John N. Morris

Population ageing, the emergence of chronic illness, and the shift away from institutional care challenge conventional approaches to assessment systems which traditionally are problem and setting specific.

Background: The objective of this study was to assess the responsiveness of the Minimum Data Set Activities of Daily Living (MDS-ADL) Scale to change over time by examining the change in physical function in adults with moderate to severe dementia with no comorbid illness who had been resident in a nursing home for over 90 days. Methods: Longitudinal data were collected on nursing home residents with moderate (n = 7001) or severe (n = 4616) dementia in one US state from the US national Minimum Data Set (MDS). Severity of dementia was determined by the MDS Cognitive Performance Scale (CPS). Physical function was assessed by summing the seven items (bed mobility, transfer, locomotion, dressing, eating, toilet use, personal hygiene) on the MDS activities of daily living (ADL) Long Form scale. Mean change over time of MDS-ADL scores were estimated at three and six months for residents with moderate (CPS score of 3) and severe (CPS score of 4 or 5) dementia. Results: Physical function in residents with moderate cognitive impairment deteriorated over six months by an average of 1.78 points on the MDS-ADL Long Form scale, while those with severe cognitive impairment declined by an average of 1.70 points. Approximately one quarter of residents in both groups showed some improvement in physical function over the six month period. Residents with moderate cognitive impairment experienced the greatest deterioration in early-loss and mid-loss ADL items (personal hygiene, dressing, toilet use) and residents with severe cognitive impairment showed the greatest deterioration in activities related to eating, a late loss ADL. Conclusion: The MDS-ADL Long Form scale detected clinically meaningful change in physical function in a large cohort of long-stay nursing home residents with moderate to severe dementia, supporting its use as a research tool in future studies.

Background: The objective of this study was to examine the Minimum Data Set (MDS) and Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) as measures of depression among nursing home residents. Methods: The data for this study were baseline, pre-intervention assessment data from a research study involving nine nursing homes and 704 residents in Massachusetts. Trained research nurses assessed residents using the MDS and the GDS 15-item version. Demographic, psychiatric, and cognitive data were obtained using the MDS. Level of depression was operationalized as: (1) a sum of the MDS Depression items; (2) the MDS Depression Rating Scale; (3) the 15-item GDS; and (4) the five-item GDS. We compared missing data, floor effects, means, internal consistency reliability, scale score correlation, and ability to identify residents with conspicuous depression (chart diagnosis or use of antidepressant) across cognitive impairment strata. Results: The GDS and MDS Depression scales were uncorrelated. Nevertheless, both MDS and GDS measures demonstrated adequate internal consistency reliability. The MDS suggested greater depression among those with cognitive impairment, whereas the GDS suggested a more severe depression among those with better cognitive functioning. The GDS was limited by missing data; the DRS by a larger floor effect. The DRS was more strongly correlated with conspicuous depression, but only among those with cognitive impairment. Conclusions: The MDS Depression items and GDS identify different elements of depression. This may be due to differences in the manifest symptom content and/or the self-report nature of the GDS versus the observer-rated MDS. Our findings suggest that the GDS and the MDS are not interchangeable measures of depression.

This study assessed the validity of standardized assessment data collected with the Minimum Data Set (MDS) in postacute care settings and used to create performance indicators. Our results show that performance indicators derived from information collected with the MDS demonstrate convergent validity with data collected with other research or standardized assessment instruments. Results were most favorable for areas of physical functioning, cognitive and communicative functioning, and clinical complexity. Results were encouraging for affective functioning, but further research and development in this area is clearly needed. There is a pressing need for better quality data on performance measurement in the post-acute environment, given the rapid growth in the volume of services and expenditures for such care and the associated need to ensure that patients receive the most appropriate care possible.

In the US, Quality Indicators (QI's) profiling and comparing the performance of hospitals, health plans, nursing homes and physicians are routinely published for consumer review. We report the results of the largest study of inter-rater reliability done on nursing home assessments which generate the data used to derive publicly reported nursing home quality indicators. We sampled nursing homes in 6 states, selecting up to 30 residents per facility who were observed and assessed by research nurses on 100 clinical assessment elements contained in the Minimum Data Set (MDS) and compared these with the most recent assessment in the record done by facility nurses. Kappa statistics were generated for all data items and derived for 22 QI's over the entire sample and for each facility. Finally, facilities with many QI's with poor Kappa levels were compared to those with many QI's with excellent Kappa levels on selected characteristics. A total of 462 facilities in 6 states were approached and 219 agreed to participate, yielding a response rate of 47.4%. A total of 5758 residents were included in the inter-rater reliability analyses, around 27.5 per facility. Patients resembled the traditional nursing home resident, only 43.9% were continent of urine and only 25.2% were rated as likely to be discharged within the next 30 days. Results of resident level comparative analyses reveal high inter-rater reliability levels (most items >.75). Using the research nurses as the "gold standard", we compared composite quality indicators based on their ratings with those based on facility nurses. All but two QI's have adequate Kappa levels and 4 QI's have average Kappa values in excess of .80. We found that 16% of participating facilities performed poorly (Kappa <.4) on more than 6 of the 22 QI's while 18% of facilities performed well (Kappa >.75) on 12 or more QI's. No facility characteristics were related to reliability of the data on which Qis are based. While a few QI's being used for public reporting have limited reliability as measured in US nursing homes today, the vast majority of QI's are measured reliably across the majority of nursing facilities. Although information about the average facility is reliable, how the public can identify those facilities whose data can be trusted and whose cannot remains a challenge.