Risk Assessment and Prevention of Falls in Older Community-Dwelling Adults: A Review.

Importance: Falls are reported by more than 14 million US adults aged 65 years or older annually and can result in substantial morbidity, mortality, and health care expenditures. Observations: Falls result from age-related physiologic changes compounded by multiple intrinsic and extrinsic risk factors. Major modifiable risk factors among community-dwelling older adults include gait and balance disorders, orthostatic hypotension, sensory impairment, medications, and environmental hazards. Guidelines recommend that individuals who report a fall in the prior year, have concerns about falling, or have gait speed less than 0.8 to 1 m/s should receive fall prevention interventions. In a meta-analysis of 59 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in average-risk to high-risk populations, exercise interventions to reduce falls were associated with 655 falls per 1000 patient-years in intervention groups vs 850 falls per 1000 patient-years in nonexercise control groups (rate ratio [RR] for falls, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.71-0.83; risk ratio for number of people who fall, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.81-0.89; risk difference, 7.2%; 95% CI, 5.2%-9.1%), with most trials assessing balance and functional exercises. In a meta-analysis of 43 RCTs of interventions that systematically assessed and addressed multiple risk factors among individuals at high risk, multifactorial interventions were associated with 1784 falls per 1000 patient-years in intervention groups vs 2317 falls per 1000 patient-years in control groups (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.67-0.87) without a significant difference in the number of individuals who fell. Other interventions associated with decreased falls in meta-analysis of RCTs and quasi-randomized trials include surgery to remove cataracts (8 studies with 1834 patients; risk ratio [RR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48-0.96), multicomponent podiatry interventions (3 studies with 1358 patients; RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.99), and environmental modifications for individuals at high risk (12 studies with 5293 patients; RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.61-0.91). Meta-analysis of RCTs of programs to stop medications associated with falls have not found a significant reduction, although deprescribing is a component of many successful multifactorial interventions. Conclusions and Relevance: More than 25% of older adults fall each year, and falls are the leading cause of injury-related death in persons aged 65 years or older. Functional exercises to improve leg strength and balance are recommended for fall prevention in average-risk to high-risk populations. Multifactorial risk reduction based on a systematic clinical assessment for modifiable risk factors may reduce fall rates among those at high risk.

Short-term outcomes of prehospital opioid pain management for older adults with fall-related injury.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are recommended for pain management in patients being cared for and transported by emergency medical services, but no specific guidelines exist for older adults with fall-related injury. Prior research suggests prehospital opioid administration can effectively manage pain in older adults, but less is known about safety in this population. We compared short-term safety outcomes, including delirium, disposition, and length of stay, among older adults with fall-related injury according to whether they received prehospital opioid analgesia. METHODS: We linked Medicare claims data with prehospital patient care reports for older adults (≥65) with fall-related injury in Illinois between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2015. We used weighted regression models (logistic, multinomial logistic, and Poisson) to assess the association between prehospital opioid analgesia and incidence of inpatient delirium, hospital disposition, and length of stay. RESULTS: Of 28,150 included older adults, 3% received prehospital opioids. Patients receiving prehospital opioids (vs. no prehospital opioids) were less likely to be discharged home from the emergency department (adjusted probability = 0.30 [95% CI: 0.25, 0.34] vs. 0.47 [95% CI: 0.46, 0.48]), more likely to be discharged to a non-home setting after an inpatient admission (adjusted probability = 0.43 [95% CI: 0.39, 0.48] vs. 0.30 [95% CI: 0.30, 0.31]), had inpatient length of stay 0.4 days shorter (p < 0.001) and ICU length of stay 0.7 days shorter (p = 0.045). Incidence of delirium did not vary between treatment and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Few older adults receive opioid analgesia in the prehospital setting. Prehospital opioid analgesia may be associated with hospital disposition and length of stay for older adults with fall-related injury. However, our findings do not provide evidence of an association with inpatient delirium. These findings should be considered when developing guidelines for prehospital pain management specific to the older adult population.

