Nurse Staffing Impact on Quality of Care in Nursing Homes: A Systematic Review of Longitudinal Studies

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 383-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramona Backhaus ◽  
Hilde Verbeek ◽  
Erik van Rossum ◽  
Elizabeth Capezuti ◽  
Jan P.H. Hamers
2002 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 315-325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlene Harrington ◽  
Steffie Woolhandler ◽  
Joseph Mullan ◽  
Helen Carrillo ◽  
David U. Himmelstein

Quality problems have long plagued the nursing home industry. While two-thirds of U.S. nursing homes are investor-owned, few studies have examined the impact of investor-ownership on the quality of care. The authors analyzed 1998 data from inspections of 13,693 nursing facilities representing virtually all U.S. nursing homes. They grouped deficiency citations issued by inspectors into three categories (“quality of care,” “quality of life,” and “other”) and compared deficiency rates in investor-owned, nonprofit, and public nursing homes. A multivariate model was used to control for case mix, percentage of residents covered by Medicaid, whether the facility was hospital-based, whether it was a skilled nursing facility for Medicare only, chain ownership, and location by state. The study also assessed nurse staffing. The authors found that investor-owned nursing homes provide worse care and less nursing care than nonprofit or public homes. Investor-owned facilities averaged 5.89 deficiencies per home, 46.5 percent higher than nonprofit and 43.0 percent higher than public facilities, and also had more of each category of deficiency. In the multivariate analysis, investor-ownership predicted 0.679 additional deficiencies per home; chain-ownership predicted an additional 0.633 deficiencies per home. Nurse staffing ratios were markedly lower at investor-owned homes.


2020 ◽  
pp. 107755872093165
Author(s):  
R. Tamara Konetzka ◽  
Kevin Yan ◽  
Rachel M. Werner

Approximately two decades ago, federally mandated public reporting began for U.S. nursing homes through a system now known as Nursing Home Compare. The goals were to provide information to enable consumers to choose higher quality nursing homes and to incent providers to improve the quality of care delivered. We conduct a systematic review of the literature on responses to Nursing Home Compare and its effectiveness in meeting these goals. We find evidence of modest but meaningful response by both consumers and providers. However, we also find evidence that some improvement in scores does not reflect true quality improvement, that disparities by race and income have increased, that risk-adjustment of the measures is likely inadequate, and that several key domains of quality are not represented. Our results support moderate success of Nursing Home Compare in achieving intended goals but also reveal the need for continued refinement.


2011 ◽  
Vol 51 (5) ◽  
pp. 610-616 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Hyer ◽  
K. S. Thomas ◽  
L. G. Branch ◽  
J. S. Harman ◽  
C. E. Johnson ◽  
...  

2004 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Weech-Maldonado ◽  
Louise Meret-Hanke ◽  
Maria C. Neff ◽  
Vince Mor

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document