Start Submission Become a Reviewer

Reading: Profile of Residents with Mental Disorders in Canadian Long-Term Care Facilities: A Cross-Se...

Download

A- A+
Alt. Display

Research

Profile of Residents with Mental Disorders in Canadian Long-Term Care Facilities: A Cross-Sectional Study

Authors:

Vahe Kehyayan ,

University of Calgary in Qatar, QA
About Vahe

PhD

X close

Jonathan Chen,

School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, CA
X close

John P. Hirdes

School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, CA
X close

Abstract

Brief Summary: Residents in long-term care facilities in Canada with mental and cognitive disorders have complex care needs. To meet these needs an integrated model of care is recommended.

Context: The high prevalence of mental disorders in residents of long-term care (LTC) facilities raises serious concerns for facility operators and staff. These residents have multiple vulnerabilities that facility staff should have the necessary knowledge and skills to properly meet their needs.

Objectives: To describe the profile of residents with mental disorders (MD) and Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD) in Canadian long-term care (LTC) facilities.

Findings: Seventy-six percent of residents had MD (40%) and ADRD (36%). These residents compared to those without such disorders were more likely to be cognitively impaired, manifest aggressive behavior, receive psychotropic drugs, and physically restrained, and less likely to be socially engaged.

Strengths and Limitations: The large representative sample was a key strength. The findings add to the knowledge about the profile of LTC residents. The cross-sectional design of the study limits the findings to the population studied.

Implications: Residents with MD and ADRD compared to those without such disorders are highly vulnerable because of their double burden of mental and physical comorbidities. Their profile may be of interest to LTC facility operators, clinicians, and policy makers about their complex care needs. Our findings raise awareness of the need for trained LTC facility staff for knowledge and skills in psychogeriatric conditions to assess, plan, and implement appropriate interventions for these residents. Coordinated and integrated models of care with access to psychogeriatric specialists such as psychiatrists or advanced practice nurses will also be of benefit to them.

How to Cite: Kehyayan, V., Chen, J. and Hirdes, J.P., 2021. Profile of Residents with Mental Disorders in Canadian Long-Term Care Facilities: A Cross-Sectional Study. Journal of Long-Term Care, (2021), pp.154–166. DOI: http://doi.org/10.31389/jltc.47
63
Views
14
Downloads
9
Twitter
  Published on 01 Jun 2021
 Accepted on 07 Apr 2021            Submitted on 01 Aug 2020

Introduction

The high prevalence of mental disorders in residents of long-term care (LTC) facilities raises serious concerns for facility operators and staff. A quarter of admissions to LTC facilities have mental health diagnoses such as depression, anxiety disorders, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder (Grabowski et al., 2009; Rahman et al., 2013). A systematic review of 30 studies showed that dementia, depression, and anxiety disorders were the most common diagnoses in LTC facilities (Seitz et al., 2010). However, estimates of the prevalence of LTC facility residents’ mental disorders may vary due to study design, source of data, variation in definitions of LTC facilities, diagnostic criteria used, and the time period in which the research was conducted (Bagchi et al., 2009). Residents with mental and cognitive disorders live with the dual burden of their mental disorder and physical comorbidities (Benjenk et al., 2019).

While the prevalence of mental and cognitive disorders in LTC facility residents is very high, LTC facility staff often do not have the requisite knowledge or skills to respond to the unique needs of these residents (Grabowski et al., 2010; Koekkoek et al., 2016). Previous research suggests that nursing staff lack specialized training in psychogeriatrics to enable them to provide resident-centered care (Blair et al., 2012). This issue is further compounded by the lack of appropriate access to specialized mental health services available to them resulting in poor or inappropriate care to residents with mental disorders (Grabowski et al., 2010). While nursing staff are of the view that geropsychiatric consultations would benefit residents with mental disorders, such consultations are typically not available (Wilson et al., 2019). The most common reported intervention for mental disorders in LTC facilities is the use of antipsychotic drugs (Foebel et al., 2016). A retrospective study in LTC facilities in Canada reported that the prevalence of antipsychotic use in residents with dementia was 48% (Rios et al., 2017). Others also have reported excessive use of antipsychotics in these settings (Barnett et al., 2011; Heckman et al., 2017; Snowdon et al., 2011). Further, it has also been shown that some residents without qualifying diagnoses of mental disorders have received antipsychotic medications (Foebel et al., 2015; Phillips et al., 2018). It is now generally recognized that inappropriate antipsychotic use can increase risks to the health and well-being of LTC residents (Berry et al., 2016; Chatterjee et al., 2012; Chiu et al., 2015; Fraser et al., 2015). Hence, several Canadian initiatives are underway to reduce this type of inappropriate prescribing in Canada (Hirdes et al., 2020).

Despite the high prevalence of mental disorders and dementia in residents in LTC facilities, current evidence of their distinctive health status, clinical outcomes and health service utilization of these residents is lacking. A comprehensive description of the unique characteristics of these residents will enable LTC program providers and policy makers to design appropriate care models that will meet the specific needs of this population. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to develop a current understanding of the characteristics of LTC facility residents in Canada with mental and cognitive disorders and to identify implications for practice, policy, and research.

For the purpose of this study, mental disorders (MD) included those listed in Table 1 such as schizophrenia, depression, bipolar disorder, and anxiety disorders as recorded by clinicians in the RAI-MDS 2.0 (Resident Assessment Instrument – Minimum Data Set) assessment or documented as ICD 10 codes. Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD) were recorded by clinicians in the RAI-MDS assessment.

Table 1

Diagnoses of Mental Disorders and Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Disorders and their Sources.

Mental Disorders and Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Disorders

Sources (Minimum Data Set 2.0 Canadian Version, 2012)
Delusions Checkbox (j1e)
Hallucinations Checkbox (j1i)
Schizophrenia Checkbox (i1ii)
Bipolar Disorder Checkbox (i1hh)
Depression Checkbox (i1gg)
Anxiety Disorder Checkbox (i1ff)
Alzheimer’s Disease Checkbox (ir1)
Dementia other than Alzheimer’s Disease Checkbox (iv1)
ICD-10-CA Codes – Version 2016 (F00–F99)
Mental disorders not otherwise specified
Schizophrenic disorders
Episodic mood disorders, including episodic affective disorders
Delusional disorders including paranoid disorders
Depressive disorders
Neurotic disorders

Method

Design

This was a retrospective, cross-sectional study of Canadian LTC facility residents using the Resident Assessment Instrument – Minimum Data Set (RAI-MDS) 2.0. Sociodemographic, functional, clinical, and health resource use data were extracted from the RAI-MDS 2.0. The profile of residents with mental disorders and those with ADRD were compared with residents without MD or ADRD (the comparison group).