Performance of FRAX in older adults with frailty: the Framingham Heart Study.

We compared the performance of FRAX according to frailty status in 3554 individuals from the Framingham Study. During 10-year follow-up, 6.9% and 3.0% of participants with and without frailty experienced MOF. Discrimination profiles were lower in participants with frailty compared to those without, but they improved when FRAX included BMD. INTRODUCTION: Frailty increases fracture risk. FRAX was developed to predict fractures but never validated in individuals with frailty. We aimed to compare the predictive performance of FRAX (v4.3) in individuals with and without frailty. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study using the Framingham Heart Study. Frailty was defined by the Fried phenotype. Major osteoporotic fractures (MOF) were ascertained from medical records during 10-year follow-up. To evaluate discrimination and calibration of FRAX, we calculated the area-under-the-receiver-operating characteristics curves (AUC) using logistic regression models and observed-to-predicted fracture probabilities. Analyses were stratified by frailty status. RESULTS: Frailty was present in 550/3554 (15.5%) of participants. Participants with frailty were older (81.1 vs. 67.6 years), female (68.6% vs. 55.1%), and had greater mean FRAX scores (MOF: 15.9% vs. 10.1%) than participants without frailty. During follow-up, 38 participants with frailty (6.9%) and 91 without (3.0%) had MOFs. The AUC for FRAX (without BMD) was lower in participants with frailty (0.584; 95% CI 0.504-0.663) compared to those without (0.695; 95% CI 0.649-0.741); p value = 0.02. Among participants with frailty, the AUC improved when FRAX included BMD (AUC 0.658, p value < 0.01). FRAX overestimated MOF risk, with larger overestimations in individuals without frailty. Performance of FRAX for hip fracture was similar. CONCLUSION: FRAX may have been less able to identify frail individuals at risk for fracture, as compared with individuals without frailty, unless information on BMD is available. This suggests that BMD captures features important for fracture prediction in frail persons. Future fracture prediction models should be developed among persons with frailty.

Long-Term Care Pharmacy Market Shares and Differences in Skilled Nursing Facilities Served.

Medications and pharmacy services are critical to post-acute care (PAC) in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), yet little is known about the long-term care (LTC) pharmacies that provide them. We estimated the market shares of LTC pharmacies and how SNFs differed between pharmacies. This cross-sectional study used data from SNFs that provided PAC services in Rhode Island (RI) in 2019. We applied the parametric g-formula to compare SNF pharmacy-related deficiencies and medication use measures between LTC pharmacies while standardizing for SNF membership in a chain and number of beds. Among 75 SNFs, 68 (91%) were served by either Omnicare (n = 32, 43%) or PharMerica (n = 36, 48%), and 7 (9%) by other LTC pharmacies. After covariate adjustment, PharMerica SNFs had the lowest prevalences of any pharmacy-related deficiency (PharMerica, 63.2%; Omnicare, 80.2%; other LTC pharmacy, 69.1%) and antianxiety medication use (PharMerica, 9.7%; Omnicare, 13.6%; other LTC pharmacy, 13.5%), but estimates were imprecise. The RI market is highly concentrated between LTC pharmacies. If similarly high LTC pharmacy market concentration exists nationally, there is enormous promise for efficiently delivering interventions to improve medication management in SNFs. However, it may also present a risk of harm if policies do not maintain sufficient competition and innovation is stifled.

Little is known about long-term care pharmacies serving skilled nursing facilitiesThese pharmacies may have a strong influence on quality of care and outcomesTwo pharmacies dominate 91% of the Rhode Island skilled nursing facility marketSkilled beds, pharmacy deficiencies, and medication use may differ by pharmacyPharmacy market concentration creates opportunities for both big benefits and harms.

Use of Diabetes Medications before and after a Heart Failure-Related Hospitalization among Nursing Home Residents.

