The staffing-outcomes relationship in nursing homes.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To assess longitudinally whether a change in registered nurse (RN) staffing and skill mix leads to a change in nursing home resident outcomes while controlling for the potential endogeneity of staffing.Data sources
Minimum Data Set (MDS) nursing home resident assessment data from five states merged with Online Survey Certification and Reporting (OSCAR) data from 1996 through 2000.Study design
Resident-level longitudinal analysis with facility fixed effects and instrumental variables. Outcomes studied are incidence of pressure sores and urinary tract infections. RN staffing was measured as the care hours per resident-day and skill mix was measured as RN staffing hours as a proportion of total staffing hours.Data extraction method
We use all quarterly MDS assessments that fall within 120 days of an annual OSCAR data point, resulting in 399,206 resident-level observations.Principal findings
Controlling for endogeneity of staffing increases the estimated impact of staffing on outcomes in nursing homes. Greater RN staffing significantly decreases the likelihood of both adverse outcomes. Increasing skill mix only reduces the incidence of urinary tract infections.Conclusions
Research that fails to account for endogeneity of the staffing-outcomes relationship may underestimate the benefit from increased RN staffing. Increases in RN staffing are likely to reduce adverse outcomes in some nursing homes. More research using a broader array of instruments and a national sample would be beneficial.
SUBMITTER: Konetzka RT
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2442239 | biostudies-literature | 2008 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
The staffing-outcomes relationship in nursing homes.
Konetzka R Tamara RT Stearns Sally C SC Park Jeongyoung J
Health services research 20080601 3
<h4>Objective</h4>To assess longitudinally whether a change in registered nurse (RN) staffing and skill mix leads to a change in nursing home resident outcomes while controlling for the potential endogeneity of staffing.<h4>Data sources</h4>Minimum Data Set (MDS) nursing home resident assessment data from five states merged with Online Survey Certification and Reporting (OSCAR) data from 1996 through 2000.<h4>Study design</h4>Resident-level longitudinal analysis with facility fixed effects and i ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo estimate and contrast the relationships between nurse staffing and health outcomes in nursing homes with low and high dementia census, to understand the association of staffing hours with dementia care quality.Data sources and study settingA national sample of nursing homes during 2017-2019 (pre-COVID). Data included the Payroll-Based Journal, Medicare Claims, Nursing Home Care Compare, and Long-Term Care Focus.Study designRetrospective, regression analyses. We estimated separate linear models predicting six long-term facility-level outcomes. Independent variables included staffing hours per resident-day (HPRD) interacted with the facility percentage of dementia residents, controlling for other resident and facility characteristics.Data collection/extraction methodsHospital-based nursing homes, those with fewer than 30% dementia residents, and missing data were excluded.Principal findingsWe found that registered nurses and certified nurse assistants HPRDs were likely to exhibit positive returns in terms of outcomes throughout most of the range of HPRD for both high and low-census dementia facilities, although, high- and low-dementia facilities differed in most outcome rates at all staffing levels. Average predicted antipsychotics and activities of daily living as functions of HPRD were worse in higher dementia facilities, independent movement, and hospitalizations did not differ significantly, and Emergency Rooms and pressure sores were worse in lower dementia facilities. Average marginal effects were not statistically different [CI included zero] between the high and low dementia facilities for any outcome.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that increasing staffing will improve outcomes by similar increments in both low- and high-dementia facilities for all outcomes. However, at any given level of staffing, absolute differences in outcomes between low- and high-dementia facilities remain, suggesting that additional staffing alone will not suffice to close these gaps. Further studies are required to identify opportunities for improvement in performance for both low- and high-dementia census facilities.
