Asymptomatic and Presymptomatic Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection Rates in a Multistate Sample of Skilled Nursing Facilities.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: White EM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7573793 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:OBJECTIVES:Prior studies have reported mixed findings about the existence of racial disparities in readmission rates among Medicare Advantage beneficiaries, but these studies used data from one state, focused on black-white disparities, and did not focus on patients discharged to skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). The objective of the study was to characterize racial and ethnic disparities in rates of 30-day rehospitalization directly from SNFs among fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage patients. DESIGN:A cross-sectional study of admissions to SNFs in 2015 was conducted. SETTING:SNFs across the United States. PARTICIPANTS:The sample included 1 500 334 white, 213 848 African American, and 99 781 Hispanic Medicare patients who were admitted to 13 375 SNFs. MEASUREMENTS:The main outcome of interest was readmission, identified as patients sent back to any hospital directly from the SNF within 30?days of admission, as indicated on the Minimum Data Set discharge assessment. RESULTS:Overall readmission rates for fee-for-service patients were 16.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 16.7%-16.8%) for whites, 18.8% (95% CI =?18.7%-19.0%) for African Americans, and 17.4% (95% CI =?17.1%-17.7%) for Hispanics. Readmission rates in Medicare Advantage were 14.7% (95% CI =?14.5%-14.8%) for whites, 16.8% (95% CI =?16.6%-17.1%) for African Americans, and 15.3% (95% CI =?14.9%-15.6%) for Hispanics. We also found that African Americans had about 1% higher readmission rates than whites, even when they received care within the same SNF. No statistically significant differences were found in the magnitude of within-SNF racial disparities in Medicare Advantage compared with Medicare fee-for-service. CONCLUSION:We found racial disparities in readmission rates even within the same facility for both Medicare Advantage and fee-for-service beneficiaries. Intervention to reduce disparities in readmission rates, as well as more comprehensive quality measures that incorporate outcomes for Medicare Advantage enrollees, are needed. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:1672-1679, 2019.
| S-EPMC6684399 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:There are areas of skilled nursing facility (SNF) experience of importance to the public that are not currently included in public reporting initiatives on SNF quality. Whether patients, hospitals, and payers can leverage the information available from unsolicited online reviews to reduce avoidable rehospitalizations from SNFs is unknown. Objectives:To assess the association between rehospitalization rates and online ratings of SNFs; to compare the association of rehospitalization with ratings from a review website vs Medicare Nursing Home Compare (NHC) ratings; and to identify specific topics consistently reported in reviews of SNFs with the highest vs lowest rehospitalization rates using natural language processing. Design, Setting, and Participants:A retrospective cross-sectional study of 1536 SNFs with online reviews on Yelp (a website that allows consumers to rate and review businesses and services, scored on a 1- to 5-star rating scale, with 1 star indicating the lowest rating and 5 stars indicating the highest rating) posted between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2018. The combined data set included 1536 SNFs with 8548 online reviews, NHC ratings, and readmission rates. Main Outcomes and Measures:A mean rating from the review website was calculated through the end of each year. Risk-standardized rehospitalization rates were obtained from NHC. Linear regression was used to measure the association between the rehospitalization rate of a SNF and the online ratings. Natural language processing was used to identify topics associated with reviews of SNFs in the top and bottom quintiles of rehospitalization rates. Results:The 1536 SNFs in the sample had a median of 6 reviews (interquartile range, 3-13 reviews), with a mean (SD) review website rating of 2.7 (1.1). The SNFs with the highest rating on both the review website and NHC had 2.0% lower rehospitalization rates compared with the SNFs with the lowest rating on both websites (21.3%; 95% CI, 20.7%-21.8%; vs 23.3%; 95% CI, 22.7%-24.0%; P?=?.04). Compared with the NHC ratings alone, review website ratings were associated with an additional 0.4% of the variation in rehospitalization rates across SNFs (adjusted R2?=?0.009 vs adjusted R2?=?0.013; P?=?.003). Thematic analysis of qualitative comments on the review website for SNFs with high vs low rehospitalization rates identified several areas of importance to the reviewers, such as the quality of physical infrastructure and equipment, staff attitudes and communication with caregivers. Conclusions and Relevance:Skilled nursing facilities with the best rating on both a review website and NHC had slightly lower rehospitalization rates than SNFs with the best rating on NHC alone. However, there was marked variation in the volume of reviews, and many SNF characteristics were underrepresented. Further refinement of the review process is warranted.