OBJECTIVES: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) offer cardiovascular benefits, whereas thiazolidinediones (TZDs) and sulfonylureas (SUs) increase cardiovascular risk. The objective of this study was to describe the use of SGLT-2is, GLP-1RAs, TZDs, and SUs before and after a heart failure (HF)-related hospitalization in nursing home (NH) residents with type 2 diabetes (T2D). DESIGN: This was a cohort study using a 20% sample of Medicare claims linked with Minimum Data Set resident assessments. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The study population was long-stay NH residents with T2D and an HF-related hospitalization between January 1, 2013, and August 31, 2018. For individuals with multiple HF hospitalizations, 1 hospitalization was randomly selected. METHODS: We ascertained diabetes medications using Medicare Part D claims during the 120 days before and after hospital discharge (or skilled nursing facility discharge, where applicable). We calculated (1) the proportion of study participants who received a medication class of interest during pre- and posthospitalization periods; (2) the proportion of continuous users; and (3) the proportion of posthospitalization users who were new users. RESULTS: A total of 12,990 NH residents with T2D and an HF-related hospitalization were included (mean age 78 years, 66% female, 19% Black). Before hospitalization, 1.5% received TZDs, 14.1% received SUs, 1.2% received GLP-1RAs, and 0.3% received SGLT-2is. Among prehospitalization users of TZDs, SUs, GLP-1RAs, and SGLT-2is, 49%, 62%, 60%, and 40% continued the medications, respectively. Among posthospitalization users of TZDs, SUs, GLP-1RAs, and SGLT-2is, 37%, 10%, 28%, and 11%, respectively, were new users. CONCLUSIONS: Among NH residents with hospitalized HF, GLP-1RAs and SGLT-2is were seldom used. TZDs and SUs were still used by many residents with T2D after HF hospitalizations. IMPLEMENTATIONS: Barriers may exist in the use of newer diabetes medications to prevent heart failure in NH residents with T2D, which warrants further studies in older adults with multimorbidity.

Fall risk and cardiovascular outcomes of first-line antihypertensive medications in nursing home residents.

BACKGROUND: Little evidence exists about the comparative effects of first-line antihypertensive medications (i.e., renin-angiotensin-aldosterone converting enzyme inhibitors (RAASi), amlodipine, or thiazide diuretics) in older adults with limited life expectancy. We compared the rates of injurious falls and short-term cardiovascular events between different first-line antihypertensive medication classes in adults receiving care in nursing homes (NH). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries receiving care in NHs. Patients newly dispensed first-line antihypertensive medications were identified using Part D claims (2015-2018) and linked with clinical assessments (i.e., Minimum Data Set). Fall-related injuries (FRI), hip fractures, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) outcomes were identified using hospitalization claims. Patients were followed from the date of antihypertensive dispensing until the occurrence of outcomes, death, disenrollment, or 6-month follow-up. Inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighted (IPTW) cause-specific hazards regression models were used to compare outcomes between patients who were new users of RAASi, amlodipine, or thiazides. RESULTS: Our cohort included 16,504 antihypertensive users (RAASi, n = 9574; amlodipine, n = 5049; thiazide, n = 1881). Mean age was 83.5 years (± 8.2), 70.6% were female, and 17.2% were non-white race. During a mean follow-up of 5.3 months, 326 patients (2.0%) experienced an injurious fall, 1590 (9.6%) experienced MACE, and 2123 patients (12.9%) died. The intention-to-treat IPTW hazard ratio (HR) for injurious falls for amlodipine (vs RAASi) use was 0.85 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-1.08) and for thiazides (vs RAASi) was 1.22 (95% CI 0.88-1.66). The rates of MACE were similar between those taking anti-hypertensive medications. Thiazides were discontinued more often than other classes; however, inferences were largely unchanged in as-treated analyses. Subgroup analyses were generally consistent. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults with limited life expectancy experience similar rates of injurious falls and short-term cardiovascular events after initiating any of the first-line antihypertensive medications.