Source of Data

The source of the data for this study was from the RAI-MDS assessment form (‘the Form’), which captures comprehensive clinical information about persons receiving health and social services in LTC facilities settings (Morris et al., 2012). The RAI-MDS is typically completed by registered nurses who are trained to complete the assessment using their clinical judgement after considering multiple sources of information including direct communication with the person and primary caregiver/family member (if available), observation of the person, and review of charts and other secondary documents available, and feedback from other staff members, including personal support workers (Morris et al., 2012).

The RAI-MDS 2.0 assessment includes several outcome scales that measure performance in specific functions such as cognition, depression, and activities of daily living. These scales include the Cognitive Performance Scale (Morris et al., 1994); the Depression Rating Scale (Burrows et al., 2000); the Activities of Daily Living Hierarchy (ADLH) Scale (Morris et al., 1999); the Aggressive Behaviour Scale (Perlman and Hirdes, 2008); the Pain Scale (Fries et al., 2001); the Changes in Health, End Stage Disease and Signs and Symptoms (CHESS) Scale (Hirdes et al., 2003); and the Index of Social Engagement (Mor and Branco, 1995). Detailed descriptions of these scales are provided elsewhere (Dalby et al., 2009; Kehyayan et al., 2015). The interRAI assessment instruments and their embedded scales have been shown to have strong evidence of both reliability and validity (Hirdes et al., 2008; Poss et al., 2008).

Study Population

The study population came from 1,319 LTC facilities in eight of the ten Canadian provinces and one territory where the RAI-MDS 2.0 instrument is used. The completion of the RAI-MDS is mandatory and has been so in these geographical areas with different starting dates (Hirdes and Kehyayan, 2014; Hirdes et al., 2011). Table 2 shows the distribution of the number of unique LTC facility residents across the provinces and one territory in the study sample of 514,208 unique individuals spanning a 16-year period. This is compared with 2018–19 national reports of the number of unique individuals assessed with the RAI-MDS 2.0 in long-term care prepared by the Canadian Institute for Health Information (Canadian Institute for Health Information, 2020, CIHI). The distribution of the study sample closely matched that of the 2018–19 report by CIHI, with only an absolute 3.1% difference in over-representation of Ontario relative to other provinces in the study sample. Residents’ most recent assessments were chosen for the following reasons:

Table 2

Sources of RAI-MDS 2.0 Data in Long-term Care Facilities from Participating Canadian Provinces from March 1, 2002 to March 31, 2018 Compared with National Distributions Reported by Canadian Institute for Health Information 2018–19.

Province/Territory Study Sample (2002–2018) Continuing Care Reporting System (2018–2019)

Number of Individuals % Number of Individuals %

Alberta 55,671 10.8 22,095 11.5
British Columbia 96,433 18.8 36,829 19.2
Manitoba 21,330 4.2 7,632 4.0
New Brunswick 462 0.1
Newfoundland 7,471 1.5 3,733 1.9
Nova Scotia 2,592 0.5
Ontario 310,891 60.5 110,161 57.4
Saskatchewan 18,783 3.7 11,069 5.8
Yukon 575 0.1 316 0.2
Total 514,208 100 191,835 100
  1. To maximize the sample size by retaining all persons who had serious mental illness (SMI) in the sample. For rare populations, cross-sectional samples at one point in time will result in small number. The intent was to boost the sample size for the SMI group.
  2. To make observations closest to current practice.
  3. To avoid having multiple observations per resident if all assessments in a year were included.

The overall aim was to have a near-level census data on the study population (Turcotte et al., 2018). This approach has been used elsewhere in research on a variety of neurological conditions among long term care home residents and home care clients in the community (see, for example, (Bansal et al., 2016; Colantonio et al., 2015; Danila et al., 2014; Foebel et al., 2011; Foebel et al., 2015; Kehyayan and Hirdes, 2018; Turcotte et al., 2018; Vu et al., 2014). Alternative approaches including selecting of the first assessment in time or assessments centred around a specific time period were considered but were not used for the reasons noted above and because the study sample corresponded closely to the single year provincial/territorial distributions noted in Table 2. All residents who had any of the mental disorder diagnoses or dementia listed in Table 2 were included. Validity of the diagnostic information in interRAI assessment instruments has been reported elsewhere (Foebel et al., 2013; Gambassi et al., 1998).

The comparison group used in this study included residents in these same facilities without any of the mental disorders listed in Table 1 or dementia. Case ascertainment of mental disorders, Alzheimer’s Disease, or Dementias other than Alzheimer’s Disease was based on documented text in the diagnostic section of the RAI-MDS 2.0 Form. To obtain accurate diagnostic data from the free text entry fields in the RAI-MDS 2.0 Form an iterative process was used in consultation with clinical and/or epidemiological expertise. Following such consultations, a clinician-approved list of terms was prepared, and the database was searched to identify residents with the diagnoses listed in Table 1. Another source of the diagnostic information was the ICD-10-CA Codes (Version 2016; F00–F99) that clinicians recorded in the RAI-MDS 2.0 Form. Diagnostic information in interRAI assessment instruments has been demonstrated to have high specificity (range 0.80–1.00) (Foebel et al., 2013).

Analysis

Descriptive analyses were conducted to describe the profiles of the study population. Chi-square tests of significance were calculated to compare the frequency and percentage distributions between residents with mental disorders and ADRD and the comparison group. All variables were compared between the three groups using the Chi-square test. Moreover, Chi-square tests were used for pairwise comparisons adjusting for multiple testing using the Bonferroni method. All comparisons described in this paper are significant at the p < 0.0001 level with exceptions noted in the tables. The SAS version 9.4, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina, was used for all data analyses (http://www.sas.com/).

Ethics Approval

Data were obtained through an existing license agreement between interRAI and the Canadian Institute for Health Information. Ethics approval for this project was received from the Office of Research Ethics, University of Waterloo (ORE#30372).

Results

All comparisons described in this section are between MD and ADRP groups with the comparison group. The pairwise comparisons in Tables 3, 4 and 5 are noted by the letters a, b, and c with different letters signifying significant differences between the groups.

Table 3

Demographic, Social and Functional Profile of Residents with Mental Disorders, Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias and the Comparison Group.