| S-EPMC11250382 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceStaff absences and departures at nursing homes may put residents at risk and present operational challenges.ObjectiveTo quantify changes in nursing home facility staffing during and after a severe COVID-19 outbreak.Design setting and participantsIn this cohort study, daily staffing payroll data were used to construct weekly measures of facility staffing, absences, departures, and use of overtime and contract staff among US nursing homes experiencing a severe COVID-19 outbreak that started between June 14, 2020, and January 1, 2021. Facility outbreaks were identified using COVID-19 case data. An event-study design with facility and week fixed effects was used to investigate the association of severe outbreaks with staffing measures.ExposuresWeeks since the beginning of a severe COVID-19 outbreak (4 weeks prior to 16 weeks after).Main outcomes and measuresTotal weekly staffing hours, staff counts, staff absences, departures, new hires, overtime and contract staff hours measured for all nursing staff and separately by staff type (registered nurses, licensed practical nurses, certified nursing assistants), facility self-reported staff shortages, and resident deaths.ResultsOf the included 2967 nursing homes experiencing severe COVID-19 outbreaks, severe outbreaks were associated with a statistically significant drop in nursing staffing levels owing to elevated absences and departures. Four weeks after an outbreak's start, around when average new cases peaked, staffing hours were 2.6% (95% CI, 2.1%-3.2%) of the mean below preoutbreak levels, despite facilities taking substantial measures to bolster staffing through increased hiring and the use of contract staff and overtime. Because these measures were mostly temporary, staffing declined further in later weeks; 16 weeks after an outbreak's start, staffing hours were 5.5% (95% CI, 4.5%-6.5%) of the mean below preoutbreak levels. Staffing declines were greatest among certified nursing assistants, primarily owing to smaller increases in new hires of this staff type compared with licensed practical nurses and registered nurses.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of nursing homes experiencing severe COVID-19 outbreaks, facilities experienced considerable staffing challenges during and after outbreaks. These results suggest the need for policy action to ensure facilities' abilities to maintain adequate staffing levels during and after infectious disease outbreaks.
| S-EPMC9308062 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo examine the effect of Hurricane Irma on staff-related financial expenditures and daily direct-care nurse staffing levels.DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingSeptember 3-24, 2017 in the state of Florida, United States. Hurricane Irma made landfall on September 10, 2017.ParticipantsSix hundred and fifty-three nursing homes (NHs), 81 evacuated facilities, and 572 facilities that sheltered-in-place.MeasurementsThis study used data from Payroll-Based Journaling (PBJ), Certification and Survey Provider Enhanced Reports (CASPER), and Florida's health providers' emergency reporting system. PBJ provided estimates of daily direct-care nurse staffing levels for registered nurses, licensed practical nurses, and certified nursing assistants. CASPER reported facility-level characteristics such as profit status, chain membership, and special care unit availability. Florida's emergency reporting system identified evacuation status during Hurricane Irma. Linear mixed-effects models were used to estimate the unique contribution of evacuation status on daily staffing increases over time from September 3 to 10.ResultsAmong all facilities, we found significant increases in staffing for licensed practical nurses (p = 0.02) and certified nursing assistants (p < 0.001), but not for registered nurses (p = 0.10) before Hurricane Irma made landfall. From 1 week before landfall to 2 weeks after landfall (September 3-24), an additional estimated $2.41 million was spent on direct-care nurse staffing. In comparison to facilities that sheltered-in-place, evacuated facilities increased staffing levels of all nurse types (all p < 0.001). At landfall, evacuated facilities spent an estimated $93.74 on nurse staffing per resident whereas facilities that sheltered-in-place spent $76.10 on nurse staffing per resident.ConclusionNHs face unprecedented challenges during hurricanes, including maintaining adequate direct-care nurse staffing levels to meet the needs of their residents. NHs that evacuated residents had an increase in direct-care nurse staffing that was greater than that seen in NHs that sheltered-in-place.
| S-EPMC8373745 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recent increases in state Medicaid payments to nursing homes have the potential to reduce disparities in nurse staffing between facilities with high and low concentrations of racial/ethnic minority residents. Analyses of nursing home and state policy survey data for the period 2001-11 suggest that registered nurse and licensed practical nurse staffing levels increased slightly during this period, regardless of racial/ethnic minority resident concentration. Adjusted disparities in registered nurse hours per resident day between nursing homes with high and low concentrations of minority residents persisted, although they were reduced. Certified nursing assistant hours per patient day increased in nursing homes with low concentrations of minorities but decreased in homes with high concentrations, creating a new disparity. Overall, increases in state Medicaid payment rates to nursing homes were associated with improvements in staffing and reduced staffing disparities across facilities, but the adoption of case-mix payments had the opposite effect. Further reforms in health care delivery and payment are needed to address persistent disparities in care between nursing homes serving higher proportions of minority residents and those serving lower proportions, and to prevent unintended exacerbations of such disparities.