Benefits and Harms of Standard Versus Reduced-Dose Direct Oral Anticoagulant Therapy for Older Adults With Multiple Morbidities and Atrial Fibrillation.

Background Dose reduction of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) medications is inconsistently applied to older adults with multiple morbidities, potentially due to perceived harms and unknown benefits of standard dosing. Methods and Results Using 2013 to 2017 US Medicare claims linked to Minimum Data Set records, we conducted a retrospective cohort study. We identified DOAC initiators (apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban) aged ≥65 years with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation residing in a nursing home. We estimated inverse-probability of treatment weights for DOAC dose using propensity scores. We examined safety (hospitalization for major bleeding) and effectiveness outcomes (all-cause mortality, thrombosis [myocardial infarction, stroke, systemic embolism, venous thromboembolism]). We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs using cause-specific hazard-regression models. Of 21 878 DOAC initiators, 48% received reduced dosing. The mean age of residents was 82.0 years, 66% were female, and 31% had moderate/severe cognitive impairment. After estimating inverse-probability of treatment weights, standard dosing was associated with a higher rate of bleeding (HR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.03-1.37]; 9.4 versus 8.0 events per 100 person-years). Standard-dose therapy was associated with the highest rates of bleeding among those aged >80 years (9.1 versus 6.7 events per 100 person-years) and with a body mass index <30 kg/m2 (9.4 versus 7.4 events per 100 person-years). There was no association of dosing with mortality (HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.96-1.06]) or thrombotic events (HR, 1.16 [95% CI, 0.96-1.41]). Conclusions In this nationwide study of nursing home residents with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, we found a higher rate of bleeding and little difference in effectiveness of standard versus reduced-dose DOAC treatment. Our results support the use of reduced-dose DOACs for many older adults with multiple morbidities.

Nursing Home PRevention of Injury in DEmentia (NH PRIDE): A pilot study of a remote injury prevention service for NH residents.

BACKGROUND: Medication optimization, including prescription of osteoporosis medications and deprescribing medications associated with falls, may reduce injurious falls. Our objective was to describe a remote, injury prevention service (NH PRIDE) designed to optimize medication use in nursing homes (NHs), and to describe its implementation outcomes in a pilot study. METHODS: This was a non-randomized trial (pilot study) including NH staff and residents from five facilities. Long-stay residents at high-risk for injurious falls were identified using a validated risk calculator and staff referral. A remote team reviewed the electronic health record (EHR) and provided recommendations as Injury Prevention Plans (IPP). A research nurse served as a care coordinator focused on resident engagement and shared decision-making. Outcomes included implementation measures, as identified in the EHR, and surveys and interviews with staff. RESULTS: Across five facilities, 274 residents were screened for eligibility, and 46 residents (16.8%) were enrolled. Most residents were female (73.9%) and had dementia (63.0%). An IPP was completed for 45 residents (97.8%). The nurse made a total of 93 deprescribing recommendations in 36 residents (80% of residents had one or more deprescribing recommendation; mean 2.2 recommendations/resident). Twenty of 45 residents (44.4%) had a recommendation for osteoporosis treatment. Among residents with recommendations, 21/36 (58.3%) had one or more deprescribing orders written and 6/20 (30.0%) had an osteoporosis medication prescribed. At 4 months, most medication changes persisted. Adverse side effects were rare. Staff members identified several areas for program refinement, including aligning recommendations with provider workflow and engaging consultant psychiatrists. CONCLUSIONS: A remote injury prevention service is safe and feasible to enhance deprescribing and osteoporosis treatment in long-stay NH residents at risk for injury. Additional investigation is needed to determine if this model could reduce injurious falls when deployed across NH chains.