| S-EPMC7225899 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceTelemedicine in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) has the potential to improve access and timeliness of care. During the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 to 2022, telemedicine coverage expanded, but little is known about patterns of use in SNFs.ObjectiveTo describe patterns of telemedicine use in SNFs.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study used 2018 to 2022 Medicare fee-for-service claims and Minimum Data Set 3.0 records to identify short- and long-term care SNF residents. Clinician visits were grouped into routine SNF visits (ie, regular primary care within SNF) and other outpatient visits (ie, with non-SNF affiliated primary and specialty care clinicians). Using a difference-in-differences approach, assessments included whether off-hours visits (measured as weekend visits), new specialist visits, psychiatrist visits, or visits for residents with limited mobility changed differentially between 2018 to 2019 and 2020 to 2021 for SNFs with high compared with low telemedicine use in 2020.ExposureTelemedicine adoption at SNF after 2020.Main outcomes and measuresNumber and proportion of telemedicine SNF and outpatient visits.ResultsAcross 15 434 SNFs and 4 463 591 residents from the period January 2019 through June 2022 (mean [SD] age, 79.7 [11.6] years; 61% female in 2020), telemedicine visits increased from 0.15% in January 2019 to February 2020 to 15% SNF visits and 25% outpatient visits in May 2020. By 2022, telemedicine dropped to 2% of SNF visits and 8% of outpatient visits. The proportion of SNFs with any telemedicine visits annually dropped from 91% in 2020 to 61% in 2022. The facilities with high telemedicine use were more likely to be rural (adjusted odds ratio vs urban, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.77 to 2.40). Psychiatry visits differentially increased in high vs low telemedicine-use SNFs (20.2% relative increase; 95% CI, 1.2% to 39.2%). In contrast, there was little change in outpatient visits for residents with limited mobility (7.2%; 95% CI, -0.1% to 14.6%) or new specialist visits (-0.7%; 95% CI, -2.5% to 1.2%).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of SNF residents, telemedicine was rapidly adopted in early 2020 but subsequently stabilized at a low use rate that was nonetheless higher than before 2020. Higher telemedicine use in SNFs was associated with improved access to psychiatry visits in SNFs. A policy to encourage continued telemedicine use may facilitate further access to important services as the technology matures.
| S-EPMC10439478 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recent epidemiologic, virologic, and modeling reports support the possibility of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission from persons who are presymptomatic (SARS-CoV-2 detected before symptom onset) or asymptomatic (SARS-CoV-2 detected but symptoms never develop). SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the absence of symptoms reinforces the value of measures that prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2 by infected persons who may not exhibit illness despite being infectious. Critical knowledge gaps include the relative incidence of asymptomatic and symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, the public health interventions that prevent asymptomatic transmission, and the question of whether asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection confers protective immunity.
