Background Nursing home residents (NHR) are characterized by increasing frailty, multimorbidity and care dependency. These conditions result in frequent hospital transfers which can lead to negative effects on residents’ health status and are often avoidable. Reasons for emergency department (ED) visits or hospital admissions are complex. Prior research indicated factors influencing transfer decisions in view of nursing staff and general practitioners. The aim of this systematic review is to explore how family members experience and influence transfers from nursing home (NH) to hospital and how they are involved in the transfer decision. Methods A systematic literature search was performed in Medline via PubMed, Ebsco Scopus and CINAHL in May 2018. Studies were eligible if they contained information a) about the decision to transfer NHR to hospital and b) the experiences or influence of family members. The review followed Joanna Briggs Institute's (JBI) approach for qualitative systematic reviews. Screening, selection and quality appraisal of studies were performed independently by two reviewers. Synthesis of qualitative data was conducted through meta-aggregation. Results After screening of n = 2863 articles, in total n = 10 qualitative studies were included in the review. Results indicate that family members of NHR experience decision-making before hospitalization differently. They mainly reported NH-related, hospital-related, and family/resident-related factors influencing the transfer decision. The involvement of family members in the decision-making process varies - from no involvement to insistence on a decision in favor of their personal preferences. However, hospital transfer decisions and other treatment decisions (e.g. advance care planning (ACP) discussions) were commonly discussed with physicians and nurses. Conflicts between family members and healthcare providers mostly arose around the interpretation of resident’s best interest. In general, family members perceive discussions as challenging thus leading to emotional stress and discomfort. Conclusion The influence of NHR family members concerning hospital transfer decisions varies. Family members are an important link for communication between resident and medical staff and for communication between NH and hospital. Interventions aiming to reduce hospitalization rates have to take these findings into account. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12877-019-1170-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

Background The medical care for nursing home residents is estimated to be partly inadequate in Germany. The aim of this study is to investigate the needs and utilization of general practitioners (GPs), medical specialists and allied health professionals. Methods A survey was sent to a nationwide random sample of 1069 nursing homes in Germany in January 2019. Nursing staff managers were asked about medical care. Regular nursing home visits by medical specialists and allied health professionals were defined as at least one contact per year to at least one nursing home resident. Results A total of 486 persons responded (45.5%). On average, nursing homes have contact to 8.6 (interquartile range: 4–10) different GPs. Almost 70% of respondents agreed that residents’ medical care should be coordinated by GPs. However, only 46.0% stated that specialist treatment should require GP referral. A high need was seen for care from physiotherapists (91.0%), neurologists or psychiatrists (89.3%), dentists (73.7%), and urologists (71.3%). Regarding the actual utilization of medical specialists and health professionals, most nursing homes have regular contact to physiotherapists (97.1%), psychiatrists or neurologists (90.4%), speech therapists (85.0%), and dentists (84.8%). Remarkable discrepancies between need and utilization were found for urologists and ophthalmologists. Conclusion There is large variance in the number of GPs per nursing home, and needs for medical specialists, especially urologists and ophthalmologists, seem unmet. Interprofessional collaboration between GPs, medical specialists and allied health professionals should be improved, and GPs should play a more coordinating role.

AimTo describe general practitioners' (GPs) perspectives on end‐of‐life care of nursing home residents.MethodsWe carried out a cross‐sectional study. A questionnaire was sent to a random sample of 1121 GPs in the German federal states of Bremen and Lower Saxony in 2018. Data were compared between GPs with a qualification in palliative medicine and those without such qualifications, and multivariable logistic regression was performed.ResultsOverall, 375 questionnaires were returned (response rate 34%). The majority of GPs (71%) agreed that nursing home residents are treated too often in hospitals at the end of life, and more than half rated end‐of‐life care in nursing homes as “rather poor” (54%). For both questions, GPs with a qualification in palliative medicine showed higher agreements. In the multivariable analysis, a prior qualification in palliative medicine was also strongly associated with rating end‐of‐life care as “rather poor” (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.10–3.23). Respondents cited higher staffing ratios and better trained nursing staff as the most important measures to improve end‐of‐life care. Furthermore, it was estimated that just 37% of residents have an advance directive, with only one‐third including valid information on end‐of‐life hospitalizations.ConclusionsThis study showed that GPs tend to be critical regarding end‐of‐life care in nursing homes. To improve end‐of‐life care, better training in palliative care for nursing staff and GPs might be warranted. In addition, advance care planning can help to ensure that residents' wishes are respected. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2020; 20: 25–30.

Background Nursing homes are becoming more important for end-of-life care. Within the industrialised world, Germany is among the countries with the most end-of-life hospitalizations in nursing home residents. To improve end-of-life care, investigation in the status quo is required. The objective was to gain a better understanding of the perspectives of nursing home staff on the current situation of end-of-life care in Germany. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted as a postal survey among a random sample of 1069 German nursing homes in 2019. The survey was primarily addressed to nursing staff management. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. Staff was asked to rate different items regarding common practices and potential deficits of end-of-life care on a 5-point-Likert-scale. Estimations of the proportions of in-hospital deaths, residents with advance directives (AD), cases in which documented ADs were ignored, and most important measures for improvement of end-of-life care were requested. Results 486 (45.5%) questionnaires were returned, mostly by nursing staff managers (64.7%) and nursing home directors (29.9%). 64.4% of the respondents rated end-of-life care rather good, the remainder rated it as rather bad. The prevalence of in-hospital death was estimated by the respondents at 31.5% (SD: 19.9). Approximately a third suggested that residents receive hospital treatments too frequently. Respondents estimated that 45.9% (SD: 21.6) of the residents held ADs and that 28.4% (SD: 26.8) of available ADs are not being considered. Increased staffing, better qualification, closer involvement of general practitioners and better availability of palliative care concepts were the most important measures for improvement. Conclusions Together with higher staffing, better availability and integration of palliative care concepts may well improve end-of-life care. Prerequisite for stronger ties between nursing home and palliative care is high-quality education of those involved in end-of-life care.

