在过去十年中,养老院的关闭率相对稳定,但仍需继续监测。

IF 1.4 3区 心理学 Q3 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions Pub Date : 2023-07-22 eCollection Date: 2023-08-01 DOI:10.1093/haschl/qxad025
Kelly Hughes, Zhanlian Feng, Qinghua Li, Micah Segelman, Iara Oliveira, Judith Goldberg Dey
{"title":"在过去十年中,养老院的关闭率相对稳定,但仍需继续监测。","authors":"Kelly Hughes, Zhanlian Feng, Qinghua Li, Micah Segelman, Iara Oliveira, Judith Goldberg Dey","doi":"10.1093/haschl/qxad025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>For years, nursing home closures have been a concern for the industry, policymakers, consumer advocates, and other stakeholders. We analyzed data from 2011 through 2021 and did not find persistent increases in the closure rates. Closures were relatively stable from 2011 to 2017, averaging 118 facilities (0.79%) per year and increasing to 143 (0.96%) in 2018 and 200 (1.34%) in 2019. Closures decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic, averaging 133 facilities in 2020 and 2021 (0.90%). Medicaid-only nursing facilities had higher closure rates than Medicare-only skilled-nursing facilities and dually certified nursing homes. The Census regions (divisions) of the South (West South Central) and Northeast (New England) had the highest closure rates, while the South (South Atlantic and East South Central) had the lowest rates. Facility characteristics associated with increased closure risk included smaller size, lower occupancy rate, urban location, no ownership changes, lower inspection survey ratings, higher staffing ratings, higher percentages of non-White residents and Medicaid residents, lower percentages of Medicare residents and residents with severe acuity, and location in states with more nursing home alternatives. Additional research should examine the impact of closures on resident outcomes and access to care.</p>","PeriodicalId":47652,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions","volume":"10 1","pages":"qxad025"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10986232/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rates of nursing home closures were relatively stable over the past decade, but warrant continuous monitoring.\",\"authors\":\"Kelly Hughes, Zhanlian Feng, Qinghua Li, Micah Segelman, Iara Oliveira, Judith Goldberg Dey\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/haschl/qxad025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>For years, nursing home closures have been a concern for the industry, policymakers, consumer advocates, and other stakeholders. We analyzed data from 2011 through 2021 and did not find persistent increases in the closure rates. Closures were relatively stable from 2011 to 2017, averaging 118 facilities (0.79%) per year and increasing to 143 (0.96%) in 2018 and 200 (1.34%) in 2019. Closures decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic, averaging 133 facilities in 2020 and 2021 (0.90%). Medicaid-only nursing facilities had higher closure rates than Medicare-only skilled-nursing facilities and dually certified nursing homes. The Census regions (divisions) of the South (West South Central) and Northeast (New England) had the highest closure rates, while the South (South Atlantic and East South Central) had the lowest rates. Facility characteristics associated with increased closure risk included smaller size, lower occupancy rate, urban location, no ownership changes, lower inspection survey ratings, higher staffing ratings, higher percentages of non-White residents and Medicaid residents, lower percentages of Medicare residents and residents with severe acuity, and location in states with more nursing home alternatives. Additional research should examine the impact of closures on resident outcomes and access to care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47652,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"qxad025\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10986232/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/haschl/qxad025\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/haschl/qxad025","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

多年来,养老院关闭一直是业界、政策制定者、消费者权益倡导者和其他利益相关者关注的问题。我们分析了 2011 年至 2021 年的数据,并未发现关闭率持续上升。从 2011 年到 2017 年,关闭率相对稳定,平均每年关闭 118 家设施(0.79%),2018 年增加到 143 家(0.96%),2019 年增加到 200 家(1.34%)。在 COVID-19 大流行期间,关闭率有所下降,2020 年和 2021 年平均为 133 家(0.90%)。只享受医疗补助的护理机构的关闭率高于只享受医疗补助的专业护理机构和双重认证的护理院。南部(中南西部)和东北部(新英格兰)人口普查地区(分区)的关闭率最高,而南部(南大西洋和中南东部)的关闭率最低。与关闭风险增加相关的设施特征包括:规模较小、入住率较低、位于城市、所有权未发生变化、检查调查评分较低、人员配备评分较高、非白人居民和医疗补助居民的比例较高、医疗补助居民和严重急性病居民的比例较低,以及位于有更多养老院可供选择的州。更多的研究应探讨关闭养老院对住院患者的治疗效果和获得护理的机会的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Rates of nursing home closures were relatively stable over the past decade, but warrant continuous monitoring.

For years, nursing home closures have been a concern for the industry, policymakers, consumer advocates, and other stakeholders. We analyzed data from 2011 through 2021 and did not find persistent increases in the closure rates. Closures were relatively stable from 2011 to 2017, averaging 118 facilities (0.79%) per year and increasing to 143 (0.96%) in 2018 and 200 (1.34%) in 2019. Closures decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic, averaging 133 facilities in 2020 and 2021 (0.90%). Medicaid-only nursing facilities had higher closure rates than Medicare-only skilled-nursing facilities and dually certified nursing homes. The Census regions (divisions) of the South (West South Central) and Northeast (New England) had the highest closure rates, while the South (South Atlantic and East South Central) had the lowest rates. Facility characteristics associated with increased closure risk included smaller size, lower occupancy rate, urban location, no ownership changes, lower inspection survey ratings, higher staffing ratings, higher percentages of non-White residents and Medicaid residents, lower percentages of Medicare residents and residents with severe acuity, and location in states with more nursing home alternatives. Additional research should examine the impact of closures on resident outcomes and access to care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: ...offers sound, research-based principles of positive behavior support for use in school, home and community settings with people with challenges in behavioral adaptation. Regular features include empirical research; discussion, literature reviews, and conceptual papers; programs, practices, and innovations; forum; and media reviews.
期刊最新文献
Intensifying Tier 1 Classroom Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports Practices to Support Students With Disabilities: A Pilot Study An Adaptation of Stay Play Talk for Young Children Who Exhibit Social Withdrawal Examining Immediate and Sustained Effects of Check-In/Check-Out in Finnish Elementary Schools Examining the Impact of PBIS Experience on MTSS Implementation in Secondary Schools: A Mixed Methods Study Examining Use of the Schoolwide Expectations Survey for Specific Settings to Build Expectation Matrices: A Pilot Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1