Long-term Care Facilities Setting Research Articles

Impact of vision impairment on discharge destination for patients with hip fracture

IntroductionVision impairment (VI) due to low vision or blindness is a major sensory health problem affecting quality of life and contributing to increased risk of falls and hip fractures (HF). Up to 60% of patients with hip fracture have VI, and VI increases further susceptibility to falls due to mobility challenges after HF. We sought to determine if VI affects discharge destination for patients with HF. Materials and methodsCross-sectional analysis of 2015 Inpatient Medicare claims was performed and VI, blindness/low vision), HF and HF surgery were identified using ICD-9, and ICD-10 codes. Patients who sustained a HF with a diagnosis of VI were categorized as HF + VI. The outcome measure was discharge destination of home, skilled nursing facility (SNF), long-term care facility (LTCF) or other. ResultsDuring the one-year ascertainment of inpatient claims, there were 10,336 total HF patients, 66.82% female, 91.21% non-Hispanic white with mean (standard deviation) age 82.3 (8.2) years. There was an age-related increase in diagnosis of VI with 1.49% (29/1941) of patients aged 65–74, 1.76% (63/3574) of patients aged 75–84, and 2.07% (100/4821) of patients aged 85 and older. The prevalence of VI increased with age, representing 1.5% (29/1941) of adults aged 65–74, 1.8% (63/3574) of adults aged 75–84, and 2.1% (100/4821) of adults aged 85 and older. The age-related increase in VI was not significant (P = 0.235). Patients with HF were most commonly discharged to a SNF (64.46%), followed by ‘Other’ (25.70%), home (7.15%), and LTCF (2.67%). VI was not associated with discharge destination. Male gender, Black race, systemic complications, and late postoperative discharge significantly predicted discharge to LTCF with odds ratios (95%CI) 1.42 (1.07–1.89), 1.90 (1.13–3.18), 2.27 (1.66–3.10), and 1.73 (1.25–2.39) respectively. ConclusionsThe co-morbid presence of VI was not associated with altered discharge destinations to home, skilled nursing facility, LTCF or other setting.

A SCOPING REVIEW OF SYSTEMS-LEVEL INTERVENTIONS FOR FALL PREVENTION IN LONG-TERM CARE

Abstract Older adults residing in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are at high risk for falls. In addition to individual resident-level interventions to prevent falls and fall-related injury (FRI), system-focused interventions are also necessary to adequately address fall prevention. Relatively little attention has been given to research involving systems-focused interventions. We aimed to synthesize studies on the effects of system-focused interventions for fall and FRI prevention in LTCFs with the goal of identifying promising strategies and gaps. We searched Medline, CINAHL, and EMBASE databases from 2017 to 2022 following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guideline. We conducted a narrative synthesis to summarize included studies. In the initial review, 301 studies were identified and underwent title and abstract screening resulting in 98 articles were retrieved for full-text review. Fifteen studies were included in data extraction. Fall prevention interventions evaluated in LTCF settings include: (1) multicomponent fall prevention programs, (2) staff education programs, (3) training in safe handling/transfers, (4) environmental adaptations, (5) electronic health record algorithms and prompts, (6) local culture change, (7) video analysis of falls to change local interventions, and (8) facility-level physical activity programs. About half of reported studies reported significant effects of system-focused interventions to reduce fall and FRI in LTCFs. Multicomponent fall prevention programs and physical activity interventions are the most effective systems-level interventions, while electronic health record interventions were the least effective. Overall, little attention has been given in the literature to evaluation of environmental adaptations at the systems level.