Evaluation of post-acute care and one-year outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries with hip fractures: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Post-acute care (PAC) services after hospitalization for hip fracture are typically provided in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs), or at home via home health care (HHC). Little is known about the clinical course following PAC for hip fracture. We examined the nationwide burden of adverse outcomes by PAC setting in the year following discharge from PAC for hip fracture. METHODS: This retrospective cohort included Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries > 65 years who received PAC services in U.S. SNFs, IRFs, or HHC following hip fracture hospitalization between 2012 and 2018. Individuals who had a fall-related injury (FRI) during PAC or received PAC services in multiple settings were excluded. Primary outcomes included FRIs, all-cause hospital readmissions, and death in the year following discharge from PAC. Cumulative incidences and incidence rates for adverse outcomes were reported by PAC setting. Exploratory analyses examined risk ratios and hazard ratios between settings before and after inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighting, which accounted for 43 covariates. RESULTS: Among 624,631 participants (SNF, 67.78%; IRF, 16.08%; HHC, 16.15%), the mean (standard deviation) age was 82.70 (8.26) years, 74.96% were female, and 91.30% were non-Hispanic White. Crude incidence rates (95%CLs) per 1000 person-years were highest among individuals receiving SNF care for FRIs (SNF, 123 [121, 123]; IRF, 105 [102, 107]; HHC, 89 [87, 91]), hospital readmission (SNF, 623 [619, 626]; IRF, 538 [532, 544]; HHC, 418 [414, 423]), and death (SNF, 167 [165, 169]; IRF, 47 [46, 49]; HHC, 55 [53, 56]). Overall, rates of adverse outcomes generally remained higher among SNF care recipients after covariate adjustment. However, inferences about the group with greater adverse outcomes differed for FRIs and hospital readmissions based on risk ratio or hazard ratio estimates. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective cohort study of individuals hospitalized for hip fracture, rates of adverse outcomes in the year following PAC were common, especially among SNF care recipients. Understanding risks and rates of adverse events can inform future efforts to improve outcomes for older adults receiving PAC for hip fracture. Future work should consider calculating risk and rate measures to assess the influence of differential time under observation across PAC groups.

Adoption of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors among prescribers caring for nursing home residents.

BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2I) use has increased among community-dwelling populations, but little is known about how clinicians have prescribed them for US nursing home (NH) residents. We described the adoption of SGLT2Is by prescribers caring for long-stay NH residents by clinician specialty and over time, compared with sulfonylureas, an older diabetes medication class. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of prescribers of SGLT2Is and sulfonylureas for all long-stay US NH residents aged 65 years or older (2017-2019). Using 100% of Medicare Part D claims linked to prescriber characteristics data, we identified all dispensings of SGLT2Is and sulfonylureas for long-stay NH residents and their associated prescribers. We described the distribution of prescriber specialties for each drug class over time as well as the number of NH residents prescribed SGLT2s versus sulfonylureas. We estimated the proportions of prescribers who prescribed both drug classes versus only sulfonylureas or only SGLT2Is. RESULTS: We identified 36,427 unique prescribers (SGLT2I: N = 5811; sulfonylureas: N = 35,443) for 117,667 NH residents between 2017 and 2019. For both classes, family medicine and internal medicine physicians accounted for most prescriptions (75%-81%). Most clinicians (87%) prescribed only sulfonylureas, 2% prescribed SGLT2Is only, and 11% prescribed both. Geriatricians were least likely to prescribe only SGLT2Is. We observed an increase in the number of residents with SGLT2I use from n = 2344 in 2017 to n = 5748 in 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Among NH residents, most clinicians have not incorporated SGLT2Is into their prescribing for diabetes, but the extent of use is increasing. Family medicine and internal medicine physicians prescribed the majority of diabetes medications for NH residents, and geriatricians were the least likely to prescribe only SGLT2Is. Future research should explore provider concerns regarding SGLT2I prescribing, particularly adverse events.

Post-Acute Care Setting After Hip Fracture Hospitalization and Subsequent Opioid Use in Older Adults.