N CG ADRD MD p-values

127,326 183,626 203,256

Female 61.3a 62.9b 68.6c <.0001
Age Group
0–44 1.1a 0.1b 0.4c <.0001
45–54 1.9a 0.2b 1.2c <.0001
55–64 5.0a 1.1b 4.3c <.0001
65–74 10.5a 5.2b 10.7a <.0001
75–84 25.0a 25.7b 27.9c <.0001
85+ 56.4a 67.8b 55.6c <.0001
Married
Male 21.4a 22.7b 17.6c <.0001
Female 8.5a 7.3b 6.8c <.0001
Overall 13.5a 13.0b 10.2c <.0001
Conflict with others 8.7a 8.9a 13.9b <.0001
Absence of personal contact with family or friends 2.5a 3.5b 5.0c <.0001
Index of Social Engagement
0 (lowest level of social engagement) 10.6a 22.7b 18.5c <.0001
1 14.4a 19.8b 18.0c <.0001
2 15.8a 19.3b 18.6c <.0001
3 18.5a 17.2b 18.0c <.0001
4 17.6a 10.9b 13.3c <.0001
5 11.5a 5.8b 7.6c <.0001
6 (highest level of social engagement) 11.7a 4.3b 6.1c <.0001
ADL Hierarchy Scale
0 (Independent) 5.5a 1.9b 2.8c <.0001
1–2 (Supervision required-limited impairment) 16.9a 10.3b 10.7c <.0001
3+ (Extensive assistance – total dependence) 77.6a 87.9b 86.5c <.0001

a,b,c Groups with different letters are significantly different and those with common letter are not.

Codes: CG = Comparison Group; ADRD = Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementia; MD = Mental Disorder; ADL = Activities of Daily Living.

Table 4

Mental Health Performance of Residents with Mental Disorders, Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias and the Comparison Group.

N CD ADRD MD p-values

127,326 183,626 203,256

Cognitive Performance Scale
0 (Intact) 26.9a 1.5b 7.9c <.0001
1–2 (Borderline intact-mild impairment 34.8a 14.1b 20.9c <.0001
3–4 (Moderate-moderate severe impairment) 26.4a 43.7b 41.6c <.0001
5–6 (Severe-very severe impairment) 12.0a 40.7b 29.6c <.0001
Depression Rating Scale
0 (Not depressed) 51.0a 40.5b 30.4c <.0001
1–2 (Some depressive symptoms) 27.4a 33.5b 31.3c <.0001
3+ (Potential minor -major depressive episode) 21.7a 26.0b 38.3c <.0001
Aggressive Behaviour Scale
0 (Not aggressive) 75.5a 50.2b 50.4b <.0001
1–2 (Mild severity) 15.1a 23.8b 23.4c <.0001
3–4 (Moderate) 6.3a 15.0b 14.4c <.0001
5+ (Severe) 3.1a 11.1b 11.7c <.0001
Psychotropic Drug Use
Antipsychotics 10.8a 28.1b 37.0c <.0001
Antidepressants 30.1a 36.7b 69.6c <.0001
Anxiolytics 11.2a 9.3b 18.7c <.0001
Sedatives 11.1a 7.8b 11.6c <.0001
Physical Restraints
0 (Not used) 93.5a 85.3b 87.9c <.0001
1 (Used less than daily) 5.7a 13.5b 11.1c <.0001
2 (Used daily) 0.8a 1.3b 1.1c <.0001
Activities
More than 2/3 of time 17.6a 11.4b 12.7c <.0001
From 1/3 to 2/3 of time 43.4a 42.3b 42.7c <.0001
Less than 1/3 of time 31.3a 37.6b 36.1c <.0001
None 7.8a 8.7b 8.5b <.0001
Wake Times
Awake morning 77.3a 73.7b 73.1c <.0001
Awake afternoon 54.8a 50.2b 52.5c <.0001
Awake evening 72.4a 66.8b 67.8c <.0001

a,b,c Groups with different letter are significantly different and those with common letter are not.

Codes: CG = Comparison Group; ADRD = Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementia; MD = Mental Disorder.

Table 5

Health and Health Resource Utilization of Residents with Mental Disorders, Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias and the Comparison Group.

N CD ADRD MD p-values

127,326 183,626 203,256

Diagnosis
Heart Failure 20.2a 13.6b 15.4c <.0001
Emphysema/COPD 18.0a 13.6b 18.9c <.0001
Diabetes 28.1a 22.9b 26.1c <.0001
Cancer 12.7a 9.8b 10.5c <.0001
Other CVD 64.7a 63.1b 65.6c <.0001
CHESS Scale
0 (Not at all unstable) 35.2a 31.4b 28.6c <.0001
1–2 (Little – some instability) 48.2a 49.4b 49.3b <.0001
3+ (Moderately – highly unstable) 16.5a 19.2b 22.1c <.0001
Pain Scale
0 (No pain) 49.6a 64.2b 54.4c <.0001
1 – 2 (Less than daily pain – daily pain not severe) 46.1a 33.6b 41.7c <.0001
3 and over (Daily severe pain) 4.3a 2.2b 4.0c <.0001
Emergency department visits
None 79.2a 86.1b 84.8c <.0001
1 17.7a 11.8b 12.6c <.0001
2+ 3.0a 2.1b 2.6c <.0001
Hospitalizations
None 78.5a 89.7b 88.6c <.0001
1 19.2a 9.1b 9.9c <.0001
2+ 2.3a 1.1b 1.5c <.0001
Any rehabilitation 56.7a 50.7b 52.7c <.0001
Willing to return to community 26.9a 6.1b 10.1c <.0001
Support person positive to discharge 24.0a 3.0b 5.9c <.0001
Skills training for returning to community 7.9a 0.3b 1.5c <.0001
Intervention programs 1.7a 3.8b 5.9c <.0001

a,b,c Groups with different letter are significantly different and those with common letter are not.

Codes: CG = Comparison Group; ADRD = Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementia; MD = Mental Disorder; CHESS = Changes in Health, End Stage Disease and Signs and Symptoms; COPD = Congestive Obstructive Pulmonary Disease; CVD = Cardiovascular Disease.

Table 3 provides the basic sociodemographic and functional profile of the study population. From the LTC population of 514,208 residents with completed RAI-MDS assessments, 203,256 (39.5%) had mental disorders, 183,626 (35.7%) had ADRD, and 127,326 residents (24.8%) comprised the comparison group of persons without ADRD or other mental disorders.

Sociodemographic, social and functional characteristics

Residents with mental disorders (MD) and ADRD were more than likely to be female than those in the comparison group. They were least likely to be married, more likely to be in-conflict-with others, more than likely to have no personal contact with family or friends, and less likely to have a high level of social engagement compared to the comparison group. Finally, regarding functional independence, residents with MD and ADRD were more likely to require extensive assistance or be totally dependent in activities of daily living (ADL Hierarchy scores of 3+) than the comparison group.