The association between sedentary behaviour and sarcopenia in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundSedentary behaviour is considered to contribute to sarcopenia when combined with physical inactivity. Whether sedentary behaviour is independently associated with sarcopenia remains controversial. The aim of this study is to explore the association between sedentary behaviour and sarcopenia in older adults in community and long-term care facility settings.MethodsEight electronic databases including MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Wanfang were searched from inception until August 2023. The review included cross-sectional and longitudinal studies concerning the association between sedentary behaviour and sarcopenia among participants over 60 years old. Evidence was pooled by both random-effects meta-analysis and narrative synthesis. Subgroup analyses explored variation according to adjustment of physical activity, settings, and measurements of sedentary behaviour and sarcopenia. Quality assessment for individual studies was performed with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist.ResultsSeventeen articles (16 cross-sectional studies and 1 longitudinal study) of 25,788 participants from community or long-term care facility settings were included. The overall quality of the included studies was rated high. Meta-analysis of 14 cross-sectional studies showed that sedentary behaviour was independently positively associated with sarcopenia: pooled odd ratio 1.36 (95% confidence interval, 1.18–1.58). The independent positive association remained in subgroup analyses by adjustment of physical activity, settings, and measurements of sedentary behaviour and sarcopenia. The narrative analysis corroborated the findings of the meta-analysis and provided additional evidence suggesting that interruptions in sedentary periods were linked to a decreased likelihood of developing sarcopenia.ConclusionsThe findings support the hypothesis that sedentary behaviour is independently positively associated with sarcopenia in older adults, providing vital indications for the development of strategies to prevent sarcopenia.Systematic review registrationThe systematic review protocol has been registered with the PROSPERO database (CRD42022311399).

Psychological Resilience in Older Residents of Long-Term Care Facilities: Occurrence and Associated Factors.

The researchers aimed to (1) explore the occurrence of psychological resilience in the face of a major life stressor and conflict in older residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs), and (2) identify factors associated with resilience in this population. Longitudinal cohort study using the Dutch InterRAI-LTCF cohort. Older residents (≥60years old) of 21 LTCFs in the Netherlands. The researchers selected 2 samples of residents who had at least 2 assessments surrounding (1) an incident major life stressor, or (2) incident conflict with other resident or staff. A resilient outcome was operationalized as not having clinically meaningful mood symptoms at the post-stressor assessment and equal or fewer mood symptoms at the post-stressor relative to the pre-stressor assessment. The researchers used 2 resilience outcomes per stressor: 1 based on observer-reported mood symptoms and 1 based on self-reported mood symptoms. The most important factors from among 21 potential resilience factors for each of the 4 operationalizations of resilience were identified using a backward selection procedure with 2-level generalized estimating equations analyses. Forty-eight percent and 50% of residents were resilient in the face of a major life stressor, based on observer-reported (n= 248) and self-reported (n= 211) mood, respectively. In the face of conflict, 26% and 51% of the residents demonstrated resilience, based on the observer-reported (n= 246) and self-reported (n= 183) mood, respectively. Better cognitive functioning, a strong and supportive relationship with family, participation in social activities, and better self-reported health were most strongly associated with resilience in the face of a major life stressor. Better communicative functioning, absence of psychiatric diagnoses, a strong and supportive relationship with family, not being lonely, social engagement, and not reminiscing about life were most strongly associated with resilience in the face of conflict. Factors with a social aspect appear to be particularly important to psychological resilience in older LTCF residents, and provide a potential target for intervention in the LTCF setting.

Lessons From the Field: Rapid Antigen Testing Is Efficient and Practical for Mitigation of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outbreaks in Long-Term Care Facilities.

Mitigation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreaks in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) is facilitated by rapid identification and isolation of infectious individuals to interrupt viral transmission. Immunochromatographic (IC) tests, or rapid antigen tests, have high sensitivity and specificity during the contagious period for COVID-19. Mathematical modeling predicts frequent IC surveillance will be more efficient than polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based strategies, especially during community surges when reporting of PCR results can be delayed. However, there are few published field studies evaluating IC testing strategies in this long-term care setting. In fall and winter of 2020, the Marin Health and Human Services Department implemented thrice-weekly IC mass testing by nonlaboratory workers in outbreaks that occurred in 2 LTCFs, in addition to then-standard semiweekly PCR testing. The IC test performance was characterized using same-day PCR specimens as reference standard. Cumulative incidence and duration of transmission for the 2 IC intervention facility outbreaks were compared with 6 reference LTCFs that used weekly to semiweekly PCR alone during an outbreak response. Of 123 same-day test pairs, IC test sensitivity and specificity were 75% (95% confidence interval [CI], 48%-93%) and 100% (95% CI, 97%-100%), respectively. The median duration of outbreak transmission was 19.5 days in the 2 intervention sites and 28 days in the reference facilities (P = .40). Cumulative incidence for the outbreaks among LTCF residents was 41% in the intervention facilities versus 52% in the reference facilities (P = .04, Fisher 2-sided exact). Thrice-weekly mass IC testing as used by nonlaboratory personnel can be highly practical and effective for COVID-19 outbreak mitigation in the LTCF setting.

