Telehealth may be an efficient and effective method of systematically delivering integrated care in the home health sector. The use of telehealth technology may benefit homebound older adults who have difficulty accessing care due to disability, transportation, or isolation.

The Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS) is the patient-specific, standardized assessment used in Medicare home health care to plan care, determine reimbursement, and measure quality. Since its inception in 1999, there has been debate over the reliability and validity of the OASIS as a research tool and outcome measure. A systematic literature review of English-language articles identified 12 studies published in the last 10 years examining the validity and reliability of the OASIS. Empirical findings indicate the validity and reliability of the OASIS range from low to moderate but vary depending on the item studied. Limitations in the existing research include: nonrepresentative samples; inconsistencies in methods used, items tested, measurement, and statistical procedures; and the changes to the OASIS itself over time. The inconsistencies suggest that these results are tentative at best; additional research is needed to confirm the value of the OASIS for measuring patient outcomes, research, and quality improvement.

Decision Editor: Rachel Pruchno, PhDPurpose: Villages and Naturally Occurring Retirement Community (NORC) Supportive Service Programs (NORC programs) are among the most prominent community-based models for promoting aging in place. To advance systematic understanding of their development, this study examined how these models have been implemented nationally and the models' similarities and differences. Design and Methods: A survey of program leaders representing 69 Villages and 62 NORC programs was conducted from January to June of 2012. Bivariate analyses compared measures of the initiatives' services/activities, beneficiaries, service delivery processes, and funding sources. Results: Village members were reportedly more likely than NORC program participants to be younger, to be less functionally impaired, to be more economically secure, and to reside in higher socioeconomic communities. Reflecting these differences in populations served, NORC programs reported offering more traditional health and social services, had more paid staff, and relied more on government funding than Villages. Implications: Findings indicate that Villages and NORC programs both aim to promote aging in place by offering a diverse range of supports and services to older adults within a locally defined geographic area. Nevertheless, key differences were found in the means through which they seek to achieve these aims, as well as the populations likely to benefit from their efforts. These differences raise questions regarding the models' inclusivity, sustainability, expansion, and effectiveness and have implications for community aging in place initiatives more broadly.

No abstract