Mental health performance

Table 4 shows characteristics of residents’ mental health as measured by various interRAI scales. It was more likely for residents with MD and ADRD to have moderate to very severe cognitive impairment (CPS scores of 3–6) than the comparison group. They were more than likely to have high levels of depressive symptoms (DRS score of 3+) than the comparison group. Of particular note, the rates of severe aggressive behavior were more than three times higher in the MD and ADRD groups compared with the comparison group. Not unexpectedly, they were also more than likely to have received antipsychotics and antidepressants than the comparison group. However, they were also about twice as likely to be physically restrained than the comparison group (11.1% and 13.5% vs. 5.7%). Finally, residents with MD and ADRD were less likely to be involved in activities and somewhat more likely not to be awake during the day, afternoon, or evening than the comparison group.

Health and health service utilization

Table 5 shows the health and health service utilization profiles of the study population. Residents with MD and ADRD were less likely than the comparison group to have had heart failure. With regards to the CHESS scale, which is a measure of health instability, residents with MD and ADRD were more likely to have moderate to high health instability (CHESS score of 3+) than either the ADRD or the comparison groups (22.1% and 19.4% vs. 16.5%). On the measurement of pain, those with MD and ADRD were less likely to have pain than the comparison group (54.5% and 64.16% vs. 49.62%).

In terms of emergency department use and hospitalization in the past 90 days, residents in both MD and ADRD groups were less likely to have used these health services compared to the comparison group. They also received less rehabilitation services and training in skills to return to the community than the comparison group. They were also less likely to be willing to return to the community and less likely to have a support person who was positive to the resident’s discharge into the community. However, they were more than likely to have received intervention programs for mood, behaviors, or cognition than the comparison group.

Discussion

This study described the sociodemographic, clinical, and functional characteristics and health service utilization of LTC facility residents with diagnoses of MD and ADRD. Data for this study came from the RAI-MDS 2.0 database that provided standardized, comprehensive clinical and functional profiles for the study’s population. Our data showed that these residents are highly vulnerable because of their double burden of mental and physical comorbidities compared to the comparison group.

Consistent with other studies and national surveys (Ahn and Horgas, 2013), the majority (76%) of residents were diagnosed with MD (40%) or ADRD (36%). In that sense, mental health should be considered as a major focus for LTC rather than an afterthought. Residents with such diagnoses in LTC facilities can be characterized as vulnerable populations due to multiple deficits in their socialization skills, functioning, mental capacities and behaviors, and in their health resource needs. These residents often had the same or higher level of physical comorbidities as the comparison group making them more complex in their health care needs.

A majority of the residents with MD and ADRD have moderate to severe cognitive impairments that may contribute to their low quality of life (Abrahamson et al., 2012). Their cognitive impairment may also contribute to their dependence in ADL. This is consistent with other studies that showed an association between mental capacities and functional dependence (Durant et al., 2016; Millan-Calenti et al., 2012). Residents’ cognitive impairment may also be a factor in their low level of social engagement and inability to enter into meaningful relationships with others. Good social connection has been associated with good mental health outcomes in LTC residents (Bethell et al., 2021). Meaningful social engagements are essential as they are associated with quality of life in LTC facility residents (Kehyayan et al., 2015; Morris et al., 2018).

Consistent with other research, residents with MD and ADRD also exhibited higher rates of aggressive or other behavioral disturbances (Hirdes et al., 2020). Several factors have been identified for such behaviors, including resident’s physical and psychological characteristics and facilities’ structural (e.g., organizational culture) and social (e.g., resident mix) characteristics (Foebel et al., 2015; Heckman et al., 2017; Hirdes et al., 2020; Thériaut and Grant, 2020). The under-detection and under-management of pain in these residents because of their cognitive impairment may also have contributed to their disruptive behaviors (Ahn and Horgas, 2013; Miu and Chan, 2014; Tosato et al., 2012). A large proportion of the participants in our study had not reported pain or had reported less than daily pain. This may have been due to several factors, including their cognitive impairment and possibly their inability to express their pain (Husebo et al., 2011; Proctor and Hirdes, 2001; Zyczkowska et al., 2007). Unmanaged pain may result in poor quality of care and quality of life in residents (International Association for the Study of Pain [IASP], 2018) and may increase their dependence in ADL (Lapane et al., 2012).

Residents with MD and ADRD were more than likely to have received antipsychotics and antidepressants than the comparison group. While our primary interest was in residents with MD and ADRD, it is worth noting that a large proportion of those in the comparison group without a qualifying mental disorder diagnosis also received psychotropic drugs. This is consistent with findings from other studies where residents without mental disorders were receiving antipsychotic drugs (Phillips et al., 2018). The adoption of non-pharmacological, psychosocial interventions for the treatment of behavioral problems may lead to reduction in the use of psychotropic medications (Hirdes et al., 2020; Hirdes et al., 2019; Seitz et al., 2010). The participants in our study with MD and ADRD were also twice as likely to have been physically restrained. Other studies have also shown the high prevalence of restraint use in such residents (Kuronen et al., 2017). Physical restraints have been shown to cause negative consequences in residents such as higher risk of cognitive and functional decline (Foebel et al., 2016). The use of psychotropic drugs may have contributed to the residents being unawake for most of the day and their poor activity levels. They may also pose fracture risks in these residents (Rigler et al., 2013). The use of psychotropic drugs and physical restraints may also have contributed to residents’ low social engagement, being less likely to have received any rehabilitation (i.e., physical, occupational, psychological or recreational therapies), or skills training in ADL or IADL for returning to the community. The inappropriate use of antipsychotics and restraints are inconsistent with person-centered care and quality improvement (Feng et al., 2009). The Institute of Medicine has recommended the adoption and implementation of patient-centered care models to promote interprofessional collaboration and integration of care to better achieve patient outcomes (Institute of Medicine, 2011). The Institute deems patient-centered care as a critical competence in all healthcare professionals.

Residents in the MD and ADRD groups had lower rates of hospitalization and emergency department use than the comparison group. It is not clear from the available data if they needed such services; however, the diagnostic data suggest that they had similar physical comorbidities as the comparison group. Avoidance of unnecessary hospitalization or emergency department visits of residents would be an important priority for LTC facilities because of associated iatrogenic outcomes (Ouslander and Berenson, 2011). Still, it would be surprising if having MD or ADRD would be a basis for differentials in care requirements. Future studies may explore this phenomenon.

Implications to Practice and Policy

The findings of this study will be of interest to LTC facility operators, clinicians, and health care policy makers about the complex needs of residents with MD and ADRD.

Perlman et al. (2019) reported that access to psychiatric services for LTC facility residents is limited and they have recommended better distribution of such services including use of telepsychiatry option (see also Hsu et al., 2010). Other alternatives for the delivery of psychiatric services may be provided by visiting or on-call psychiatrists or clinical nurse specialists who are trained in psychogeriatrics, to assess, plan and implement appropriate interventions for residents with mental and cognitive disorders (Bartels et al., 2002; Koekkoek et al., 2016).