| S-EPMC5066592 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceStaffing shortages in nursing homes (NHs) threaten the quality of resident care, and the COVID-19 pandemic magnified critical staffing shortages within NHs. During the pandemic, the US Congress enacted the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), a forgivable loan program that required eligible recipients to appropriate 60% to 75% of the loan toward staffing to qualify for loan forgiveness.ObjectiveTo evaluate characteristics of PPP loan recipient NHs vs nonloan recipient NHs and whether there were changes in staffing hours at NHs that received a loan compared with those that did not.Design, setting, and participantsThis economic evaluation used national data on US nursing homes that were aggregated from the Small Business Administration, Nursing Home Compare, LTCFocus, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Payroll Based Journal, the Minimum Data Set, the Area Deprivation Index, the Healthcare Cost Report Information System, and the US Department of Agriculture Rural-Urban Continuum Codes from January 1 to December 23, 2020.ExposurePaycheck Protection Program loan receipt status.Main outcome and measuresStaffing variables included registered nurse, licensed practical nurse (LPN), and certified nursing assistant (CNA) total hours per week. Staffing hours were examined on a weekly basis before and after loan receipt during the study period. An event-study approach was used to estimate the staffing total weekly hours at NHs that received PPP loans compared with NHs that did not receive a PPP loan.ResultsAmong 6008 US NHs, 1807 (30.1%) received a PPP loan and 4201 (69.9%) did not. The median loan amount was $664 349 (IQR, $407 000-$1 058 300). Loan recipients were less likely to be part of a chain (733 [40.6%] vs 2592 [61.7%]) and more likely to be for profit (1342 [74.3%] vs 2877 [68.5%]), be located in nonurban settings (159 [8.8%] vs 183 [4.4%]), have a greater proportion of Medicaid-funded residents (mean [SD], 60.92% [21.58%] vs 56.78% [25.57%]), and have lower staffing quality ratings (mean [SD], 2.88 [1.20] vs 3.03 [1.22]) and overall quality star ratings (mean [SD], 3.08 [1.44] vs 3.22 [1.44]) (P < .001 for all). Twelve weeks after PPP loan receipt, NHs that received a PPP loan experienced a mean difference of 26.19 more CNA hours per week (95% CI, 14.50-37.87 hours per week) and a mean difference of 6.67 more LPN hours per week (95% CI, 1.21-12.12 hours per week) compared with nursing homes that did not receive a PPP loan. No associations were found between PPP loan receipt and weekly RN staffing hours (12 weeks: mean difference, 1.99 hours per week; 95% CI, -2.38 to 6.36 hours per week).Conclusions and relevanceIn this economic evaluation, a forgivable loan program that required funding to be appropriated toward staffing was associated with a significant increase in CNA and LPN staffing hours among NH PPP loan recipients. Because the PPP loans are temporary, federal and state entities may need to institute sufficient and sustainable support to mitigate NH staffing shortages.
| S-EPMC10375300 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to devastate US nursing homes. Adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) and staffing levels are critical to protect nursing home residents and staff. Despite the importance of these basic measures, few national data are available concerning the state of nursing homes with respect to these resources. This article presents results from a new national database containing data from 98 percent of US nursing homes. We find that more than one in five nursing homes reports a severe shortage of PPE and any shortage of staff. Rates of both staff and PPE shortages did not meaningfully improve from May to July 2020. Facilities with COVID-19 cases among residents and staff, as well as those serving more Medicaid recipients and those with lower quality scores, were more likely to report shortages. Policies aimed at providing resources to obtain additional direct care staff and PPE for these vulnerable nursing homes, particularly in areas with rising community COVID-19 case rates, are needed to reduce the national COVID-19 death toll.
| S-EPMC7598889 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUS nursing homes are required to follow Centers for Disease Control guidance for COVID-19 transmission-based precautions (TBP) when admitting COVID-positive patients.ObjectiveTo assess how frequently nursing homes had shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) or staffing in weeks when they admitted COVID-positive patients, which likely made it more difficult to follow TBP, and to compare facility characteristics by admissions practices.Design and settingFacility-level data from the Nursing Home COVID-19 Public File for the period between June 7, 2020 and March 7, 2021 was combined with additional data. The percentages of nursing homes that admitted COVID-positive patients and that had shortages when admitting were calculated for each week. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression models were used to examine the relationship between facility characteristics and the likelihood of admitting COVID-positive patients.MeasurementsFacilities were categorized as having admitted COVID-positive patients in a week if one or more admissions requiring TBP were reported for that week. Facilities that reported having less than a 1-week supply of any type of PPE or being short any type of staff in a week were defined, respectively, as having a PPE shortage or staffing shortage in that week.ResultsOver the 40-week study period, 39% of US nursing homes admitted COVID-positive patients in at least 1 week in which they were experiencing PPE or staffing shortages. Facilities that admitted COVID-positive patients with shortages generally had lower Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services overall five-star ratings than other facilities. Only a small percentage of facilities that admitted COVID-positive patients while facing shortages were located in counties with severe shortages of PPE or staffing. In logistic regression models, shortages were not associated with COVID-positive admissions.ConclusionThe widespread practice of admitting COVID-positive patients while facing shortages may have put nursing home residents and staff at heightened risk of COVID-19 infection.