OBJECTIVE: Pain management in post-acute care (PAC) requires careful balance, with both opioid use and inadequate pain treatment linked to poor outcomes. We describe opioid use among older adults following discharge from PAC for hip fracture in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) and inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Medicare beneficiaries with Medicare Provider Analysis (MedPAR) claims, aged 66 years and older with a hip fracture hospitalization between 2012 and 2018 followed by PAC in SNFs or IRFs and then discharge to the community. METHODS: Individuals were followed from PAC discharge for up to 1 year to assess opioid use. Covariate-standardized risk ratios (RR) and risk differences (RD) for opioid use within 7 days of PAC discharge were estimated via parametric g-formula with modified Poisson regression, and hazard ratios (HRs) for any post-PAC opioid use and long-term opioid use via Fine-Gray sub-distribution hazards regression. RESULTS: Of 101,021 individuals, 80% (n = 80,495) were discharged from SNFs and 20% (n = 20,526) from IRFs. Opioids were dispensed to 50,433 patients (50%) overall and the 1-year cumulative incidence was notably higher in IRF (68%) than SNF (46%) patients. The adjusted risk of discharge from PAC with an opioid was 41% lower after SNFs versus IRFs [RR: 0.59; 95% confidence limits (CLs): 0.57-0.61; and RD: -0.16; 95% CLs: -0.17 to -0.15]. The adjusted rate of any opioid use in the year after PAC discharge was 44% lower (HR: 0.56; 95% CLs: 0.54-0.57) and of long-term opioid use was 17% lower (HR: 0.83; 95% CLs: 0.80-0.87) after SNFs versus IRFs. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Opioid use is highly prevalent upon discharge from PAC after hip fracture, with lower use after SNF versus IRF care. Future research should assess the benefits and harms of post-PAC opioid prescribing and whether care practices during PAC can be improved to optimize long-term opioid use.

Resident Factors Associated With Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 Infections.

OBJECTIVE: To examine incidence of and resident characteristics associated with breakthrough infections (BTIs) and severe illness among residents with 2 messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccinations. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Nursing home (NH) residents who completed their primary series of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination by March 31, 2021. METHODS: Electronic health records and Minimum Data Set assessments from a multistate NH data consortium were used to identify BTI and severe illness (a composite measure of hospitalization and/or death within 30 days of BTI) occurring prior to November 24, 2021. A t test for differences in means was used to compare covariates for residents with and without BTI. Finally, we estimated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for BTI with 95% CIs using a modified Poisson regression approach, comparing residents with BTI vs residents without. We adjusted for facility fixed effects in our model. RESULTS: Our sample included 23,172 residents from 984 NHs who were at least 14 days past their second mRNA vaccine dose. Of those, 1173 (5%) developed an incident COVID-19 BTI (mean follow-up time: 250 days). Among residents with BTI, 8.6% were hospitalized or died within 30 days of BTI diagnosis. Factors associated with severe illness included age ≥85 years (IRR 2.08, 95% CI 1.08-4.02, reference age <65 years), bowel incontinence (IRR 1.73, 95% CI 1.01-2.99), coronary artery disease (IRR 1.96, 95% CI 1.31-2.94), chronic kidney disease (IRR 1.65, 95% CI 1.07-2.54), and schizophrenia (IRR 2.38, 95% CI 1.19-4.75). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Among vaccinated NH residents, BTIs and associated severe illness are rare. Residents aged ≥85 years and with certain comorbidities appear to be the most vulnerable. Given that the pandemic continues and testing policies have relaxed, these data provide prognostic information for NH facilities faced with continued outbreaks.

Development and validation of the fall-related injury risk in nursing homes (INJURE-NH) prediction tool.

