Dataset Information

Serious mental illness and nursing home quality of care.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To estimate the effect of a nursing home's share of residents with a serious mental illness (SMI) on the quality of care.

Data sources

Secondary nursing home level data over the period 2000 through 2008 obtained from the Minimum Data Set, OSCAR, and Medicare claims.

Study design

We employ an instrumental variables approach to address the potential endogeneity of the share of SMI residents in nursing homes in a model including nursing home and year fixed effects.

Principal findings

An increase in the share of SMI nursing home residents positively affected the hospitalization rate among non-SMI residents and negatively affected staffing skill mix and level. We did not observe a statistically significant effect on inspection-based health deficiencies or the hospitalization rate for SMI residents.

Conclusions

Across the majority of indicators, a greater SMI share resulted in lower nursing home quality. Given the increased prevalence of nursing home residents with SMI, policy makers and providers will need to adjust practices in the context of this new patient population. Reforms may include more stringent preadmission screening, new regulations, reimbursement changes, and increased reporting and oversight.

SUBMITTER: Rahman M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3703484 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere are unmet primary care needs among people with serious mental illness that might be improved with integrated care and medical care management. Many healthcare organizations have attempted to address this problem, but few interventions have been rigorously studied and found to be effective.ObjectiveStudy the implementation and effectiveness of a novel, specialized primary care medical home designed to improve the healthcare of patients with serious mental illness.Design, setting, and participantsClustered controlled trial for a median of 401 days. One Veterans Health Administration medical center was assigned to intervention and two were assigned to usual care (control). Thirty-nine clinicians and managers were included in the study, as well as 331 patients who met eligibility criteria.InterventionA specialized medical home with systematic patient engagement, proactive nurse panel management, a collaborative care psychiatrist, and a primary care physician providing care that included psychiatric treatment.Main measuresQuality of care, chronic illness care and care experience, symptoms, and quality of life.Key resultsSixty-five intervention patients (40%) moved all psychiatric care to the primary care team. No adverse events were attributable to the intervention. Compared with control, intervention patients had greater improvement over time in appropriate screening for body mass index, lipids, and glucose (χ2 = 6.9, 14.3, and 3.9; P's < .05); greater improvement in all domains of chronic illness care (activation, decision support, goal-setting, counseling, coordination) and care experience (doctor-patient interaction, shared decision-making, care coordination, access; F for each 10-24, P's < .05); and greater improvement in mental health-related quality of life (F = 3.9, P = .05) and psychotic symptoms (F = 3.9, P = .05).ConclusionA primary care medical home for serious mental illness can be feasible to implement, safe, and more effective than usual care.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01668355.

Project description:ImportanceDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, a large fraction of mental health care was provided via telemedicine. The implications of this shift in care for use of mental health service and quality of care have not been characterized.ObjectiveTo compare changes in care patterns and quality during the first year of the pandemic among Medicare beneficiaries with serious mental illness (schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder) cared for at practices with higher vs lower telemedicine use.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cohort study, Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder were attributed to specialty mental health practices that delivered the majority of their mental health care in 2019. Practices were categorized into 3 groups based on the proportion of telemental health visits provided during the first year of the pandemic (March 2020-February 2021): lowest use (0%-49%), middle use (50%-89%), or highest use (90%-100%). Across the 3 groups of practices, differential changes in patient outcomes were calculated from the year before the pandemic started to the year after. These changes were also compared with differential changes from a 2-year prepandemic period. Analyses were conducted in November 2022.ExposurePractice-level use of telemedicine during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the total number of mental health visits (telemedicine plus in-person) per person. Secondary outcomes included the number of acute hospital and emergency department encounters, all-cause mortality, and quality outcomes, including adherence to antipsychotic and mood-stabilizing medications (as measured by the number of months of medication fills) and 7- and 30-day outpatient follow-up rates after discharge for a mental health hospitalization.ResultsThe pandemic cohort included 120 050 Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 56.5 [14.5] years; 66 638 females [55.5%]) with serious mental illness. Compared with prepandemic changes and relative to patients receiving care at practices with the lowest telemedicine use: patients receiving care at practices in the middle and highest telemedicine use groups had 1.11 (95% CI, 0.45-1.76) and 1.94 (95% CI, 1.28-2.59) more mental health visits per patient per year (or 7.5% [95% CI, 3.0%-11.9%] and 13.0% [95% CI, 8.6%-17.4%] more mental health visits per year, respectively). Among patients of practices with middle and highest telemedicine use, changes in adherence to antipsychotic and mood-stabilizing medications were -0.4% (95% CI, -1.3% to 0.5%) and -0.1% (95% CI, -1.0% to 0.8%), and hospital and emergency department use for any reason changed by 2.4% (95% CI, -1.5% to 6.2%) and 2.8% (95% CI, -1.2% to 6.8%), respectively. There were no significant differential changes in postdischarge follow-up or mortality rates according to the level of telemedicine use.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries with serious mental illness, patients receiving care from practices that had a higher level of telemedicine use during the COVID-19 pandemic had more mental health visits per year compared with prepandemic levels, with no differential changes in other observed quality metrics over the same period.

Project description:ImportanceWhile the number of prescribing clinicians (physicians and nurse practitioners) who provide any nursing home care remained stable over the past decade, the number of clinicians who focus their practice exclusively on nursing home care has increased by over 30%.ObjectivesTo measure the association between regional trends in clinician specialization in nursing home care and nursing home quality.DesignRetrospective cross-sectional study.Setting and participantsPatients treated in 15,636 nursing homes in 305 US hospital referral regions between 2013 and 2016.MeasuresClinician specialization in nursing home care for 2012-2015 was measured using Medicare fee-for-service billings. Nursing home specialists were defined as generalist physicians (internal medicine, family medicine, geriatrics, and general practice) or advanced practitioners (nurse practitioners and physician assistants) with at least 90% of their billings for care in nursing homes. The number of clinicians was aggregated at the hospital referral region level and divided by the number of occupied Medicare-certified nursing home beds. Nursing Home Compare quality measure scores for 2013-2016 were aggregated at the HHR level, weighted by occupied beds in each nursing home in the hospital referral region. We measured the association between the number of nursing home specialists per 1000 beds and the clinical quality measure scores in the subsequent year using linear regression.ResultsAn increase in nursing home specialists per 1000 occupied beds in a region was associated with lower use of long-stay antipsychotic medications and indwelling bladder catheters, higher prevalence of depressive symptoms, and was not associated with urinary tract infections, use of restraints, or short-stay antipsychotic use.Conclusions and implicationsHigher prevalence of nursing home specialists was associated with regional improvements in 2 of 6 quality measures. Future studies should evaluate whether concentrating patient care among clinicians who specialize in nursing home practice improves outcomes for individual patients. The current findings suggest that prescribing clinicians play an important role in nursing home care quality.