| S-EPMC8242553 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceNursing homes and other long-term care facilities have been disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Strategies are urgently needed to reduce transmission in these high-risk populations.ObjectiveTo evaluate COVID-19 transmission in nursing homes associated with contact-targeted interventions and testing.Design, setting, and participantsThis decision analytical modeling study developed an agent-based susceptible-exposed-infectious (asymptomatic/symptomatic)-recovered model between July and September 2020 to examine SARS-CoV-2 transmission in nursing homes. Residents and staff of a simulated nursing home with 100 residents and 100 staff split among 3 shifts were modeled individually; residents were split into 2 cohorts based on COVID-19 diagnosis. Data were analyzed from September to October 2020.ExposuresIn the resident cohorting intervention, residents who had recovered from COVID-19 were moved back from the COVID-19 (ie, infected with SARS-CoV-2) cohort to the non-COVID-19 (ie, susceptible and uninfected with SARS-CoV-2) cohort. In the immunity-based staffing intervention, staff who had recovered from COVID-19 were assumed to have protective immunity and were assigned to work in the non-COVID-19 cohort, while susceptible staff worked in the COVID-19 cohort and were assumed to have high levels of protection from personal protective equipment. These interventions aimed to reduce the fraction of people's contacts that were presumed susceptible (and therefore potentially infected) and replaced them with recovered (immune) contacts. A secondary aim of was to evaluate cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections associated with 2 types of screening tests (ie, rapid antigen testing and polymerase chain reaction [PCR] testing) conducted with varying frequency.Main outcomes and measuresEstimated cumulative incidence proportion of SARS-CoV-2 infection after 3 months.ResultsAmong the simulated cohort of 100 residents and 100 staff members, frequency and type of testing were associated with smaller outbreaks than the cohorting and staffing interventions. The testing strategy associated with the greatest estimated reduction in infections was daily antigen testing, which reduced the mean cumulative incidence proportion by 49% in absence of contact-targeted interventions. Under all screening testing strategies, the resident cohorting intervention and the immunity-based staffing intervention were associated with reducing the final estimated size of the outbreak among residents, with the immunity-based staffing intervention reducing it more (eg, by 19% in the absence of testing) than the resident cohorting intervention (eg, by 8% in the absence of testing). The estimated reduction in transmission associated with these interventions among staff varied by testing strategy and community prevalence.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that increasing the frequency of screening testing of all residents and staff, or even staff alone, in nursing homes may reduce outbreaks in this high-risk setting. Immunity-based staffing may further reduce spread at little or no additional cost and becomes particularly important when daily testing is not feasible.
| S-EPMC8122229 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Staffing level requirements for nursing homes exist at state and federal levels in the United States. While quality of care measures may include antipsychotic (AP) prescribing, the appropriate use of APs as chemical restraints in nursing homes continues to be debated. Although the two variables appear to be related, improved research methods and availability of accurate staffing data will be needed to understand causal relationships regarding AP use for facility dwelling patients.
| S-EPMC4685870 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo derive a comprehensive list of nursing-sensitive patient outcomes (NSPOs) from published research on nurse staffing levels and from expert opinion.Data sources/study settingPublished literature reviews and their primary studies analyzing the link between nurse staffing levels and NSPOs and interviews with 16 experts on nursing care.Study designUmbrella review and expert interviews.Data collection/extraction methodsWe screened three electronic databases for literature reviews on the association between nurse staffing levels and NSPOs. After screening 430 potentially relevant records, we included 15 literature reviews, derived a list of 22 unique NSPOs from them, and ranked these in a systematic fashion according to the strength of evidence existing for their association with nurse staffing. We extended this list of NSPOs based on data from expert interviews.Principal findingsOf the 22 NSPOs discussed in the 15 included literature reviews, we rated the strength of evidence for four as high, for five as moderate, and for 13 outcomes as low. Four additional NSPOs that have not been considered in literature were identified through expert interviews.ConclusionsWe identified strong evidence for a significant association between nurse staffing levels and NSPOs. Our results may guide researchers in selecting NSPOs they might wish to prioritize in future studies. In particular, rarely studied NSPOs as well as NSPOs that were only identified through expert interviews but have not been considered in literature so far should be subject to further research.
| S-EPMC8522577 | biostudies-literature