Dataset Information

Randomized trial of a delirium abatement program for postacute skilled nursing facilities.

ABSTRACT: To determine whether a delirium abatement program (DAP) can shorten duration of delirium in new admissions to postacute care (PAC).Cluster randomized controlled trial.Eight skilled nursing facilities specializing in PAC within a single metropolitan region.Four hundred fifty-seven participants with delirium at PAC admission.The DAP consisted of four steps: assessment for delirium within 5 days of PAC admission, assessment and correction of common reversible causes of delirium, prevention of complications of delirium, and restoration of function.Trained researchers screened eligible patients. Those with delirium defined according to the Confusion Assessment Method were eligible for participation using proxy consent. Regardless of location, researchers blind to intervention status re-assessed participants for delirium 2 weeks and 1 month after enrollment.Nurses at DAP sites detected delirium in 41% of participants, versus 12% in usual care sites (P<.001), and completed DAP documentation in most participants in whom delirium was detected, but the DAP intervention had no effect on delirium persistence based on two measurements at 2 weeks (DAP 68% vs usual care 66%) and 1 month (DAP 60% vs usual care 51%) (adjusted P> or =.20). Adjusting for baseline differences between DAP and usual care participants and restricting analysis to DAP participants in whom delirium was detected did not alter the results.Detection of delirium improved at the DAP sites, but the DAP had no effect on the persistence of delirium. This effectiveness trial demonstrated that a nurse-led DAP intervention was not effective in typical PAC facilities.

SUBMITTER: Marcantonio ER

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2924954 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Randomized trial of a delirium abatement program for postacute skilled nursing facilities.

Marcantonio Edward R ER Bergmann Margaret A MA Kiely Dan K DK Orav E John EJ Jones Richard N RN

Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 20100507 6

<h4>Objectives</h4>To determine whether a delirium abatement program (DAP) can shorten duration of delirium in new admissions to postacute care (PAC).<h4>Design</h4>Cluster randomized controlled trial.<h4>Setting</h4>Eight skilled nursing facilities specializing in PAC within a single metropolitan region.<h4>Participants</h4>Four hundred fifty-seven participants with delirium at PAC admission.<h4>Intervention</h4>The DAP consisted of four steps: assessment for delirium within 5 days of PAC admis ...[more]

PMID: 20487083

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceA substantial number of patients discharged to skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) after heart failure (HF) hospitalization experience regression in function or do not improve. Delirium is one of few modifiable risk factors in this patient population. Therefore, understanding the role of delirium in functional recovery may be useful for improving outcomes.ObjectiveTo assess the association of delirium with 30-day functional improvement in patients discharged to SNFs after HF hospitalization.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study included patients hospitalized for HF in 129 US Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals who were discharged to SNFs from October 1, 2010, to September 30, 2015. Data were analyzed from June 14 to December 18, 2020.ExposuresDelirium, as determined by the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 Confusion Assessment Method, with dementia as a covariate, determined via International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) coding.Main outcomes and measuresThe difference between admission and 30-day MDS 3.0 Activities of Daily Living (ADL) scores.ResultsA total of 20 495 patients (mean [SD] age, 78 [10.3] years; 78.9% White; and 97% male) were included in the analysis. Of the total sample, 882 patients (4.3%) had delirium on an SNF admission. The mean (SD) baseline ADL score on admission to SNF was significantly worse among patients with delirium than without (18.3 [4.7] vs 16.1 [5.2]; P < .001; d = 0.44.). On the 30-day repeated assessment, mean (SD) function (ADL scores) improved for both patients with delirium (0.6 [2.9]) and without delirium (1.8 [3.6]) (P < .001; d = -0.38). In the multivariate adjusted model, delirium was associated with statistically significant lower ADL improvement (difference in ADL score, -1.07; 95% CI, -1.31 to -0.83; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceIn this retrospective cohort study, patients with HF discharged to SNFs with delirium were less likely to show improvement in function compared with patients without delirium. Findings suggest a potential need to reexamine how and when health care professionals assess delirium in HF patients throughout their hospitalization and SNF course. Identifying and treating delirium for HF patients earlier in their care trajectory may play an important role in improving care and long-term functional outcomes in this population. Future research is warranted to further investigate the association between delirium and functional recovery for HF and other patient populations.

