Racial Differences in Nursing Home Quality of Life Among Residents Living With Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias.

ObjectivesAmong nursing home (NH) residents with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and AD-related dementias (AD/ADRD), racial/ethnic disparities in quality of care exist. However, little is known about quality of life (QoL). This study examines racial/ethnic differences in self-reported QoL among NH residents with AD/ADRD. Methods: Validated, in-person QoL surveys from 12,562 long-stay NH residents with AD/ADRD in Minnesota (2012-2015) were linked to Minimum Data Set assessments and facility characteristics. Hierarchical linear models assessed disparities in resident-reported mean QoL score (range, 0-100 points), adjusting for case-mix and facility factors. Results: Compared to White residents, racially/ethnically minoritized residents reported significantly lower total mean QoL scores (75.53 points vs. 80.34 points, p < .001). After adjustment for resident- and facility-level characteristics, significant racial/ethnic differences remained, with large disparities in food enjoyment, attention from staff, and engagement domains. Discussion: Policy changes and practice guidelines are needed to address racial/ethnic disparities in QoL of NH residents with AD/ADRD.

Access to preferred skilled nursing facilities: Transitional care pathways for patients with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias.

OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to assess whether individuals with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) experience restricted access to hospitals' high-volume preferred skilled nursing facility (SNF) partners. DATA SOURCES: The data source includes acute care hospital to SNF transitions identified using 100% Medicare Provider Analysis and Review files, 2017-2019. STUDY DESIGN: We model and compare the estimated effect of facility "preferredness" on SNF choice for patients with and without ADRD. We use conditional logistic regression with a 1:1 patient sample otherwise matched on demographic and encounter characteristics. DATA COLLECTION: Our matched sample included 58,190 patients, selected from a total observed population of 3,019,260 Medicare hospitalizations that resulted in an SNF transfer between 2017 and 2019. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Overall, patients with ADRD have a lower probability of being discharged to a preferred SNF (52.0% vs. 54.4%, p < 0.001). Choice model estimation using our matched sample suggests similarly that the marginal effect of preferredness on a patient choosing a proximate SNF is 2.4 percentage points lower for patients with ADRD compared with those without (p < 0.001). The differential effect of preferredness based on ADRD status increases when considering (a) the cumulative effect of multiple SNFs in close geographic proximity, (b) the magnitude of the strength of hospital-SNF relationship, and (c) comparing patients with more versus less advanced ADRD. CONCLUSIONS: Preferred relationships are significantly predictive of where a patient receives SNF care, but this effect is weaker for patients with ADRD. To the extent that these high-volume relationships are indicative of more targeted transitional care improvements from hospitals, ADRD patients may not be fully benefiting from these investments. Hospital leaders can leverage integrated care relationships to reduce SNFs' perceived need to engage in selection behavior (i.e., enhanced resource sharing and transparency in placement practices). Policy intervention may be needed to address selection behavior and to support hospitals in making systemic improvements that can better benefit all SNF partners (i.e., more robust information sharing systems).

Information sharing to support care transitions for patients with complex mental health and social needs.

BACKGROUND: Patients with complex behavioral and mental health conditions require significant transitional care coordination. It is unclear how skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) that serve these patients engage in care transfer with hospitals, specifically whether they experience discrepancies in the type of information shared by hospital partners and/or use different approaches to secure needed information. METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis of a national 2019-2020 SNF survey that collected information on transitional care practices with referring hospitals; respondents were directors of nursing services. We used chi-squared tests and descriptive statistics to characterize hospital information sharing practices experienced by facilities that accept complex patients (e.g., serious mental illness, substance use disorder, and/or medication assisted treatment), and to compare them to facilities that treat a less complex population. RESULTS: A total of 215 SNFs had sufficiently complete responses for inclusion in the analysis. Of these respondents, 57% accepted two or more types of patients with complex conditions of interest; these SNFs were more likely to be urban, for-profit, and serve more dual-eligible patients. SNFs accepting complex patients experience information sharing on par with other facilities, and are more likely to receive information on behavioral, social, mental, and functional status (25.41% vs. 12.90%; p = 0.023). These facilities are also more likely to consistently use electronic methods (e.g., an online portal, shared electronic health record [EHR] access) to retrieve information from partner hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: SNFs accepting complex patients demonstrate some evidence of enhanced information retrieval via electronically mediated pathways. Overall, information sharing remains underdeveloped in this care context. Policymakers should continue to prioritize widespread digital infrastructure that supports post-acute care delivery.

Examining Satisfaction and Quality in Home- and Community-Based Service Programs in the United States: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Long-term services and supports in the United States are increasingly reliant on home- and community-based services (HCBS). Yet, little is known about the quality of HCBS. We conducted a scoping review of the peer-reviewed literature to summarize HCBS consumer, provider, and stakeholder satisfaction with services as a means of assessing quality. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We searched PubMed, OVID-MEDLINE, and SCOPUS to identify articles published from 2000 to 2021 that reported on studies describing a U.S.-based study population. Articles were grouped into 3 categories: drivers of positive consumer satisfaction, drivers of negative consumer satisfaction, and provider and stakeholder perspectives on satisfaction. RESULTS: Our final sample included 27 articles. Positive perceptions of quality and reported satisfaction with services were driven by consistent, reliable, and respectful care providers, and adoption of person-centered models of service delivery. Mistreatment of consumers, staff turnover, training, service interruptions, and unmet functional needs were drivers of negative consumer perceptions of quality. Support for caregivers and emphasis on training were identified by providers and stakeholders as important for providing satisfactory services. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Multiple data challenges limit the ability to systematically evaluate HCBS program quality; however, studies examining single programs found that HCBS consumers are more satisfied and associate higher quality with easy-to-navigate programs and professional staff. Efforts to expand HCBS should also include requirements to systematically evaluate quality outcomes.

Evidence for Action: Addressing Systemic Racism Across Long-Term Services and Supports.

Long-term services and supports (LTSS), including care received at home and in residential settings such as nursing homes, are highly racially segregated; Black, Indigenous, and persons of color (BIPOC) users have less access to quality care and report poorer quality of life compared to their White counterparts. Systemic racism lies at the root of these disparities, manifesting via racially segregated care, low Medicaid reimbursement, and lack of livable wages for staff, along with other policies and processes that exacerbate disparities. We reviewed Medicaid reimbursement, pay-for-performance, public reporting of quality of care, and culture change in nursing homes and integrated home- and community-based service (HCBS) programs as possible mechanisms for addressing racial and ethnic disparities. We developed a set of recommendations for LTSS based on existing evidence, including (1) increase Medicaid and Medicare reimbursement rates, especially for providers serving high proportions of Medicaid-eligible and BIPOC older adults; (2) reconsider the design of pay-for-performance programs as they relate to providers who serve underserved groups; (3) include culturally sensitive measures, such as quality of life, in public reporting of quality of care, and develop and report health equity measures in outcomes of care for BIPOC individuals; (4) implement culture change so services are more person-centered and homelike, alongside improvements in staff wages and benefits in high-proportion BIPOC nursing homes; (5) expand access to Medicaid-waivered HCBS services; (6) adopt culturally appropriate HCBS practices, with special attention to family caregivers; (7) and increase promotion of integrated HCBS programs that can be targeted to BIPOC consumers, and implement models that value community health workers. Multipronged solutions may help diminish the role of systemic racism in existing racial disparities in LTSS, and these recommendations provide steps for action that are needed to reimagine how long-term care is delivered, especially for BIPOC populations.