older adults. This was achieved at a lower total cost of care. Older adults who received transitional care were able to remain at home for three weeks longer without requiring institutional care compared to those who did not receive transitional care. Considering the growing investments in transitional care, this research provides evidence supporting nursing home-based transitional care programs.

PROTOCOL: Exploring education to support vaccine confidence amongst healthcare and long-term care staff amidst the COVID-19 pandemic: A protocol for a living scoping review.

Despite the demonstrated effectiveness of vaccines, varying levels of hesitancy were observed among healthcare and long-term care workers, who were prioritized in the roll out of COVID-19 vaccines due to their high risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 transmission. However, the evidence around the measurable impact of various educational interventions to improve vaccine confidence is limited. The proposed scoping review is intended to explore any emerging research and experiences of delivering educational interventions to improve COVID-19 vaccine confidence among health and long-term care workforces. We aim to identify characteristics of both informal and formal educational interventions delivered during the pandemic to support COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Using the guidance outlined by the Joanna Briggs Institute, we intend to search five databases including, Ovid MEDLINE and Web of Science, as well as grey literature. We will consider all study designs and reports in an effort to include a breadth of sources to ensure our review will capture preliminary evidence, as well as more exploratory experiences of COVID-19 vaccine education delivery. Articles will be screened by three reviewers independently and the data will be charted, and results described narratively.