facilities have better June 27, 2017 outcomes? - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

facilities have better
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

facilities have better June 27, 2017 outcomes? - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Do assisted-living residents Portia Y. Cornell, M.S.P.H., Ph.D. Academy Health ARM in dementia-licensed New Orleans, LA facilities have better June 27, 2017 outcomes? Portia_Cornell@brown.edu Specialized dementia-care units: licensing


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Do assisted-living residents in dementia-licensed facilities have better

  • utcomes?

Portia Y. Cornell, M.S.P.H., Ph.D. Academy Health ARM New Orleans, LA June 27, 2017 Portia_Cornell@brown.edu

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Specialized dementia-care units: licensing requirements

 Some states issue special license

for dementia care

 Licensing requirements differ by

state

 Secured to prevent wandering  Training requirements  Staff-to-resident ratios 2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Conceptual model for specialized- care licensing

 Information asymmetries between prospective resident and

assisted-living community

 Dementia-specialized-care license is a “signal” of underlying

capacity and quality of a facility (Spence 1971)

 Key insight: cost of licensure is lower for higher-quality facilities  Limitation: prospective don’t update their beliefs from experience

3

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Conceptual model: information asymmetries

 Licensing requirements directly impact patient outcomes  License is a signal of deeper specialization & capacity

4

Informatio n

  • Observation
  • Reputation
  • Licensing

AL Community Prospective resident

slide-5
SLIDE 5

What is the effect of living in a dementia-specialized AL?

 Does living in a dementia-specialized assisted-living facility,

compared to a non-specialized facility, affect resident outcomes and health care use?

 Outcomes:  Mortality  Hospice use  Emergency department visits  Inpatient hospital days 5

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Approach

 Linear model effect of residing in dementia-licensed AL  Instrumental variable analysis  Stratify by dual status and state

6

slide-7
SLIDE 7

 Log-distance difference:

 D1 = distance to nearest non-specialized AL community  D2 = distance to nearest dementia-specialized AL community  lnDD = ln(D1) – ln(D2)

Instrument definition

7

Regular assisted-living residence Dementia-licensed assisted-living residence

D1 D2 D1 D2 lnDD<0 lnDD>0 With increasing lnDD, more likely to move to a dementia- licensed residence

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Sample

 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with validated residence

in an assisted-living community in 2014 in the study states:

 Alabama, Colorado, Mississippi, New York

 Diagnosis of dementia in 2011, 2012, or 2013  Previous residence in 2011 or 2012 NOT in assisted living

community

8

State N Pct AL 498 8.71 CO 1,027 17.95 MS 283 4.95 NY 3,912 68.39 Total 5,720

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Summary statistics

9

Non-dementia- licensed Dementia- licensed Total Age 80.56 83.90 81.24 Female 68% 70% 69% Race=Black 8% 3% 7% Race=Other non-white 3% 1% 2% Dual Medicare/Medicaid 43% 14% 37% Inpatient days 2.49 1.11 2.21 Skilled nursing days 12.22 7.97 11.36 ED visits 1.01 0.63 0.93 Heart problems 63% 59% 62% Stroke/TIA 11% 11% 11% Kidney disease 29% 25% 29% Hip fracture 5% 5% 5% County: pct in poverty 15.60 14.19 15.32 County: median hh income 57026 60562 57740

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Instrument strength

10

 Probability of dementia-licensed AL increases with instrument  F-statistics >10

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Covariate Balance

11

  • 0.30
  • 0.20
  • 0.10

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30

Age<60 Age<70 Age<80 Age>=80 female black

  • th_race

inpatient_days snf_days er_visits heart stroke kidney hipfracture poverty_pct median_hh_inc

Standardized Difference Change from Treatment to Instrument

Duals Instrument Duals Treatment Non-duals Instrument Non-duals Treatment

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Outcomes

12

Mean outcomes among study sample Duals(N=2114) Non-Duals (N=3606) Mortality (died in 2013) 0.14 0.13 Hospice (any) 0.06 0.08 Emergency Dept Visits† 0.10 0.09 Hospital Inpatient Days† 0.23 0.11 Skilled Nursing Days† 1.25 1.24 † Adjusted for observed months

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Main Results: IV Estimates

13

Effect of living in a dementia-specialized assisted-living residence compared to non-specialized Duals (N=2114) Non-Duals (N=3606) Mortality (died in 2013) 0.35*** 0.04 Hospice (any) 0.28*** 0.07** Emergency Dept Visits† 0.06 0.01 Hospital Inpatient Days† 0.34 0.09 Skilled Nursing Days† 0.29

  • 0.10

*p<0.10, **p<0.05, ***p<0.01 † Adjusted for observed months

slide-14
SLIDE 14

IV vs. OLS results: mortality (duals)

14

slide-15
SLIDE 15

IV vs. OLS results: mortality (non-duals)

15

slide-16
SLIDE 16

IV vs. OLS results: hospice (duals)

16

slide-17
SLIDE 17

IV vs. OLS results: hospice (non-duals)

17

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Interpreting Results

 Dementia-specialized communities increase mortality?

 Inefficient allocation of resources

 Value independence and quality of life over safety and prolonging

life?

 Increase use of Medicare hospice benefit suggests different priorities

 Geographic differences?

 E.g.: frail individuals may choose assisted living over a nursing-home

special-care-unit if there is a dementia-specialized facility nearby

18

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Caveats, limitations, and hedges

 IV addresses patient-level selection, but NOT geographic

selection

 Within a dementia-licensed community with both specialized and

non-specialized care, cannot identify who lives in the dementia unit

19

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Thank You!

 Kali S. Thomas & Momotazur Rahman, co-authors  National Institute on Aging grant (R21 AG047303; PI, K.S. Thomas)  Veterans Administration OAA Advanced Fellowship  Contact: Portia_Cornell@brown.edu

20

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Selected References

Carder P, O’Keeffe J, O’Keeffe C. Compendium of Residential Care and Assisted Living Regulations and Policy: 2015 Edition. 2015. Prepared by RTI International for the Office of Disability, Aging, and Long-Term Care Policy, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Harris-Kojetin L, Sengupta M, Park-Lee E, et al. 2016. Long-term care providers and service users in the United States: Data from the National Study of Long-term Care Providers, 2013-14. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat 3(38). Spence M. 1973. Job Market Signaling. Quarterly Journal of Economics 87(3):355-374. Thomas K, Dosa D, Gozalo PL, Grabowski DC, Nazareno J, Makineni R, Mor V . A methodology to Identify a Cohort of Medicare Beneficiaries Residing in Large Assisted Living Facilities Using Administrative Data 21

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Instrument balance: propensity score

.2 .4

  • 6
  • 4
  • 2

2

AL

.2 .4

  • 6
  • 4
  • 2

2 4

CO

.2 .4

  • 5

5

MS

.2 .4

  • 6
  • 4
  • 2

2 4

NY

Dementia-licensed assisted living propensity score

  • vs. lnDD

Propensity to move to dementia-specialized AL 95% CI Smoothed average

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Main Results: IV Estimates

23

Effect of living in a dementia-specialized assisted-living residence compared to non-specialized Duals (N=2114) Pct mean Non-Duals (N=3606) Pct mean Mortality (died in 2013) 0.35*** 250% 0.04 34% Hospice (any) 0.28*** 496% 0.07** 85% Emergency Dept Visits† 0.06 57% 0.01 10% Hospital Inpatient Days† 0.34 150% 0.09 78% Skilled Nursing Days† 0.29 23%

  • 0.10
  • 8%

*p<0.10, **p<0.05, ***p<0.01 † Adjusted for observed months