Rhodes A, Novak AC, Caprio TV, Zanjani F, Marrs S, Gendron T, Waters L.
Special Focus Facilities vs Special Focus Facility Candidates: What is the Difference?
J Am Med Dir Assoc 2024;
25:390-395. [PMID:
37951582 DOI:
10.1016/j.jamda.2023.10.005]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2023] [Revised: 09/29/2023] [Accepted: 10/04/2023] [Indexed: 11/14/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES
This study compares Special Focus Facilities (SFFs) and Special Focus Facility Candidate Facilities (SFFcs) on organizational traits and quality outcomes to evaluate the effectiveness of the SFF program as a quality improvement intervention and inform potential areas for program reform.
DESIGN
This is a retrospective analysis.
SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS
Using data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services archives for 2020, this retrospective study analyzed 247 nursing facilities (50 SFFs and 197 SFFcs).
METHODS
Variables of interest were staffing, profit status, facility size, certification status, number of residents, and complaint citations: t tests, χ2, Fisher's Exact test, and multivariate analysis of variance were used to compare the 2 groups.
RESULTS
From an organizational perspective, SFFs and SFFcs are minimally different. Both groups had similar facility size, profit status, hospital affiliation, continuing care retirement community status, and Medicare/Medicaid certification. Large and for-profit facilities were overrepresented in both groups. SFFs and SFFcs exhibited statistical differences in the number of complaint deficiencies. The groups had no significant difference in staffing levels, category, severity of complaints, or incident reports.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATION
The study's findings suggest that the SFF program, while resource-intensive, is minimally impactful. The similarities between SFFs and SFFcs raise questions about the program's effectiveness in improving nursing facility care. Previous adjustments to the program may not have successfully achieved the desired quality improvements. This research highlights the need to further evaluate the SFF program's effectiveness as a quality improvement intervention. It also underscores the importance of addressing biases and subjectivity in state survey agency processes, which affect the enrollment of nursing facilities. The study underscores the flaws within the nursing home monitoring system and the 5-star quality rating system, especially when comparing small samples between states.
Collapse