Workplace health promotion programs for employees in long-term care facilities - a systematic review

Abstract Background Employees in long-term care facilities (LTC) are exposed to physically and mentally demanding workloads. Due to the specific working conditions and processes in LTC, recent literature recommends that care setting-specific health promotion is required. The objective was to systematically review the current evidence of workplace health promotion programs among employees in LTC. Methods A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 Statement. The literature search was applied in the online databases PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and APA PsycArticles (Jan 2000 - Feb 2022). Studies were included if (1) participants worked in any occupational setting in LTC, (2) personal health and outcomes related to occupational health were measured as primary outcome, and (3) studies were randomized controlled trials. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool (RoB 2). Results The literature search yielded 23.007 articles, resulting in 24 included studies and 21 unique interventions with a total of 6.625 participants at baseline. Most participants were female (85.2% to 100%). Interventions were grouped into person-directed (n = 4), person/work interface-directed (n = 10), work-directed (n = 0), and combined approaches (n = 7). Of these studies, two studies (2/4) using a person-directed approach, four studies (4/10) using a person/work interface-directed approach, and four studies (4/7) using a combined approach demonstrated significant improvements in personal health-related outcomes and occupational health-related outcomes. Methodological quality can be rated as some concerns. Conclusions Interventions that incorporate a combination of intervention approaches appear promising for improving health and work-related outcomes among employees in LTC. There is a lack of evidence for only work-directed approaches to health promotion in LTC. High-level quality studies are still needed. Key messages • Combined intervention approaches to workplace health promotion in long-term care facility settings appear to be beneficial. • High-level quality studies on workplace health promotion in long-term care facilities are still needed.

Dynamics of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales intestinal colonisation in the elderly population after hospital discharge, Italy, 2018–2020

Carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (CPE) represent a serious threat to public health worldwide. Elderly patients are at increased risk of colonisation/infection with CPE. This study aimed to evaluate the persistence of CPE colonisation and the genotypic characteristics of persistent strains in elderly people discharged from Italian hospitals. A longitudinal study was conducted in two Italian cities (March 2018 to September 2020) enrolling 137 patients aged ≥65 years with CPE intestinal colonisation at hospital discharge. CPE colonisation was evaluated after 4, 8 and 12 months. Competing risk analysis was used to explore the association between baseline characteristics and persistence at 4 months. For all isolates, carbapenemase typing and multilocus sequence typing were performed. Persistent isolates underwent whole-genome sequencing. Of 137 patients, 91% carried carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae (CP-KP) and 8.8% carried carbapenemase-producing Escherichia coli. Although a large number of patients were lost to follow-up owing to death or withdrawal, 28/65 patients (43.1%) remained colonised at Month 4; 16/42 (38.1%) and 5/28 (17.9%) were found colonised up to Months 8 and 12, respectively. Colonisation persistence was more frequent in patients with bacteraemia or complicated urinary tract infection while in hospital and in those staying in long-term care facilities (LTCFs). Clonal characteristics of CP-KP isolates did not appear to influence persistence. Isolates obtained from each persistent carrier were identical or highly related by SNP phylogenetic analysis. Identification of patients at higher risk of persistent intestinal carriage after hospital discharge can prompt control measures to limit the transmission of CPE in the community, especially in LTCF settings.

Timeline of COVID-19 Incidence and Mortality among Residents and Staff of South Carolina Long-term Care Facilities

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted older adults living in long-term care facilities (LTCFs), but little research has described parallel infection rates and mortality among LTCF residents and staff in relation to state-level mitigation measures. This study used comprehensive COVID-19 tracking data from the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC), including case report information on demographics, symptoms, comorbidities, and employment. We included all confirmed or probable COVID-19 cases and deaths among adult SC residents reported between 3/15/2020 and 1/2/2021. Residence or employment in LTCF, including nursing homes, assisted living, or skilled nursing facilities, were confirmed by SCDHEC. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare mortality between residents/staff and counterparts in the community. Overall, 54,514 cases of COVID-19 were identified among older adults in SC. Of these, 13.5% (n = 7,366) resided in a LTCF. LTCF residents with COVID-19 were more likely to be hospitalized compared to older adults in the community and 74% more likely to die (HR= 1.74, 95% CI: 1.59-1.90), after controlling for age, gender, race, and chronic health conditions. LTCF staff had greater infection rates but lower risk of mortality (HR=0.58; 95% CI: 0.39-0.88) compared to the general population. Differences in COVID-19 incidence and mortality between residents/staff and the community decreased after statewide mitigation policies. This study indicates that LTCF residents are at increased risk of COVID infection and mortality, even accounting for pre-existing health conditions. LTCF settings are key sites for prioritizing prevention, vaccination, and training plans to prepare for future pandemics.

Timeline of COVID-19 Incidence and Mortality among Residents and Staff of South Carolina Long-term Care Facilities

Public health guidelines to prevent spreading COVID-19 place older adults at risk of loneliness and social isolation. Evidence suggests that participation protects older adults from such detrimental outcomes, therefore we aimed to identify the factors associated with participation in life roles among older adults living in the community during the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted a telesurvey on a random sample of community-dwelling older adults living in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, between May and July 2020. Outcome measures included participation in life roles, physical function, physical activity, mobility, mental health, nutrition, and demographics. We conducted two multivariate regression analyses with the Late Life Disability Instrument’s (LLDI) frequency and limitations scales as the dependent variables. Candidate factors were organized by International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) framework domains; personal factors, body functions and structures, activities, and environmental factors. A total of 272 older adults completed the telesurvey (mean age 78 ±7.3 yrs, 70% female). Age, using walking aids, driving status, household income, education, mental health, nutrition, physical function, and dwelling type explained 47.1% (p<0.001) of the variance observed in LLDI frequency scores. Using walking aids, driving status, receiving health assistance, mental health, and physical function explained 33.9% (p<0.001) of the variance observed in LLDI limitation scores. These findings highlight factors from multiple ICF domains that are associated with participation limitation and frequency among older adults during the pandemic. Our findings have implications for developing public health initiatives to mitigate the effects of the pandemic on the participation of older adults.

Influence of Attachment Anxiety on the Relationship between Loneliness and Depression among Long-Term Care Residents.

Background: Attachment styles influence an individual’s ability to maintain relationships throughout their lifespan. Insecure attachment has been associated with many aspects of mental health. The study aimed to explore the influence of attachment on loneliness and depression among old-age residents in long-term care facilities. Methods: A survey was conducted among residents from long term care facilities (LTC) in Thailand during the COVID-19 pandemic; 221 older people participated in the study. The mean aged was 73.60 ± 7.45 years old, and 57.5% female. All participants completed the Geriatric Depression Scale, the six-item revised version of the University of California Los Angeles Loneliness Scale, and the Revised Experience of Close Relationships questionnaire to measure depressive symptoms, loneliness, and attachment style. Hierarchical multiple regression analysis was performed to find the predictors for depressive symptoms. Results: In all, 40.7% of residents in LTC facilities experienced depression. Male sex, education, loneliness, and attachment anxiety predicted the increased level of depressive symptoms. Conclusion: Loneliness was confirmed to be significantly associated with depressive symptoms, and attachment anxiety was found to be a strong predicting factor of depressive symptoms. Intervention and research regarding reducing loneliness and attachment anxiety should be promoted in LTC settings.

Frailty Status and Cognitive Function Should Guide Prescribing in Long-term Care Facilities.

Frailty, dementia and complex multimorbidity are highly prevalent among residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs). Prescribing for residents of LTCFs is often informed by disease-specific clinical practice guidelines based on research conducted among younger and more robust adults. However, frailty and cognitive impairment may modify medication benefits and risks. Residents with frailty and advanced dementia may be at increased susceptibility to adverse drug events (ADEs) and often have a lower likelihood of achieving long-term therapeutic benefit from chronic preventative medications. For this reason, there is a strong rationale for deprescribing, particularlyamong residents with high medication burdens, swallowing difficulties or limited dexterity. Conversely, frailty and dementia have also been associated with under-prescribing of clinically indicated medications. Unnecessarily withholding treatment based on assumed risk may deprive vulnerable population groups from receiving evidence-based care. There is a need for specific evidence regarding medication benefits and risks in LTCF residents with frailty and dementia. Observational studies conducted using routinely collected health data may complement evidence from randomized controlled trials that often exclude people living with dementia, frailty and in LTCFs. Balancing over- and under-prescribing requires consideration of each resident's frailty and cognitive status, therapeutic goals, time-to-benefit, potential ADEs, and individual values or preferences. Incorporating frailty screening into medication review may also provide better alignment of medication regimens to changing goals of care. Timely identification of frail residents as part of treatment decision-making may assist with targeting interventions to minimize and monitor for ADEs. Shifting away from rigid application of conventional disease-specific clinical practice guidelines may provide an individualized and more holistic assessment of medication benefits and risks in the LTCF setting.

Hypoglycemia in Older People With Type 2 Diabetes: Prevention and Treatment Strategies for Outpatient and Long-Term Care Facility Settings

Hypoglycemia in the older population is a significant problem accounting for increased hospitalizations, emergency room visits, health care costs, and decreased quality of life. Older patients are more susceptible to hypoglycemia because of the increased prevalence of comorbidities requiring multiple medications, age-related physiologic changes, and a progressive decline in health. Older patients are less likely to present with symptoms of hypoglycemia and symptoms may frequently appear at a lower threshold of blood glucose than in younger patients. Consequently, preventing and treating hyperglycemia in older patients can be challenging. If mismanaged, the impact of hypoglycemia in these patients can lead to acute and chronic negative outcomes. Insulin and sulfonylureas should be closely monitored, and deprescribing should be routinely considered in older patients at high risk for hypoglycemia.

Hypoglycemia in Older People With Type 2 Diabetes: Prevention and Treatment Strategies for Outpatient and Long-Term Care Facility Settings.

Hypoglycemia in the older population is a significant problem accounting for increased hospitalizations, emergency room visits, health care costs, and decreased quality of life. Older patients are more susceptible to hypoglycemia because of the increased prevalence of comorbidities requiring multiple medications, age-related physiologic changes, and a progressive decline in health. Older patients are less likely to present with symptoms of hypoglycemia and symptoms may frequently appear at a lower threshold of blood glucose than in younger patients. Consequently, preventing and treating hyperglycemia in older patients can be challenging. If mismanaged, the impact of hypoglycemia in these patients can lead to acute and chronic negative outcomes. Insulin and sulfonylureas should be closely monitored, and deprescribing should be routinely considered in older patients at high risk for hypoglycemia.

77. Long Term Care Facility Residents Hospitalized with COVID-19 Infection Present with Atypical Symptoms

BackgroundFever and cough are frequently reported in COVID-19 infections, although little is known about the subgroup of symptomatic patients who do not manifest these classic symptoms. We aimed to compare clinical manifestations and outcomes for hospitalized COVID-19 patients with typical vs. atypical presentations and identify risk factors for atypical COVID-19 presentations.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort of all patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infections during 3/13- 5/13/2020 at UW Health, a network of 3 acute-care hospitals in Midwest. We defined atypical cases as patients hospitalized for COVID-19 related reasons presenting without fever and cough and compared them in univariate analysis with patients manifesting both symptoms (controls). We identified independent risk factors for atypical COVID-19 presentations by logistic regression.ResultsAmong the 163 patients hospitalized during the 60-day study frame, 39 (24%) had atypical presentations. Table 1 shows demographic, clinical manifestations, and outcomes of atypical vs. typical cases. On univariate analysis, atypical cases were more likely to be older, reside in a long-term-care facility (LTCF), have underlying diabetes mellitus, stroke, cardiac disease, and deny myalgias or dyspnea, despite having no significant difference in the prevalence of hypoxia or radiological lung infiltrates. Atypical cases also had a significantly higher Beta-Natriuretic-Peptide and lower C-Reactive-Protein, although other inflammatory markers were not significantly different. They were less likely to be admitted to the ICU, and more likely to die within 30 days, as older patients with respiratory failure and multiple comorbidities opted for comfort measures and less aggressive care. On multivariate analysis, LTCF residence was the only independent predictor for atypical status (Table 2). ConclusionLTCF residents are more likely to experience COVID-19 respiratory illness (hypoxia, pneumonia) without classic symptoms (fever, cough, myalgias, dyspnea). Given the excessive pandemic burden in the LTCF setting, timely recognition and diagnosis of these atypical, more subtle presentations is critical.Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Decreased costs and retained QoL due to the \u2018PACE Steps to Success\u2019 intervention in LTCFs: cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundThe number of residents in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) in need of palliative care is growing in the Western world. Therefore, it is foreseen that significantly higher percentages of budgets will be spent on palliative care. However, cost-effectiveness analyses of palliative care interventions in these settings are lacking. Therefore, the objective of this paper was to assess the cost-effectiveness of the ‘PACE Steps to Success’ intervention. PACE (Palliative Care for Older People) is a 1-year palliative care programme aiming at integrating general palliative care into day-to-day routines in LTCFs, throughout seven EU countries.MethodsA cluster RCT was conducted. LTCFs were randomly assigned to intervention or usual care. LTCFs reported deaths of residents, about whom questionnaires were filled in retrospectively about resource use and quality of the last month of life. A health care perspective was adopted. Direct medical costs, QALYs based on the EQ-5D-5L and costs per quality increase measured with the QOD-LTC were outcome measures.ResultsAlthough outcomes on the EQ-5D-5L remained the same, a significant increase on the QOD-LTC (3.19 points, p value 0.00) and significant cost-savings were achieved in the intervention group (€983.28, p value 0.020). The cost reduction mainly resulted from decreased hospitalization-related costs (€919.51, p value 0.018).ConclusionsCosts decreased and QoL was retained due to the PACE Steps to Success intervention. Significant cost savings and improvement in quality of end of life (care) as measured with the QOD-LTC were achieved. A clinically relevant difference of almost 3 nights shorter hospitalizations in favour of the intervention group was found. This indicates that timely palliative care in the LTCF setting can prevent lengthy hospitalizations while retaining QoL. In line with earlier findings, we conclude that integrating general palliative care into daily routine in LTCFs can be cost-effective.Trial registrationISRCTN14741671.