Specialist mental health services should be available and accessible for consultative and collaborative, integrated care. Such models would support comprehensive and improved care of residents with MD and ADRD (Institute of Medicine, 2011; Morris, 2012). Nurse-led multidisciplinary psychiatric consultations in nursing homes have been shown to be effective in reducing the frequency and severity of residents’ psychiatric symptoms such as agitation, aggression, depression, anxiety and disinhibition (Koekkoek et al., 2016).

Others have suggested special training of LTC staff to ensure core competencies in mental health and aging, including understanding how to identify and respond to mental health conditions (Ahn and Horgas, 2013; Blair et al., 2012; Moyle et al., 2010; Muralidharan et al., 2019). However, as simple as such a measure seems, it presents a challenge in LTC facilities because registered nurses (RN) make up a very small proportion of LTC facility staffing (Harrington et al., 2020; Hirdes et al., 2020) in contrast to personal support workers (PSW) or nursing assistants (NA) who make up the majority and who have the primary responsibility of providing direct care to residents on a daily basis (Boscart et al., 2018; Harrington et al., 2020). As PSWs and NAs have more and direct contact with residents, it is critical that targeted training be provided to them for the early recognition of mental health issues in residents.

Provision of medical services in LTC facilities presents a further challenge because of the limited availability of physicians to LTC. According to a survey of conducted by the American Medical Association, the majority of physicians (77%) reported that they did not devote time for treating residents in LTC facilities (Levy et al., 2007). Most medical services in Canada are provided by vising family practitioners or family physicians who require quality improvement efforts (Lam et al., 2012). Customized training should be provided to increase their knowledge and skills in the proper assessment, diagnosis, and management of residents’ mental health problems.

Further suggestions to better meet the needs of this vulnerable population include the necessity for clinicians to integrate residents’ mental and physical care needs (Attoe, 2018). Patient-centered care is one mechanism for the integration of care (Institute of Medicine, 2011). A clinical review has demonstrated that shared integrated care of older people with dementia and/or frailty leads to their humane and effective care (Morris, 2012).

In sum, our study showed that residents with MD and ADRD, compared to those without either one of these conditions, presented unique functional and clinical characteristics and health care resource use. To meet their complex care needs novel mechanisms for training clinical and support staff and the availability and accessibility of psychiatric and mental health services should be introduced.

Strengths and Limitations

This study had several strengths and limitations, which need to be highlighted. We consider the very large sample size (514, 208) and the number of facilities (1,319) involved across Canada (except for Quebec) is representative of the LTC population and constitute one of the key strengths of this study. The interRAI system of comprehensive assessment, with its embedded clinical scales, made it possible for the systematic and comprehensive evaluation of the study populations and their unique functional and health care needs. This study will add to the scientific knowledge arising from published interRAI data (Foebel et al., 2016; Hirdes et al., 2020; Hirdes et al., 2013; Hirdes et al., 2011; Kehyayan and Hirdes, 2018; Kehyayan et al., 2016; Kehyayan et al., 2014; Turcotte et al., 2018).

The study also had a few limitations. First, this was a cross sectional study limiting the findings to the population studied. As well, its design makes it difficult to discern causal relationships because it is not possible to discern temporal order which longitudinal data may provide. Another limitation may be that while we were diligent in identifying distinct populations of residents with MD and ADRD, there may have been residents with both diagnoses. One final limitation is that we were unable to explain why certain drugs were prescribed for the residents because the reasons for prescription of medications are not documented in the RAI-MDS. Despite its limitations, however, the findings may allow the generation of ideas for future studies. For instance, studies may examine the reasons for prescribing medications particularly psychotropic drugs; another may examine temporal trends in some resident characteristics such as the use of anti-psychotics; others could explore the impact of access to formal mental health services on resident outcomes; and finally, a follow-up study could examine differences in residents’ profiles between provinces/territory.

Conclusions

In summary, our study found that residents with MD or ADRD in LTC facilities have multiple vulnerabilities that facility operators and clinicians should be mindful. These residents present challenges to staff because of the double burden of their physical and mental comorbidities. The findings of this study will be of interest to LTC facility operators, clinicians, and health care policy makers about the complex needs of residents with MD and ADRD. Novel mechanisms are needed to address the psychiatric and mental health needs of the LTC facility residents.

Competing Interests

The authors have no competing interests to declare.

References

  1. Abrahamson, K, Clark, D, Perkins, A and Arling, G. 2012. ‘Does cognitive impairment influence quality of life among nursing home residents?’ Gerontologist, 52(5): 632–640. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnr137 

  2. Ahn, H and Horgas, A. 2013. ‘The relationship between pain and disruptive behaviors in nursing home resident with dementia’. BMC Geriatrics, 13(1): 14–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2318-13-14 

  3. Attoe, C. 2018. ‘Integrating mental and physical health care: The mind and body approach’. The Lancet. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(18)30044-0 

  4. Bagchi, AD, Verdier, JM, Simon, SE, Bagchi, AD, Verdier, JM and Simon, SE. 2009. ‘How many nursing home residents live with a mental illness?’. Psychiatric Services, 60(7): 958–964. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.60.7.958 

  5. Bansal, S, Hirdes, JP, Maxwell, CJ, Papaioannou, A, and Giangregorio, LM. 2016. ‘Identifying fallers among home care clients with dementia and Parkinson’s disease’. Canadian Journal on Aging, 35(3): 319–331. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0714980816000325 

  6. Barnett, K, McCowan, C, Evans, JMM, Gillespie, ND, Davey, PG and Fahey, T. 2011. ‘Prevalence and outcomes of use of potentially inappropriate medicines in older people: Cohort study stratified by residence in nursing home or in the community’. BMJ Quality & Safety, 20(3): 275–281. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs.2009.039818 

  7. Bartels, SJ, Moak, GS and Bums, AR. 2002. ‘Models of mental health services in nursing homes: A review of the literature’. Psychiatric Services, 53(11): 1390–1396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.53.11.1390 

  8. Benjenk, I, Buchongo, P, Amaize, A, Martinez, GS and Chen, J. 2019. ‘Overcoming the dual stigma of mental illness and aging: Preparing new nurses to care for the mental health needs of older adults’, American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 27(7): 664–674. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jagp.2018.12.028 

  9. Berry, SD, Placide, SG, Mostofsky, E, Zhang, Y, Lipsitz, LA, Mittleman, MA, Kiel, DP and Zhang, Y. 2016. ‘Antipsychotic and benzodiazepine drug changes affect acute falls risk differently in the nursing home’. Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences & Medical Sciences, 71(2): 273–278. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glv091 