Project description:Importance:Health care reform legislation and Medicare plans for unified payment for postacute care highlight the need for research examining service delivery and outcomes. Objective:To compare functional outcomes in patients with stroke after postacute care in inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRF) vs skilled nursing facilities (SNF). Design, Setting, and Participants:This cohort study included patients with stroke who were discharged from acute care hospitals to IRF or SNF from January 1, 2013, to November 30, 2014. Medicare claims were used to link to IRF and SNF assessments. Data analyses were conducted from January 17, 2017, through April 25, 2019. Exposures:Inpatient rehabilitation received in IRFs vs SNFs. Main Outcomes and Measures:Changes in mobility and self-care measures during an IRF or SNF stay were compared using multivariate analyses, inverse probability weighting with propensity score, and instrumental variable analyses. Mortality between 30 and 365 days after discharge was included as a control outcome as an indicator for unmeasured confounders. Results:Among 99 185 patients who experienced a stroke between January 1, 2013, and November 30, 2014, 66 082 patients (66.6%) were admitted to IRFs and 33 103 patients (33.4%) were admitted to SNFs. A higher proportion of women were admitted to SNFs (21 466 [64.8%] women) than IRFs (36 462 [55.2%] women) (P < .001). Compared with patients admitted to IRFs, patients admitted to SNFs were older (mean [SD] age, 79.4 [7.6] years vs 83.3 [7.8] years; P < .001) and had longer hospital length of stay (mean [SD], 4.6 [3.0] days vs 5.9 [4.2] days; P < .001) than those admitted to IRFs. In unadjusted analyses, patients with stroke admitted to IRF compared with those admitted to SNF had higher mean scores for mobility on admission (44.2 [95% CI, 44.1-44.3] points vs 40.8 [95% CI, 40.7-40.9] points) and at discharge (55.8 [95% CI, 55.7-55.9] points vs 44.4 [95% CI, 44.3-44.5] points), and for self-care on admission (45.0 [95% CI, 44.9-45.1] points vs 41.8 [95% CI, 41.7-41.9] points) and at discharge (58.6 [95% CI, 58.5-58.7] points vs 45.1 [95% CI, 45.0-45.2] points). Additionally, patients in IRF compared with those in SNF had larger improvements for mobility score (11.6 [95% CI, 11.5-11.7] points vs 3.5 [95% CI, 3.4-3.6] points) and for self-care score (13.6 [95% CI, 13.5-13.7] points vs 3.2 [95% CI, 3.1-3.3] points). Multivariable, propensity score, and instrumental variable analyses showed a similar magnitude of better improvements in patients admitted to IRF vs those admitted to SNF. The differences between SNF and IRF in odds of 30- to 365-day mortality (unadjusted odds ratio, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.46-0.49]) were reduced but not eliminated in multivariable analysis (adjusted odds ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.69-0.74]) and propensity score analysis (adjusted odds ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.72-0.77]). These differences were no longer statistically significant in the instrumental variable analyses. Conclusions and Relevance:In this cohort study of a large national sample, inpatient rehabilitation in IRFs for patients with stroke was associated with substantially improved physical mobility and self-care function compared with rehabilitation in SNFs. This finding raises questions about the value of any policy that would reimburse IRFs or SNFs at the same standard rate for stroke.

Project description:BackgroundSkilled nursing facility (SNF) patients are medically complex with multiple, advanced chronic conditions. They are dependent on caregivers and have experienced recent acute illnesses. Among SNF patients, the rate of mortality or acute care use is over 50% within 90 days of discharge, yet these patients and their caregivers often do not receive the quality of transitional care that prepares them to manage serious illnesses at home.MethodsThe study will test the efficacy of Connect-Home, a successfully piloted transitional care intervention targeting seriously ill SNF patients discharged to home and their caregivers. The study setting will be SNFs in North Carolina, USA, and, following discharge, in patients' home. Using a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial design, six SNFs will transition at randomly assigned intervals from standard discharge planning to the Connect-Home intervention. The SNFs will contribute data for patients (N = 360) and their caregivers (N = 360), during both the standard discharge planning and Connect-Home time periods. Connect-Home is a two-step intervention: (a) SNF staff create an individualized Transition Plan of Care to manage the patient's illness at home; and (b) a Connect-Home Activation RN visits the patient's home to implement the written Transition Plan of Care. A key feature of the trial includes training of the SNF and Home Care Agency staff to complete the transition plan rather than using study interventionists. The primary outcomes will be patient preparedness for discharge and caregiver preparedness for caregiving role. With the proposed sample and using a two-sided test at the 5% significance level, we have 80% power to detect a 18% increase in the patient's preparedness for discharge score. We will employ linear mixed models to compare observations between intervention and usual care periods to assess primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes include (a) patients' quality of life, functional status, and days of acute care use and (b) caregivers' burden and distress.DiscussionStudy results will determine the efficacy of an intervention using existing clinical staff to (a) improve transitional care for seriously ill SNF patients and their caregivers, (b) prevent avoidable days of acute care use in a population with persistent risks from chronic conditions, and (c) advance the science of transitional care within end-of-life and palliative care trajectories of SNF patients and their caregivers. While this study protocol was being implemented, the COVID-19 pandemic occurred and this protocol was revised to mitigate COVID-related risks of patients, their caregivers, SNF staff, and the study team. Thus, this paper includes additional material describing these modifications.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03810534 . Registered on January 18, 2019.

Dataset Information

Randomized trial of a delirium abatement program for postacute skilled nursing facilities.

Publications

Randomized trial of a delirium abatement program for postacute skilled nursing facilities.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure