Search results

The Nursing Home Reform Act (NHRA) was adopted and implemented to improve the quality of care that residents receive in nursing homes by having state inspection agencies issue deficiencies for substandard care. Yet, there is a great deal of variation in the average number of deficiencies cited by state inspectors. The goals of this study are twofold: 1) to identify the impact of political factors on the variation in deficiencies and nursing home compliance, and 2) to provide the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) with a strategic planning model that will help to improve its ability to oversee state implementation of the NHRA. Political party control of the governorship and legislative houses accounted for significant amounts of variance in deficiencies.

Concerns about quality and standards of care in the nursing and residential home sector have exercised policymakers, managers and practitioners in both Australia and the UK for some years. While Australia is a relatively young country, demographically speaking, it has in place a coherent ‘aged care’ policy. The UK on the other hand, with its rapidly ageing profile, has only recently made a serious policy commitment to the health and social care agenda for older people. Australia therefore has several years of experience to be shared with the UK when it comes to policy and practice of quality improvement. In particular, there are valuable lessons to be learnt from Australia's national outcome standards and monitoring system for care homes, and its more recent introduction of a care homes accreditation system. Apart from identifying any issues associated with the implementation of such approaches to quality improvement, it is important to establish whether they have an impact on the quality of care and life of older residents. As the UK moves to implementing national minimum standards in 2002, lessons from Australia are timely and may help inform best practice and policy in long‐term care in the future.

Federal and state governments collaborate on state Medicaid nursing facility long-term care (SMNF-LTC) programs. These programs are increasingly expensive as the baby-boomers retire. Yet serious resident outcome problems continue in spite of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ (CMS) extensive process-focused regulatory efforts. This study identifies a promising and simpler auxiliary path for improving resident outcomes.

Drawing on a longitudinal (1997–2005), 48-state data set and panel-corrected, time-series regression, we compare the effects on resident outcomes of CMS process-focused surveys and four minimally regulated program structural features on which the states vary considerably.

We find that each of these four structural features exerts a greater effect on resident outcomes than process quality.

We suggest augmenting current process-focused regulation with a less arduous approach of more extensive regulation of these program features.

To date SMNF-LTC program regulation has focused largely on member facility processes. While regulating processes is appropriate, we show that regulating program structural features directly, an arguably easier task, might well produce considerable improvement in the quality of resident outcomes.

Strategic socio-political views are notably scarce among contemporary discourses on the causes of abuse of vulnerable older people in care and nursing homes. This paper aims to catalyse higher order consideration and discussion of one socio-political characteristic that has relevance to the issue of abuse, that is, the market-like environment in which care and nursing homes in England operate. In doing so, the paper argues that the now firmly established but imbalanced “quasi-market” of care that has developed over many years fosters conditions under which both poor care and abuse are more likely to occur. The evidence presented in the paper focusses primarily on the rise to dominance of for-profit care home provision and the contraction of public sector provision. The paper does not examine in detail the characteristics and market presence of the not-for-profit sector because it has not held a numerically significant market share either historically or contemporarily.

Outcomes of the marketisation of the care home sector that has its origins in the political landscape prevailing in 1979 and thereafter, along with the concurrent development of its regulation and oversight, are narrated and analysed. From this, a mythos of the motives behind the transition to a market-like economy that has taken place over four decades is developed and used to explain how prevailing market conditions contribute to the perpetuation of poor care and abuse.

In the opinion of the author, there are identifiable consequences arising from the evolution of the current care economy that dispel the beliefs that providing care by means of current market-like arrangements is advantageous, that the independent regulation and monitoring of such a market is unproblematic and effective, and that the “consumers” in this market are exercising personal choice, in accord with classical economic theory.

The paper offers the opportunity for the reader to consider how the development of a “quasi” market of care and nursing home services that has come to be dominated by for-profit private providers, and that is subject to ineffective oversight, may have contributed to conditions where abuse is more likely to occur and endure.

This is a conceptual paper that explores the consequences of the creation of the market-like economy of care in which care and nursing homes now operate and suggests that it is time for prevailing market conditions to be re-visited and subjected to remedial strategic intervention.

Despite the increasing evidence about the inappropriate use of medications by older people, there is very little published evidence about the control and monitoring of neuroleptic drugs used in nursing homes. As others have indicated, this is all the more worrying when set in the context of the paucity of research on nursing home care and the trend to replace registered nurses with untrained care assistants. In the United States, legislation in the form of the Nursing Home Reform Act (OBRA 1987) was introduced, in part, to regulate the prescribing and administration of neuroleptic (antipsychotic) drugs. No such legislation exists in Canada or the United Kingdom. In the case of the latter jurisdiction, the recent Royal Commission on Long‐Term Care for older people (The Stationery Office, 1999) has recommended a national care commission to monitor care, and set assessment and quality benchmarks. In Canada this debate has not even begun, and the purpose of this paper is not to ignite controversy, but to raise questions about the use of these drugs with nursing home residents. Voluntary guidelines and education of physicians, nurses and care attendants would be infinitely better than legislation. In the meantime, we need research to address the following questions: For what reasons should these drugs be given to older people? Are these drugs being used appropriately? Is the risk of side‐effects too great with these drugs? Are the numbers and type of staff employed in nursing homes adequate/qualified to detect and report side‐effects? How well do these drugs manage the behaviours they are given to control? Are they being used as chemical restraints or to make the older person compliant? Are the so‐called ‘atypical’ neuroleptic drugs any better? What we offer in this article is background information that might encourage others to not only review their practice but also to address these questions.

The problems of providing high-quality care in nursing homes have been extensively documented. Accounts of residents, close family members, and qualitative researchers have described feelings of desperation, anomie, and hopelessness, which accompany the last years, months and days of those reluctantly finding themselves in institutional facilities at the end of their days. However sociologists have, thus far, paid little attention to the actual and potential impact of families in breaking through the barriers set up by institutional life and in enhancing the responsiveness of care in nursing homes. This chapter aims to fill this gap.

Quality is an essential criterion by which care homes for older people are judged. However the measurement of quality is both challenging and potentially costly. This paper examines the potential of using routinely generated data from inspection processes as quality indicators. It indicates that generation of such information is possible, providing material that may be used in research and also for more general guidance.

Private equity has acquired multiple large nursing home chains within the past few years; by 2007, it owned 6 of the 10 largest chains. Despite widespread public and policy interest, evidence on the purported impact of private equity on nursing home performance is limited. In our review, we begin by briefly reviewing the organizational and environmental changes in the nursing home industry that facilitated private equity investments. We offer a conceptual framework to hypothesize the relationship between private equity ownership and nursing home performance. Finally, we offer a research agenda focused on the important parameters of nursing home performance: financial performance, and quality of care.

The Government has published proposals to set up two new structures ‐ one for the regulation of social services and one for independently provided health care. This article argues that a single regulator for all categories of health care, including that provided in social care settings, would be more cost‐effective. It proposes the creation of functionally ring‐fenced divisions of health care regulation, structured within and answerable to the proposed commissions for care standards.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the concept of homelikeness from the perspective of family members and friends of nursing home residents across different models of nursing homes.

This mixed-methods study examined survey data collected from 397 family members and friends of residents living in 23 nursing homes representing three models of care (traditional, new augmented, and full scope). Participants completed a homelikeness scale and a measure of the importance of nursing home spaces to family members and friends. This study also involved conducting three focus groups with 20 family members and friends to provide further insights into the findings.

Analysis of survey data indicated quite high levels of homelikeness overall. Significant differences did emerge between traditional model nursing homes compared to new full-scope and new augmented models for all items in the homelikeness scale and for many items about nursing home spaces. Qualitative results provided insights into how homelikeness can be fostered through public and private spaces and through care and relationships.

As this study was conducted in one Canadian province, the results may not be applicable to other geographic areas. In addition, there are limitations in survey response rate.

Homelikeness can be supported across models of care by fostering relationships between residents and staff, ensuring that that family and friends feel welcome, and creating public and private physical spaces that are conducive to new and ongoing relationships.

The results provide evidence to nursing home decision makers about how to foster a homelike environment in various models of nursing homes.