  10. Bethell, J, Aelick, K, Babineau, J, Bretzlaff, M, Edwards, C, Gibson, J, Hewitt Colborne, D, Iaboni, A, Lender, D, Schon, D and McGilton, KS. 2021. ‘Social connection in long-term care homes: A scoping review of published research on the mental health impacts and potential strategies during COVID-19’. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 22(2): 228–228. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2020.11.025 

  11. Blair, IA, Billow, MB, Eberhage, MG, Seeley, JR, McMahon, E and Bourgeois, M. 2012. ‘Mental illness training for licensed staff in long-term care’. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 33(3): 181–194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/01612840.2011.639482 

  12. Boscart, VM, Sidani, S, Poss, J, Davey, M, d’Avernas, J, Brown, P, Heckman, G, Ploeg, J and Costa, AP. 2018. ‘The associations between staffing hours and quality of care indicators in long-term care’. BMC Health Services Research, 18(1): N.PAG–N.PAG. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3552-5 

  13. Burrows, AB, Morris, JN, Simon, SE, Hirdes, JP and Phillips, C. 2000. ‘Development of a minimum data set-based depression rating scale for use in nursing homes’. Age and Ageing, 29(2): 165–172. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/29.2.165 

  14. Canadian Institute for Health Information. 2020. Quick stats: Profile of residents in residentail and hospital-based continuing care, 2018–2019. Available at: https://www.cihi.ca/en/quick-stats. 

  15. Chatterjee, S, Chen, H, Johnson, ML and Aparasu, RR. 2012. ‘Risk of falls and fractures in older adults using atypical antipsychotic agents: A propensity score-adjusted, retrospective cohort study’. American Journal of Geriatric Pharmacotherapy, 10(2): 83–94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjopharm.2011.10.006 

  16. Chiu, Y, Bero, L, Hessol, NA, Lexchin, J and Harrington, C. 2015. A literature review of clinical outcomes associated with antipsychotic medication use in North American nursing home residents’. Health Policy, 119(6): 802–813. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.02.014 

  17. Colantonio, A, Hsueh, J, Petgrave, J, Hirdes, JP and Berg, K. 2015. ‘A profile of patients with traumatic brain injury within home care, long-term care, complex continuing care, and institutional mental health settings in a publicly insured population’. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 30(6): E18–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/HTR.0000000000000112 

  18. Dalby, DM, Hirdes, JP, Stolee, P, Strong, GJ, Poss, J, Tjam, EY, Bowman, L and Ashworth, M. 2009. ‘Development and psychometric properties of a standardized assessment for adults who are deaf-blind’. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 103(1): 7–16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X0910300103 

  19. Danila, O, Hirdes, JP, Maxwell, CJ, Marrie, RA, Patten, S, Pringsheim, T and Jetté, N. 2014. ‘Prevalence of neurological conditions across the continuum of care based on interRAI assessments’. BMC Health Services Research, 14(1): 29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-29 

  20. Durant, J, Leger, GC, Banks, SJ and Miller, JB. 2016. ‘Relationship between the activities of daily living questionnaire and the Montreal cognitive assessment’. Alzheimer’s & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring, 4: 43–46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dadm.2016.06.001 

  21. Feng, Z, Hirdes, JP, Smith, TS, Finne-Soveri, H, Chi, I, Du Pasquier, J, Gilgen, R, Ikegamin, N and Mor, V. 2009. ‘Use of physical restraints and antipsychotic medications in nursing homes: A cross-national study’. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/gps.2232 

  22. Foebel, A, Ballokova, A, Wellens, NIH, Fialova, D, Milisen, K, Liperoti, R and Hirdes, JP. 2015. ‘A retrospective, longitudinal study of factors associated with new antipsychotic medication use among recently admitted long-term care residents’. BMC Geriatrics, 15: 128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-015-0127-8 

  23. Foebel, AD, Hirdes, JP, Heckman, GA, Kergoat, M, Patten, S and Marrie, RA. 2013. ‘Diagnostic data for neurological conditions in interRAI assessments in home care, nursing home and mental health care settings: A validity study’. BMC Health Services Research, 13(1): 457–457. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-13-457 

  24. Foebel, AD, Hirdes, JP, Heckman, GA, Tyas, SL and Tjam, EY. 2011. ‘A profile of older community-dwelling home care clients with heart failure in ontario’. Chronic Diseases in Canada, 31(2): 49–57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24095/hpcdp.31.2.01 

  25. Foebel, AD, Onder, G, Finne-Soveri, H, Lukas, A, Denkinger, MD, Carfi, A, Vetrano, DL, Brandi, V, Bernabei, R and Liperoti, R. 2016. ‘Physical restraint and antipsychotic medication use among nursing home residents with dementia’. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 17(2): 184.e9–184.e14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2015.11.014 

  26. Fraser, L, Liu, K, Naylor, KL, Hwang, YJ, Dixon, SN, Shariff, SZ and Garg, AX. 2015. ‘Falls and fractures with atypical antipsychotic medication use: A population-based cohort study’. JAMA Internal Medicine, 175(3): 450–452. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.6930 

  27. Fries, BE, Simon, SE and Morris, JN. 2001. ‘Pain in US nursing homes: Validating a pain scale for the minimum data set’. The Gerontologist, 41(2): 173–179. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/41.2.173 

  28. Gambassi, G, Landi, F, Peng, L, Brostrup-Jensen, C, Calore, K, Hiris, J, Lipsitz, L, Mor, V, Bernabei, R and SAGE Study Grp. 1998. ‘Validity of diagnostic and drug data in standardized nursing home resident assessments – Potential for geriatric pharmacoepidemiology.’ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199802000-00006 

  29. Grabowski, DC, Aschbrenner, KA, Feng, Z and Mor, V. 2009. ‘Mental illness in nursing homes: Variations across states’. Health Affairs, 28(3): 689–700. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.28.3.689 

  30. Grabowski, DC, Aschbrenner, KA, Rome, VF, Bartels, SJ, Grabowski, DC, Aschbrenner, KA, Rome, VF, and Bartels, SJ. 2010. ‘Quality of mental health care for nursing home residents: A literature review’. Medical Care Research & Review, 67(6): 627–656. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1077558710362538 

  31. Harrington, C, Dellefield, ME, Halifax, E, Fleming, ML and Bakerjian, D. 2020. ‘Appropriate nurse staffing levels for US nursing homes’. Health Services Insights, 13: 1–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1178632920934785 

  32. Heckman, GA, Crizzle, AM, Chen, J, Pringsheim, T, Jette, N, Kergoat, M, Eckel, L and Hirdes, JP. 2017. ‘Clinical complexity and use of antipsychotics and restraints in long-term care residents with Parkinson’s disease’. Journal of Parkinson’s Disease, 7(1): 103–115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/JPD-160931 