Management of Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase Urinary Tract Infections: Diagnostic and Treatment Considerations for the Older Adult

OBJECTIVE: To review the treatment options for extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) urinary tract infections (UTIs) in the long-term care facility setting.<br/> DATA SOURCES: A PubMed search from January 1, 1990, through December 31, 2018, using terms "extended spectrum beta lactamase" and "urinary tract infection" was performed. Current guidelines, drug databases, and manufacturer package inserts were also used.<br/> STUDY SELECTION: All English-language articles during the above time frame appearing in these searches were reviewed for relevance to this paper. In addition, their bibliographies were reviewed to identify any articles not originally identified.<br/> DATA SYNTHESIS: ESBL UTIs are a growing concern in the long-term care facility as these pathogens are becoming more prevalent. Patients residing in long-term care facilities have fewer treatment modalities because of medication administration and care issues. This review highlights the data on different antibiotics and their efficacy toward ESBLs in the setting of UTI.<br/> CONCLUSIONS: Despite the challenges and limitations, there are still options for clinicians to provide optimal care, including antibiotics with different routes of administration, as well as different administration techniques. Clinicians can be successful with treating ESBL UTIs in older adults.

Management of Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase Urinary Tract Infections: Diagnostic and Treatment Considerations for the Older Adult.

OBJECTIVE: To review the treatment options for extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) urinary tract infections (UTIs) in the long-term care facility setting.<br/> DATA SOURCES: A PubMed search from January 1, 1990, through December 31, 2018, using terms "extended spectrum beta lactamase" and "urinary tract infection" was performed. Current guidelines, drug databases, and manufacturer package inserts were also used.<br/> STUDY SELECTION: All English-language articles during the above time frame appearing in these searches were reviewed for relevance to this paper. In addition, their bibliographies were reviewed to identify any articles not originally identified.<br/> DATA SYNTHESIS: ESBL UTIs are a growing concern in the long-term care facility as these pathogens are becoming more prevalent. Patients residing in long-term care facilities have fewer treatment modalities because of medication administration and care issues. This review highlights the data on different antibiotics and their efficacy toward ESBLs in the setting of UTI.<br/> CONCLUSIONS: Despite the challenges and limitations, there are still options for clinicians to provide optimal care, including antibiotics with different routes of administration, as well as different administration techniques. Clinicians can be successful with treating ESBL UTIs in older adults.

Sepsis in Older Adults in Long-Term Care Facilities: Challenges in Diagnosis and Management.