| S-EPMC7323549 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection can spread rapidly within skilled nursing facilities. After identification of a case of Covid-19 in a skilled nursing facility, we assessed transmission and evaluated the adequacy of symptom-based screening to identify infections in residents.MethodsWe conducted two serial point-prevalence surveys, 1 week apart, in which assenting residents of the facility underwent nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal testing for SARS-CoV-2, including real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR), viral culture, and sequencing. Symptoms that had been present during the preceding 14 days were recorded. Asymptomatic residents who tested positive were reassessed 7 days later. Residents with SARS-CoV-2 infection were categorized as symptomatic with typical symptoms (fever, cough, or shortness of breath), symptomatic with only atypical symptoms, presymptomatic, or asymptomatic.ResultsTwenty-three days after the first positive test result in a resident at this skilled nursing facility, 57 of 89 residents (64%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Among 76 residents who participated in point-prevalence surveys, 48 (63%) tested positive. Of these 48 residents, 27 (56%) were asymptomatic at the time of testing; 24 subsequently developed symptoms (median time to onset, 4 days). Samples from these 24 presymptomatic residents had a median rRT-PCR cycle threshold value of 23.1, and viable virus was recovered from 17 residents. As of April 3, of the 57 residents with SARS-CoV-2 infection, 11 had been hospitalized (3 in the intensive care unit) and 15 had died (mortality, 26%). Of the 34 residents whose specimens were sequenced, 27 (79%) had sequences that fit into two clusters with a difference of one nucleotide.ConclusionsRapid and widespread transmission of SARS-CoV-2 was demonstrated in this skilled nursing facility. More than half of residents with positive test results were asymptomatic at the time of testing and most likely contributed to transmission. Infection-control strategies focused solely on symptomatic residents were not sufficient to prevent transmission after SARS-CoV-2 introduction into this facility.
| S-EPMC7200056 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo understand how hospital-based clinicians evaluate older adults in the hospital and decide who will be transferred to a skilled nursing facility (SNF) for postacute care.DesignSemistructured interviews paired with a qualitative analytical approach informed by Social Constructivist theory.SettingInpatient care units in three hospitals. Purposive sampling was used to maximize variability in hospitals, units within hospitals, and staff on those units.ParticipantsClinicians (hospitalists, nurses, therapists, social workers, case managers) involved in evaluation and decision-making regarding postacute care (N = 25).MeasurementsCentral themes related to clinician evaluation and discharge decision-making.ResultsClinicians described pressure to expedite evaluation and discharge decisions, resulting in the use of SNFs as a "safety net" for older adults being discharged from the hospital. The lack of hospital-based clinician knowledge of SNF care practices, quality, or patient outcomes resulted in lack of a standardized evaluation process or a clear primary decision-maker.ConclusionHospital clinician evaluation and decision-making about postacute care in SNFs may be characterized as rushed, without a clear system or framework for making decisions and uninformed by knowledge of SNF or patient outcomes in those discharged to SNFs. This leads to SNFs being used as a "safety net" for many older adults. As hospitals and SNFs are increasingly held jointly accountable for outcomes of individuals transitioning between hospitals and SNFs, novel solutions for improving evaluation and decision-making are urgently needed.
| S-EPMC5681432 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Older adults are susceptible to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes as a consequence of their age and, in some cases, underlying health conditions (1). A COVID-19 outbreak in a long-term care skilled nursing facility (SNF) in King County, Washington that was first identified on February 28, 2020, highlighted the potential for rapid spread among residents of these types of facilities (2). On March 1, a health care provider at a second long-term care skilled nursing facility (facility A) in King County, Washington, had a positive test result for SARS-CoV-2, the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19, after working while symptomatic on February 26 and 28. By March 6, seven residents of this second facility were symptomatic and had positive test results for SARS-CoV-2. On March 13, CDC performed symptom assessments and SARS-CoV-2 testing for 76 (93%) of the 82 facility A residents to evaluate the utility of symptom screening for identification of COVID-19 in SNF residents. Residents were categorized as asymptomatic or symptomatic at the time of testing, based on the absence or presence of fever, cough, shortness of breath, or other symptoms on the day of testing or during the preceding 14 days. Among 23 (30%) residents with positive test results, 10 (43%) had symptoms on the date of testing, and 13 (57%) were asymptomatic. Seven days after testing, 10 of these 13 previously asymptomatic residents had developed symptoms and were recategorized as presymptomatic at the time of testing. The reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing cycle threshold (Ct) values indicated large quantities of viral RNA in asymptomatic, presymptomatic, and symptomatic residents, suggesting the potential for transmission regardless of symptoms. Symptom-based screening in SNFs could fail to identify approximately half of residents with COVID-19. Long-term care facilities should take proactive steps to prevent introduction of SARS-CoV-2 (3). Once a confirmed case is identified in an SNF, all residents should be placed on isolation precautions if possible (3), with considerations for extended use or reuse of personal protective equipment (PPE) as needed (4).