  33. Hirdes, JP, Declercq, A, Finne-Soveri, H, Fries, BF, Geffen, L, Heckman, G, Lum, T, Meehan, B, Millar, N and Morris, JN. 2020. ‘The long-term care pandemic: International perspectives on COVID-19 and the future of nursing homes’. Balsillie Papers, 2(1): 1–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.51644/BAP24 

  34. Hirdes, JP, Frijters, DH and Teare, GF. 2003. ‘The MDS-CHESS scale: A new measure to predict mortality in institutionalized older people’. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 51(1): 96–100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1601-5215.2002.51017.x 

  35. Hirdes, JP and Kehyayan, V. 2014. ‘Health care for the elderly in Canada: Progress toward a better world’. In Mor, V, Leone, T and Maresso, A. (eds.), Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press (ISBN 9781107665354): 324–356. In Mor, V. (Ed.), Regulating long-term care: An international comparison. Cambridge University Press: 324–356. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107323711.017 

  36. Hirdes, JP, Ljunggren, G, Morris, JN, Frijters, DHM, Finne Soveri, H, Gray, L, Björkgren, M and Gilgen, R. 2008. ‘Reliability of the interRAI suite of assessment instruments: A 12-country study of an integrated health information system’. BMC Health Services Research, 8: 1–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-277 

  37. Hirdes, JP, Major, J, Didic, S, Quinn, C, Mitchell, L, Chen, J, Jantzi, M and Phillips, K. 2020. ‘A Canadian cohort study to evaluate the outcomes associated with a multicenter initiative to reduce antipsychotic use in long-term care homes’. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 21(6): 817–822. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2020.04.004 

  38. Hirdes, JP, Major, J, Didic, S, Quinn, C, Sinclair, C, Bucek, J, Samis, S, Jantzi, M, Chen, J, Curtin-Telegdi, N and Phillips, K. 2019. ‘Study protocol and baseline comparisons for a pan-Canadian initiative to reduce inappropriate use of antipsychotics in long-term care homes’. SAGE Open, 9(1): 1–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019835942 

  39. Hirdes, JP, Mitchell, L, Maxwell, CJ and White, N. 2011. ‘Beyond the “iron lungs of gerontology”: Using evidence to shape the future of nursing homes in Canada’. Canadian Journal on Aging = La Revue Canadienne Du Vieillissement, 30(3): 371–390. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0714980811000304 

  40. Hirdes, JP, Poss, JW, Caldarelli, H, Fries, BE, Morris, JN, Teare, GF, Reidel, K and Jutan, N. 2013. ‘An evaluation of data quality in canada’s continuing care reporting system (CCRS): Secondary analyses of Ontario data submitted between 1996 and 2011’. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 13(1): 27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-13-27 

  41. Hsu, M, Chu, T, Yen, J, Chiu, W, Yeh, G, Chen, T, Sung, Y, Hsiao, J and Li, YJ. 2010. ‘Development and implementation of a national telehealth project for long-term care: A preliminary study’. Computer Methods & Programs in Biomedicine, 97(3): 286–292. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2009.12.008 

  42. Husebo, BS, Ballard, C, Sandvik, R, Nilsen, OB and Aarsland, D. 2011. ‘Efficacy of treating pain to reduce behavioural disturbances in residents of nursing homes with dementia: Cluster randomised clinical trial’. BMJ, 343: 4065. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d4065 

  43. Institute of Medicine. 2011. The future of nursing: Leading change, advancing health. Washington, DC: National Academies Press (US). 

  44. International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP). 2018. Recommendations for pain treatment services. Available at: http://www.iasp-pain.org/Guidelines?navItemNumber=648. 

  45. Kehyayan, V and Hirdes, JP. 2018. ‘Profile of persons with epilepsy receiving home care services’. Home Health Care Management & Practice, 1–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1084822318769640 

  46. Kehyayan, V, Hirdes, JP, Tyas, SL and Stolee, P. 2015. ‘Residents’ self-reported quality of life in long-term care facilities in Canada’. Canadian Journal on Aging = La Revue Canadienne Du Vieillissement, 34(2): 149–164. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0714980814000579 

  47. Kehyayan, V, Hirdes, JP, Tyas, SL and Stolee, P. 2016. ‘Predictors of long-term care facility residents’ self-reported quality of life with individual and facility characteristics in Canada’. Journal of Aging and Health, 28(3): 503–529. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0898264315594138 

  48. Kehyayan, V, Korngut, L, Jetté, N and Hirdes, JP. 2014. ‘Profile of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis across continuum of care’. Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences, 41(2): 246–252. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0317167100016656 

  49. Koekkoek, B, Baarsen, C and Steenbeek, M. 2016. ‘Multidisciplinary, nurse-led psychiatric consultation in nursing homes: A pilot study in clinical practice’. Perspectives in Psychiatric Care, 52(3): 217–223. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ppc.12120 

  50. Kuronen, M, Kautiainen, H, Karppi, P, Hartikainen, S and Koponen, H. 2017. ‘Physical restraints and associations with neuropsychiatric symptoms and personal characteristics in residential care: A cross-sectional study’. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 32(12): 1418–1424. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/gps.4629 

  51. Lam, JM, Anderson, GM, Austin, PC and Bronskill, SE. 2012. ‘Family physicians providing regular care to residents in Ontario long-term care homes: Characteristics and practice patterns’. Canadian Family Physician, 58(11): 1241–1248. 

  52. Lapane, KL, Quilliam, BJ, Chow, W and Kim, M. 2012. ‘The association between pain and measures of well-being among nursing home residents’. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 13(4): 344–349. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2011.01.007 

  53. Levy, C, Palat, SI and Kramer, AM. 2007. ‘Physician practice patterns in nursing homes’. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 8(9): 558–567. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2007.06.015 

  54. Millan-Calenti, JC, Tubio, J, Pita-Fernandez, S, Rochette, S, Lorenzo, T and Maseda, A. 2012. ‘Cognitive impairment as predictor of functional dependence in an elderly sample’. Archives of Gerontology & Geriatrics, 54(1): 197–201. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2011.02.010 

  55. Miu, DKY and Chan, KC. 2014. ‘Under-detection of pain in elderly nursing home residents with moderate to severe dementia’. Journal of Clinical Gerontology & Geriatrics, 5: 23–27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcgg.2013.09.001 

  56. Mor, V and Branco, K. 1995. ‘The structure of social engagement among nursing home residents’. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences & Social Sciences, 50B(1): P1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/50B.1.P1 

  57. Morris, J. 2012. ‘Integrated care for frail older people 2012: A clinical overview’. Journal of Integrated Care, 20(4): 257–257. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14769011211255294 

  58. Morris, JN, Declercq, A, Hirdes, JP, Finne-Soveri, H, Fries, BE, James, ML, Geffen, L, Kehyayan, V, Saks, K, Szczerbińska, K and Topinkova, E. 2018. ‘Hearing the voice of the resident in long-term care Facilities—An internationally based approach to assessing quality of life’. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 19(3): 207–215. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2017.08.010 

  59. Morris, JN, Fries, BE, Bernabei, R, Steel, K, Ikegamin, N, Carpenter, I, Gilgen, R, DuPasquier, J, Frijeters, D, Henrard, J, Hirdes, JP and Belleville-Taylor, P. 2012. InterRAI home care (HC) assessment form and user’s manual (Version 9.1, Canadian Edition ed.). interRAI. 