BACKGROUND: Existing models to predict fall-related injuries (FRI) in nursing homes (NH) focus on hip fractures, yet hip fractures comprise less than half of all FRIs. We developed and validated a series of models to predict the absolute risk of FRIs in NH residents. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of long-stay US NH residents (≥100 days in the same facility) between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2017 (n = 733,427) using Medicare claims and Minimum Data Set v3.0 clinical assessments. Predictors of FRIs were selected through LASSO logistic regression in a 2/3 random derivation sample and tested in a 1/3 validation sample. Sub-distribution hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated for 6-month and 2-year follow-up. Discrimination was evaluated via C-statistic, and calibration compared the predicted rate of FRI to the observed rate. To develop a parsimonious clinical tool, we calculated a score using the five strongest predictors in the Fine-Gray model. Model performance was repeated in the validation sample. RESULTS: Mean (Q1, Q3) age was 85.0 (77.5, 90.6) years and 69.6% were women. Within 2 years of follow-up, 43,976 (6.0%) residents experienced ≥1 FRI. Seventy predictors were included in the model. The discrimination of the 2-year prediction model was good (C-index = 0.70), and the calibration was excellent. Calibration and discrimination of the 6-month model were similar (C-index = 0.71). In the clinical tool to predict 2-year risk, the five characteristics included independence in activities of daily living (ADLs) (HR 2.27; 95% CI 2.14-2.41) and a history of non-hip fracture (HR 2.02; 95% CI 1.94-2.12). Performance results were similar in the validation sample. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and validated a series of risk prediction models that can identify NH residents at greatest risk for FRI. In NH, these models should help target preventive strategies.

Differences In Nursing Home Staff COVID-19 Testing Rates And Odds Of Vaccination Across Work Shifts.

COVID-19 vaccination and regular testing of nursing home staff have been critical interventions for mitigating COVID-19 outbreaks in US nursing homes. Although implementation of testing has largely been left to nursing home organizations to coordinate, vaccination occurred through a combination of state, federal, and organization efforts. Little research has focused on structural variation in these processes. We examined whether one structural factor, the primary shift worked by staff, was associated with differences in COVID-19 testing rates and odds of vaccination, using staff-level data from a multistate sample of 294 nursing homes. In facility fixed effects analyses, we found that night-shift staff had the lowest testing rates and lowest odds of vaccination, whereas day-shift staff had the highest testing rates and odds of vaccination. These findings highlight the need to coordinate resources and communication evenly across shifts when implementing large-scale processes in nursing homes and other organizations with shift-based workforces.

Perspectives on Deprescribing in long-term care: qualitative findings from nurses, aides, residents, and proxies.

BACKGROUND: Deprescribing initiatives in the long-term care (LTC) setting are often unsuccessful or not sustained. Prior research has considered how physicians and pharmacists feel about deprescribing, yet little is known about the perspectives of frontline nursing staff and residents. Our aim was to elicit perspectives from LTC nursing staff, patients, and proxies regarding their experiences and preferences for deprescribing in order to inform future deprescribing efforts in LTC. METHODS: This study was a qualitative analysis of interviews with nurses, nurse aides, a nurse practitioner, residents, and proxies (family member and/or responsible party) from three LTC facilities. The research team used semi-structured interviews. Guides were designed to inform an injury prevention intervention. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. A qualitative framework analysis was used to summarize themes related to deprescribing. The full study team reviewed the summary to identify actionable, clinical implications. RESULTS: Twenty-six interviews with 28 participants were completed, including 11 nurse aides, three residents, seven proxies, one nurse practitioner, and six nurses. Three themes emerged that were consistent across facilities: 1) build trust with team members, including residents and proxies; 2) identify motivating factors that lead to resident, proxy, nurse practitioner, and staff acceptance of deprescribing; 3) standardize supportive processes to encourage deprescribing. These themes suggest several actionable steps to improve deprescribing initiatives including: 1) tell stories about successful deprescribing, 2) provide deprescribing education to frontline staff, 3) align medication risk/benefit discussions with what matters most to the resident, 4) standardize deprescribing monitoring protocols, 5) standardize interprofessional team huddles and care plan meetings to include deprescribing conversations, and 6) strengthen non-pharmacologic treatment programs. CONCLUSIONS: By interviewing LTC stakeholders, we identified three important themes regarding successful deprescribing: Trust, Motivating Factors, and Supportive Processes. These themes may translate into actionable steps for clinicians and researchers to improve and sustain person-centered deprescribing initiatives. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04242186.

