OBJECTIVE: This cross-sectional study examined the association between nursing home quality and admission of working-age persons (ages 22-64 years) with serious mental illness. METHODS: The study used 2015 national Minimum Data Set 3.0 and Nursing Home Compare (NHC) data. A logistic mixed-effects model estimated the likelihood (adjusted odds ratios [AORs] and 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) of a working-age nursing home resident having serious mental illness, by NHC health inspection quality rating. The variance partition coefficient (VPC) was calculated to quantify the variation in serious mental illness attributable to nursing home characteristics. Measures included serious mental illness (i.e., schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and other psychotic disorders), health inspection quality rating (ranging from one star, below average, to five stars, above average), and other sociodemographic and clinical covariates. RESULTS: Of the 343,783 working-age adults newly admitted to a nursing home in 2015 (N=14,307 facilities), 15.5% had active serious mental illness. The odds of a working-age resident having serious mental illness was lowest among nursing homes of above-average quality, compared with nursing homes of below-average quality (five-star vs. one-star facility, AOR=0.78, 95% CI=0.73-0.84). The calculated VPC from the full model was 0.11. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate an association between below-average nursing homes and admission of working-age persons with serious mental illness, suggesting that persons with serious mental illness may experience inequitable access to nursing homes of above-average quality. Access to alternatives to care, integration of mental health services in the community, and improving mental health care in nursing homes may help address this disparity.

Purpose of Review: To describe approaches to measuring deprescribing and associated outcomes in studies of patients approaching end of life (EOL). Recent Findings: We reviewed studies published through 2020 that evaluated deprescribing in patients with limited life expectancy and approaching EOL. Deprescribing includes reducing the number of medications, decreasing medication dose(s), and eliminating potentially inappropriate medications. Tools such as STOPPFrail, OncPal, and the Unnecessary Drug Use Measure can facilitate deprescribing. Outcome measures vary and selection of measures should align with the operationalized deprescribing definition used by study investigators. Summary: EOL deprescribing considerations include medication appropriateness in the context of patient goals for care, expected benefit from medication given life expectancy, and heightened potential for medication-related harm as death nears. Additional data are needed on how EOL deprescribing impacts patient quality of life, caregiver burden, and out-of-pocket medication-related costs to patients and caregivers. Investigators should design deprescribing studies with this information in mind.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Anticoagulants are indicated for treatment and prevention of several clinical conditions. Prior studies have examined anticoagulant utilization for specific indications and in community-dwelling populations. Decision-making regarding anticoagulant prescribing in the nursing home setting is particularly challenging because advanced age and clinical complexity places most residents at increased risk for adverse drug events. To estimate the prevalence of oral anticoagulant (OAC) use (overall, warfarin, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs)) and identify factors associated with oral anticoagulant use among the general population of residents living in nursing homes. METHODS: This point prevalence study was conducted among 506,482 residents in US nursing homes on 31 October 2016 who were enrolled in Medicare fee-for-service. Covariates including demographics, clinical conditions, medications, cognitive impairment and functional status were obtained from Minimum Data Set 3.0 assessments and Medicare Part A and D claims. Oral anticoagulant use was identified using dispensing dates and days supply information from Medicare Part D claims. Robust Poisson models estimated adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) for associations between covariates and 1) any anticoagulant use, and 2) DOAC versus warfarin use. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Overall, 11.8% of residents used oral anticoagulants. Among users, 44.3% used DOACs. Residents with body mass index (BMI) > /=40 kg/m(2) (aPR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.61 -1.71), with functional dependency in activities of daily living, polypharmacy and higher CHA2 DS2 -VASc risk ischaemic stroke scores, had a higher prevalence of oral anticoagulant use. Women (aPR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.76-0.79), residents with limited life expectancy (aPR 0.80; 95% CI: 0.76-0.83), those with moderate-to-severe cognitive impairment (aPR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.65-0.68), those using NSAIDs or antiplatelets, and non-white racial/ethnic groups had a lower prevalence of anticoagulant use. Residents with higher levels of polypharmacy, BMI and age had a lower prevalence of DOAC use (versus warfarin). WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: Approximately one in eight general nursing home residents use oral anticoagulants and among oral anticoagulant users, only slightly more residents used warfarin than DOACs. The lower prevalence of anticoagulation among women and non-white racial/ethnic groups raises concerns of potential inequities in quality of care. Lower oral anticoagulant use among residents with limited life expectancy suggests possible deprescribing at the end of life. Further research is needed to inform resident-centred shared decision-making that explicitly considers treatment goals and individual-specific risks and benefits of anticoagulation at all stages of the medication use continuum.