  60. Morris, JN, Fries, BE, Mehr, DR and Hawes, C. 1994. ‘MDS cognitive performance scale®’. Journals of Gerontology: Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 49(4): M174–M182. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/49.4.M174 

  61. Morris, JN, Fries, BE and Morris, SA. 1999. ‘Scaling ADLs within the MDS’. Journal of Gerontology, Medical Sciences, 54(11): M546–53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/54.11.M546 

  62. Moyle, W, Hsu, MC, Lieff, S, Vernooij-Dassen, M, Moyle, W, Hsu, MC, Lieff, S and Vernooij-Dassen, M. 2010. ‘Recommendations for staff education and training for older people with mental illness in long-term aged care’. International Psychogeriatrics, 22(7): 1097–1106. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610210001754 

  63. Muralidharan, A, Mills, WL, Evans, DR, Fujii, D and Molinari, V. 2019. ‘Preparing long-term care staff to meet the needs of aging persons with serious mental illness’. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 20(6): 683–688. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2019.03.018 

  64. Ouslander, JG and Berenson, RA. 2011. ‘Reducing unnecessary hospitalizations of nursing home residents’. The New England Journal of Medicine, 365(13): 1165–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1105449 

  65. Perlman, C, Kirkham, J, Velkers, C, Leung, RH, Whitehead, M and Seitz, D. 2019. ‘Access to psychiatrist services for older adults in long-term care: A population-based study’. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 20(5): 610–610. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2019.01.121 

  66. Perlman, CM and Hirdes, JP. 2008. ‘The aggressive behavior scale: A new scale to measure aggression based on the minimum data set’. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 56(12): 2298–2303. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.02048.x 

  67. Phillips, LJ, Birtley, NM, Siem, C, Rantz, M and Petroski, GF. 2018. ‘An observational study of antipsychotic medication use among long-stay nursing home residents without qualifying diagnoses’. Journal of Psychiatric & Mental Health Nursing (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.), 25(8): 463–474. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jpm.12488 

  68. Poss, JW, Jutan, NM, Hirdes, JP, Fries, BE, Morris, JN, Teare, GF and Reidel, K. 2008. ‘A review of evidence on the reliability and validity of minimum data set data’. Healthc Manage Forum, 21(1): 33–39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0840-4704(10)60127-5 

  69. Proctor, WR and Hirdes, JP. 2001. ‘Pain and cognitive status among nursing home residents in Canada’. Pain Research & Management, 6(3): 119–125. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2001/978130 

  70. Rahman, M, Grabowski, DC, Intrator, O, Cai, S, and Mor, V. 2013. ‘Serious mental illness and nursing home quality of care’. Health Services Research, 48(4): 1279–1298. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12023 

  71. Rigler, SK, Shireman, TI, Cook-Wiens, G, Ellerbeck, EF, Whittle, JC, Mehr, DR and Mahnken, JD. 2013. ‘Fracture risk in nursing home residents initiating antipsychotic medications’. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 61(5): 715–722. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.12216 

  72. Rios, S, Perlman, CM, Costa, A, Heckman, G, Hirdes, JP, and Mitchell, L. 2017. ‘Antipsychotics and dementia in Canada: A retrospective cross-sectional study of four health sectors’. BMC Geriatrics, 17: 1–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-017-0636-8 

  73. Seitz, D, Purandare, N, Conn, D, Seitz, D, Purandare, N and Conn, D. 2010. ‘Prevalence of psychiatric disorders among older adults in long-term care homes: A systematic review’. International Psychogeriatrics, 22(7): 1025–1039. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610210000608 

  74. Snowdon, J, Galanos, D and Vaswani, D. 2011. ‘Patterns of psychotropic medication use in nursing homes: Surveys in Sydney, allowing comparisons over time and between countries’. International Psychogeriatrics, 23(9): 1520–1525. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610211000445 

  75. Thériaut, ÉR and Grant, A. 2020. ‘Depression and aggressive behaviour in continuing care: How cognitive impairment might not explain the whole story’. Journal of Long-Term Care, 1–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31389/jltc.15 

  76. Tosato, M, Lukas, A, van der Roest, HG, Danese, P, Antocicco, M, Finne-Soveri, H, Nikolaus, T, Landi, F, Bernabei, R, Onder, G, Tosato, M, Lukas, A, van der Roest, HG, Danese, P, Antocicco, M, Finne-Soveri, H, Nikolaus, T, Landi, F, Bernabei, R and Onder, G. 2012. ‘Association of pain with behavioral and psychiatric symptoms among nursing home residents with cognitive impairment: Results from the SHELTER study’. Pain, 153(2): 305–310. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2011.10.007 

  77. Turcotte, LA, Marrie, RA, Patten, SB and Hirdes, JP. 2018. ‘Clinical profile of persons with multiple sclerosis across the continuum of care’. Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences, 45(2): 188–198. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/cjn.2017.274 

  78. Vu, M, Hogan, DB, Patten, SB, Jetté, N, Bronskill, SE, Heckman, G, Kergoat, MJ, Hirdes, JP, Chen, X, Zehr, MM and Maxwell, CJ. 2014. ‘A comprehensive profile of the sociodemographic, psychosocial and health characteristics of Ontario home care clients with dementia’. Maladies Chroniques Et Blessures Au Canada, 34(2): 132–144. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24095/hpcdp.34.2/3.08 

  79. Wilson, L, Power, C, Owens, R and Lawlor, B. 2019. ‘Psychiatric consultation in the nursing home: Reasons for referral and recognition of delirium’. Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine, 36(2): 121–127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/ipm.2017.71 

  80. Zyczkowska, J, Szczerbinska, K, Jantzi, MR and Hirdes, JP. 2007. ‘Pain among the oldest old in community and institutional settings’. Pain, 129(1–2): 167–176. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2006.12.009 

comments powered by Disqus