Despite the current understanding of the pathophysiology of sepsis and advances in its treatment, the rate of sepsis is increasing globally. Sepsis is a common cause of hospitalization in older adults, and infections are among the most common diagnoses among residents transferred to the hospital from long-term care facilities (LTCFs). LTCFs and hospitals are facing financial and regulatory requirements to reduce potentially preventable emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and hospital readmissions due to infections and other causes. In addition, the human and financial costs of these events are substantial. Current criteria for early identification of sepsis have low sensitivity and specificity among LTCF residents. Early diagnosis must focus on changes in clinical, mental, and functional status, and vital signs including pulse oximetry. Laboratory data can increase the suspicion of sepsis, but the availability of testing and timing of results limits its usefulness in most LTCFs.While new diagnostic criteria for sepsis are being developed and validated in the LTCF setting, clinical practice and decision support tools are available to guide management. Most LTFCs do not have the capabilities to manage sepsis based on current guidelines despite availability of qualified nursing staff and clinicians. Thus excluding circumstances in which a resident's desire is palliative or hospice care without transfer to a hospital, most LTCFs will continue to transfer residents with severe infections at risk for evolving into sepsis to an acute hospital setting. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2234-2239, 2019.

Proton Pump Inhibitors and Infection-Related Hospitalizations Among Residents of Long-Term Care Facilities: A Case-Control Study.

Our objective was to investigate associations between proton pump inhibitor (PPIs) use and infection-related hospitalizations among residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs). This was a case-control study of residents aged ≥ 65years admitted to hospital between July 2013 and June 2015. Residents admitted for infections (cases) and falls or fall-related injuries (controls) were matched for age (± 2years), sex, and index date of admission (± 6months). Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate crude and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between PPI use and infection-related hospitalizations. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, polypharmacy, diabetes, heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, and concomitant use of cancer and immunosuppressant medications. Subgroup analyses were performed for high- and low/moderate-intensity PPIs and for respiratory and non-respiratory infections. Logistic regression was used to compare the odds of infection-related hospitalizations among users of high- and low/moderate-intensity PPIs. Overall, 181 cases were matched to 354 controls. Preadmission PPI use was associated with infection-related hospitalizations (aOR 1.66; 95% CI 1.11-2.48). In subgroup analyses, the association was apparent only for respiratory infections (aOR 2.26; 95% CI 1.37-3.73) and high-intensity PPIs (aOR 1.93; 95% CI 1.23-3.04). However, the risk of infection-related hospitalization was not significantly higher among users of high- versus low/moderate-intensity PPIs (aOR 1.25; 95% CI 0.74-2.13). Residents who use PPIs may be at increased risk of infection-related hospitalizations, particularly respiratory infections. Study findings provide further support for initiatives to minimize unnecessary PPI use in the LTCF setting.

The burden of respiratory infections among older adults in long-term care: a systematic review

BackgroundRespiratory infections among older adults in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are a major global concern, yet a rigorous systematic synthesis of the literature on the burden of respiratory infections in the LTCF setting is lacking. To address the critical need for evidence regarding the global burden of respiratory infections in LTCFs, we assessed the burden of respiratory infections in LTCFs through a systematic review of the published literature.MethodsWe identified articles published between April 1964 and March 2019 through searches of PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Experimental and observational studies published in English that included adults aged ≥60 residing in LTCFs who were unvaccinated (to identify the natural infection burden), and that reported measures of occurrence for influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), or pneumonia were included. Disagreements about article inclusion were discussed and articles were included based on consensus. Data on study design, population, and findings were extracted from each article. Findings were synthesized qualitatively.ResultsA total of 1451 articles were screened for eligibility, 345 were selected for full-text review, and 26 were included. Study population mean ages ranged from 70.8 to 90.1 years. Three (12%) studies reported influenza estimates, 7 (27%) RSV, and 16 (62%) pneumonia. Eighteen (69%) studies reported incidence estimates, 7 (27%) prevalence estimates, and 1 (4%) both. Seven (27%) studies reported outbreaks. Respiratory infection incidence estimates ranged from 1.1 to 85.2% and prevalence estimates ranging from 1.4 to 55.8%. Influenza incidences ranged from 5.9 to 85.2%. RSV incidence proportions ranged from 1.1 to 13.5%. Pneumonia prevalence proportions ranged from 1.4 to 55.8% while incidence proportions ranged from 4.8 to 41.2%.ConclusionsThe reported incidence and prevalence estimates of respiratory infections among older LTCF residents varied widely between published studies. The wide range of estimates offers little useful guidance for decision-making to decrease respiratory infection burden. Large, well-designed epidemiologic studies are therefore still necessary to credibly quantify the burden of respiratory infections among older adults in LTCFs, which will ultimately help inform future surveillance and intervention efforts.