Comparative safety of sulfonylureas among U.S. nursing home residents.

BACKGROUND: The comparative safety of sulfonylureas (SUs) in nursing home (NH) residents remains understudied despite widespread use. We compared the effects of three SU medications and initial SU doses on adverse glycemic and cardiovascular events among NH residents. METHODS: This national retrospective cohort study linked Medicare claims with Minimum Data Set 2.0 assessments for long-stay NH residents aged ≥65 years between January 2008 and September 2010. Exposures were the SU medication initiated (glimepiride, glipizide, or glyburide) and doses (standard or reduced). One-year outcomes were hospitalizations or emergency department visits for severe hypoglycemia, heart failure (HF), stroke, and acute myocardial infarction (AMI). After the inverse probability of treatment and inverse probability of censoring by death weighting, we estimated hazard ratios (HR) using Cox regression models with robust 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: The cohort (N = 6821) included 3698 new glipizide, 1754 glimepiride, and 1369 glyburide users. Overall, the mean (standard deviation) age was 81.4 (8.2) years, 4816 (70.6%) were female, and 5164 (75.7%) were White non-Hispanic residents. The rates of severe hypoglycemia were 30.3 (95% CI 22.3-40.1), 49.0 (95% CI 34.5-67.5), and 35.9 (95% CI 22.2-54.9) events per 1000 person-years among new glipizide, glimepiride, and glyburide users, respectively (glimepiride versus glipizide HR 1.6, 95% CI 1.0-2.4, p = 0.04; glyburide versus glipizide HR 1.2, 95% CI 0.7-1.9, p = 0.59). The rates of severe hypoglycemia were 27.1 (95% CI 18.6-38.0) and 42.8 (95% CI 33.6-53.8) events per 1000 person-years among new users of reduced and standard SU doses, respectively (HR 2.2, 95% CI 1.4-3.5, p < 0.01). Rates of HF, stroke, and AMI were similar between medications and doses. CONCLUSIONS: Among long-stay NH residents, new use of glimepiride and standard SU doses resulted in higher rates of severe hypoglycemic events. Cardiovascular outcomes may not be affected by the choice of SU medication or dose.

Controversies in Osteoporosis Treatment of Nursing Home Residents.

Osteoporotic fractures are a common and serious health problem for older adults living in nursing homes (NHs). Risk of fracture increases with age and dementia status, yet gaps in evidence result in controversies around when to start and stop treatment for osteoporosis in NH residents, particularly those who have high fracture risk but have limited life expectancy. In this article, we discuss these areas of controversy. We provide an overview of current guidelines that explicitly address osteoporosis treatment strategies for NH residents, review the evidence for osteoporosis medications in NH residents, and use these sources to suggest practical recommendations for clinical practice and for research. Three published guidelines (from the United States, Canada, and Australia) and several studies provide the current basis for clinical decisions about osteoporosis treatment for NH residents. Practical approaches may include broad use of vitamin D and selective use of osteoporosis medication based on risks, benefits, and goals of care. Clinicians still lack strong evidence to guide treatment of NH residents with advanced dementia, multimorbidity, or severe mobility impairment. Future priorities for research include identifying optimal approaches to risk stratification and prevention strategies for NH residents and evaluating the risk-benefit profile of pharmacologic treatments for osteoporosis NH residents across key clinical strata. In the absence of such evidence, decisions for initiating and continuing treatment should reflect a patient-centered approach that incorporates life expectancy, goals of care, and the potential burden of treatment.