Emergency department (ED) visits and hospital admissions are common among nursing home residents (NHRs). Little is known about the perspectives of emergency medical services (EMS) which are responsible for hospital transports. The aim of this study was to explore paramedics’ experiences with transfers from nursing homes (NHs) and their ideas for possible interventions that can reduce transfers. We conducted three focus groups following a semi-structured question guide. The data were analyzed by content analysis using the software MAXQDA. In total, 18 paramedics (mean age: 33 years, male n = 14) participated in the study. Paramedics are faced with complex issues when transporting NHRs to hospital. They mainly reported on structural reasons (e.g., understaffing or lacking availability of physicians), which led to the initiation of an emergency call. Handovers were perceived as poorly organized because required transfer information (e.g., medication lists, advance directives (ADs)) were incomplete or nursing staff was insufficiently prepared. Hospital transfers were considered as (potentially) avoidable in case of urinary catheter complications, exsiccosis/infections and falls. Legal uncertainties among all involved professional groups (nurses, physicians, dispatchers, and paramedics) seemed to be a relevant trigger for hospital transfers. In paramedics’ point of view, emergency standards in NHs, trainings for nursing staff, the improvement of working conditions and legal conditions can reduce potentially avoidable hospital transfers from NHs.

Background Emergency department visits and hospital admissions are common among nursing home residents (NHRs) and seem to be higher in Germany than in other countries. Yet, research on characteristics of transfers and involved persons in the transfer decision is scarce. Aims The aim of this study was to analyze the characteristics of hospital transfers from nursing homes (NHs) focused on contacts to physicians, family members and legal guardians prior to a transfer. Methods We conducted a multi-center study in 14 NHs in the regions Bremen and Lower Saxony (Northwestern Germany) between March 2018 and July 2019. Hospital transfers were documented for 12 months by nursing staff using a standardized questionnaire. Data were derived from care records and perspectives of nursing staff and were analyzed descriptively. Results Among 802 included NHRs, n = 535 unplanned hospital transfers occurred of which 63.1% resulted in an admission. Main reasons were deterioration of health status (e.g. fever, infections, dyspnea and exsiccosis) (35.1%) and falls/accidents/injuries (33.5%). Within 48 h prior to transfer, contact to at least one general practitioner (GP)/specialist/out-of-hour-care physician was 46.2% and varied between the NHs (range: 32.3–83.3%). GPs were involved in only 34.8% of transfer decisions. Relatives and legal guardians were more often informed about transfer (62.3% and 66.8%) than involved in the decision (21.8% and 15.1%). Discussion Contacts to physicians and involvement of the GP were low prior to unplanned transfers. The ranges between the NHs may be explained by organizational differences. Conclusion Improvements in communication between nursing staff, physicians and others are required to reduce potentially avoidable transfers.

Background: Visits in emergency departments and hospital admissions are common among nursing home (NH) residents and they are associated with significant complications. Many of these transfers are considered inappropriate. This study aimed to compare the perceptions of general practitioners (GPs) and NH staff on hospital transfers among residents and to illustrate measures for improvement. Methods: Two cross-sectional studies were conducted as surveys among 1121 GPs in the German federal states Bremen and Lower Saxony and staff from 1069 NHs (preferably nursing staff managers) from all over Germany, each randomly selected. Questionnaires were sent in August 2018 and January 2019, respectively. The answers were compared between GPs and NH staff using descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U tests and χ2-tests. Results: We received 375 GP questionnaires (response: 34%) and 486 NH questionnaires (response: 45%). GPs estimated the proportion of inappropriate transfers higher than NH staff (hospital admissions: 35.0% vs. 25.6%, p < 0.0001; emergency department visits: 39.9% vs. 20.9%, p < 0.0001). The majority of NH staff and nearly half of the GPs agreed that NH residents do often not benefit from hospital admissions (NHs: 61.4% vs. GPs: 48.8%; p = 0.0009). Both groups rated almost all potential measures for improvement differently (p < 0.0001), however, GPs and NH staff considered most areas to reduce hospital transfers importantly. The two most important measures for GPs were more nursing staff (91.6%) and better communication between nursing staff and GP (90.9%). NH staff considered better care / availability of GP (82.8%) and medical specialists (81.3%) as most important. Both groups rated similarly the importance of explicit advance directives (GPs: 77.2%, NHs: 72.4%; p = 0.1492). Conclusions: A substantial proportion of hospital transfers from NHs were considered inappropriate. Partly, the ratings of possible areas for improvement differed between GPs and NH staff indicating that both groups seem to pass the responsibility to each other. These findings, however, support the need for interprofessional collaboration.