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.

Perceptions of Palliative and End-Of-Life Care Capacity Among Frontline Staff and Administrators in Long-Term Care Homes During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Ontario, Canada: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has greatly affected the morbidity and mortality of residents in long-term care (LTC) homes. However, not much is known about its impact on staff's perception of their capacity to provide palliative and end-of-life (EOL) care for LTC residents over the course of the pandemic. We investigated changes in self-reported confidence among LTC workers and their experience in providing palliative and EOL care to residents before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Mixed-methods evaluation using a survey (n = 19) and semistructured interviews (n = 28). SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Frontline workers from 9 LTC homes who participated in Communication at End-of-Life Program in Ontario, Canada, between August 2019 and March 2020. METHODS: The survey captured LTC staff's confidence level, including attitudes toward death and dying; relationships with residents and families; and participation in palliative and EOL care. The interviews identified facilitators and barriers to providing palliative and EOL care during the pandemic. RESULTS: The COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted frontline LTC staff's confidence in their role as palliative care providers. Participants also reported notable challenges to providing resident-centered palliative and EOL care. Specifically, visitation restriction has led to increased loneliness and isolation of residents and impeded staff's ability to build supportive relationships with families. Furthermore, staffing shortages due to the single-site work restriction and illness increased workload. Psychological stress caused by a fear of COVID-19 infection and transmission also hindered staff's capacity to provide good palliative and EOL care. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Frontline LTC staff-even those who felt competent in their knowledge and skills in providing palliative and EOL care after receiving training-reported notable difficulties in providing resident-centered palliative and EOL care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

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.

An Evaluation of the Communication at End-of-Life Education Program for Personal Support Workers in Long-Term Care.

Background: Communication skills are crucial for personal support workers (PSWs) to foster therapeutic relationships with the residents and their families in the long-term care (LTC) setting. Aim: To evaluate the impact of the Communication at End-of-Life (CEoL) Education Program on the competency and confidence of PSWs working in LTC to communicate about palliative and end-of-life care, and factors affecting their involvement in palliative and end-of-life care. Setting/Participants: PSWs from 35 LTC homes in Ontario, Canada, who participated in the CEoL Education Program between January and March 2019. Design: Mixed-methods evaluation using pre- (n = 178) and post-workshop (n = 113) surveys capturing the attitudes and beliefs toward death and dying; relationships with residents and families; and PSWs' participation in end-of-life care. Follow-up interviews were conducted between February and March 2019 with 21 PSWs to examine facilitators and barriers that affected their confidence in engaging in palliative care. Results: We observed significant improvements in all three domains, with the greatest increase (11%, p < 0.001) in the proportion of participants who responded "Often" or "Always" in the participation in end-of-life care domain. Specifically, we observed PSWs' elevated confidence in speaking with families of the residents about end-of-life, discussing goals and plans with the residents, and realizing that a "good death" is possible. Time constraints and staff shortages were recurrent themes that hindered many participants' ability to provide resident-centered care. Conclusions: This evaluation demonstrates that CEoL Education Program was associated with improved PSW competency and confidence in supporting palliative and end-of-life care in LTC settings.

A Case-Control Study of the Sub-Acute Care for Frail Elderly (SAFE) Unit on Hospital Readmission, Emergency Department Visits and Continuity of Post-Discharge Care.

OBJECTIVES: In Canada, alternate-level-of-care (ALC) beds in hospitals may be used when patients who do not require the intensity of services provided in an acute care setting are waiting to be discharged to a more appropriate care setting. However, when there is a lack of care options for patients waiting to be discharged, it contributes to prolonged hospital stays and bottlenecks in the health care system manifested as "hallway medicine." We examined the effectiveness of a function-focused transitional care program, the Sub-Acute care for Frail Elderly (SAFE) Unit, in reducing the length of stay (LOS) in hospital, as well as post-discharge acute care use and continuity of care. DESIGN: Case-control study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A 450-bed nursing home located in Ontario, Canada, where the SAFE Unit is based. The study population included frail, older patients aged 60 years and older who received care in the SAFE Unit between March 1, 2018, and February 28, 2019 (n = 153) to controls comprising of other hospitalized patients (n = 1773). METHODS: We linked facility-level to provincial health administrative databases on hospital admissions and emergency department (ED) visits, and the Ontario Health Insurance Plan claims database for physician billings to investigated the LOS during the index hospitalization, 30-day odds of post-discharge ED visits, hospital readmission, and follow-up with family physicians. RESULTS: SAFE patients had a median hospital LOS of 13 days [interquartile range (IQR): 8-19 days], with 75% having fewer than 1 day in an ALC bed. In comparison, the median LOS in the control group was 15 days (IQR: 10-24 days), with one-third of those days spent in an ALC bed (median: 5 days, IQR: 3-10 days). SAFE patients were more likely (64.1%) to be discharged home than control patients (46.3%). Both groups experienced similar 30-day odds of ED visits, hospital readmission and follow-up with a family physician. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Frail older individuals in the SAFE Unit experienced shorter hospital stays, were less likely to be discharged to settings other than home and had similar 30-day acute care outcomes as control patients post-discharge.