Author
Listed:
- Lauriane Favez
(Institute of Nursing Science, University of Basel, Bernoullistrasse 28, 4056 Basel, Switzerland)
- Franziska Zúñiga
(Institute of Nursing Science, University of Basel, Bernoullistrasse 28, 4056 Basel, Switzerland)
- Narayan Sharma
(Institute of Nursing Science, University of Basel, Bernoullistrasse 28, 4056 Basel, Switzerland)
- Catherine Blatter
(Institute of Nursing Science, University of Basel, Bernoullistrasse 28, 4056 Basel, Switzerland)
- Michael Simon
(Institute of Nursing Science, University of Basel, Bernoullistrasse 28, 4056 Basel, Switzerland
Nursing and Midwifery Research Unit, Inselspital Bern University Hospital, Freiburgstrasse, 3010 Bern, Switzerland)
Abstract
Nursing home quality indicators are often used to publicly report the quality of nursing home care. In Switzerland, six national nursing home quality indicators covering four clinical domains (polypharmacy, pain, use of physical restraints and weight loss) were recently developed. To allow for meaningful comparisons, these indicators must reliably show differences in quality of care levels between nursing homes. This study’s objectives were to assess nursing home quality indicators’ between-provider variability and reliability using intraclass correlations and rankability. This approach has not yet been used in long-term care contexts but presents methodological advantages. This cross-sectional multicenter study uses data of 11,412 residents from a convenience sample of 152 Swiss nursing homes. After calculating intraclass correlation 1 (ICC1) and rankability, we describe between-provider variability for each quality indicator using empirical Bayes estimate-based caterpillar plots. To assess reliability, we used intraclass correlation 2 (ICC2). Overall, ICC1 values were high, ranging from 0.068 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.047–0.086) for polypharmacy to 0.396 (95% CI 0.297–0.474) for physical restraints, with quality indicator caterpillar plots showing sufficient between-provider variability. However, testing for rankability produced mixed results, with low figures for two indicators (0.144 for polypharmacy; 0.471 for self-reported pain) and moderate to high figures for the four others (from 0.692 for observed pain to 0.976 for physical restraints). High ICC2 figures, ranging from 0.896 (95% CI 0.852–0.917) (self-reported pain) to 0.990 (95% CI 0.985–0.993) (physical restraints), indicated good reliability for all six quality indicators. Intraclass correlations and rankability can be used to assess nursing home quality indicators’ between-provider variability and reliability. The six selected quality indicators reliably distinguish care differences between nursing homes and can be recommended for use, although the variability of two—polypharmacy and self-reported pain—is substantially chance-driven, limiting their utility.
Suggested Citation
Lauriane Favez & Franziska Zúñiga & Narayan Sharma & Catherine Blatter & Michael Simon, 2020.
"Assessing Nursing Homes Quality Indicators’ between-Provider Variability and Reliability: A Cross-Sectional Study Using ICCs and Rankability,"
IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-15, December.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:24:p:9249-:d:459999
Download full text from publisher
Citations
Citations are extracted by the
CitEc Project, subscribe to its
RSS feed for this item.
Cited by:
- Jinrong Hu & Yuyuan Zhang & Le Wang & Victor Shi, 2022.
"An Evaluation Index System of Basic Elderly Care Services Based on the Perspective of Accessibility,"
IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-16, April.
- Reena Devi & Adam Gordon & Tom Dening, 2022.
"Enhancing the Quality of Care in Long-Term Care Settings,"
IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-3, January.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:24:p:9249-:d:459999. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.