| S-EPMC7119514 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDual eligibles, persons who qualify for both Medicare and Medicaid coverage, often receive poorer quality care relative to other Medicare beneficiaries.ObjectivesTo determine whether dual eligibles are discharged to lower quality post-acute skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) compared with Medicare-only beneficiaries.Research designFollowing the random utility maximization model, we specified a discharge function using a conditional logit model and tested how this discharge rule varied by dual-eligibility status.SubjectsA total of 692,875 Medicare fee-for-service patients (22% duals) who were discharged for Medicare paid SNF care between July 2004 and June 2005.MeasuresMedicare enrollment and the Medicaid Analytic Extract files were used to determine dual eligibility. The proportion of Medicaid patients and nursing staff characteristics provided measures of SNF quality.ResultsDuals are more likely to be discharged to SNFs with a higher share of Medicaid patients and fewer nurses. These results are robust to estimation with an alternative subsample of patients based on primary diagnoses, propensity of being dual eligible, and likelihood of remaining in the nursing home.ConclusionsDisparities exist in access to quality SNF care for duals. Strategies to improve discharge planning processes are required to redirect patients to higher quality providers, regardless of Medicaid eligibility.
| S-EPMC4024370 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the relative influence of hospital and skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) on 30-day rehospitalization.Data sources/settingsElderly Medicare beneficiaries newly admitted to a SNF following hospitalization.Study designWe ranked hospitals and SNFs into quartiles based on previous years' adjusted rehospitalization rates (ARRs) and examined how rehospitalizations from a given hospital vary depending upon the admitting SNF ARR quartile. We examined whether the availability of SNFs with low rehospitalization rates influenced hospitals' SNF readmission rates and whether changes in a hospital's ARR over 3 years is associated with changes in the SNFs to which they discharge.Principal findingsHospital readmission rates from SNFs varied 5 percentage points between patients discharged to SNFs in the lowest and the highest rehospitalization quartiles. Low rehospitalization rate hospitals sent a larger fraction of their patients to the lowest rehospitalization SNFs available in the area. A 10 percent increase in hospital's share of discharges to the lowest rehospitalization quartile SNFs is associated with a 1 percentage point reduction in hospital's ARR.ConclusionsThe SNF rehospitalization rate has greater influence on patients' risk of rehospitalization than the discharging hospital. Identifying high-performing SNFs may be a powerful strategy for hospitals to reduce rehospitalizations.
| S-EPMC5346496 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Establishing preferred provider networks of skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) is one approach hospital administrators are using to reduce excess thirty-day readmissions and avoid Medicare penalties or to reduce beneficiaries' costs as part of value-based payment models. However, hospitals are also required to provide patients at discharge with a list of Medicare-eligible providers and cannot explicitly restrict patient choice. This requirement complicates the development of a SNF network. Furthermore, there is little evidence about the effectiveness of network development in reducing readmission rates. We used a concurrent mixed-methods approach, combining Medicare claims data for the period 2009-13 with qualitative data gathered from interviews during site visits to hospitals in eight US markets in March-October 2015, to examine changes in rehospitalization rates and differences in practices between hospitals that did and did not develop formal SNF networks. Four hospitals had developed formal SNF networks as part of their care management efforts. These hospitals saw a relative reduction from 2009 to 2013 in readmission rates for patients discharged to SNFs that was 4.5 percentage points greater than the reduction for hospitals without formal networks. Interviews revealed that those with networks expanded existing relationships with SNFs, effectively managed patient data, and exercised a looser interpretation of patient choice.
| S-EPMC5664928 | biostudies-literature