Risk factors for pneumonia and influenza hospitalizations in long-term care facility residents: a retrospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Older adults who reside in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are at particularly high risk for infection, morbidity and mortality from pneumonia and influenza (P&I) compared to individuals of younger age and those living outside institutional settings. The risk factors for P&I hospitalizations that are specific to LTCFs remain poorly understood. Our objective was to evaluate the incidence of P&I hospitalization and associated person- and facility-level factors among post-acute (short-stay) and long-term (long-stay) care residents residing in LTCFs from 2013 to 2015. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we used Medicare administrative claims linked to Minimum Data Set and LTCF-level data to identify short-stay (< 100 days, index = admission date) and long-stay (100+ days, index = day 100) residents who were followed from the index date until the first of hospitalization, LTCF discharge, Medicare disenrollment, or death. We measured incidence rates (IRs) for P&I hospitalization per 100,000 person-days, and estimated associations with baseline demographics, geriatric syndromes, clinical characteristics, and medication use using Cox regression models. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 1,118,054 short-stay and 593,443 long-stay residents. The crude 30-day IRs (95% CI) of hospitalizations with P&I in the principal position were 26.0 (25.4, 26.6) and 34.5 (33.6, 35.4) among short- and long-stay residents, respectively. The variables associated with P&I varied between short and long-stay residents, and common risk factors included: advanced age (85+ years), admission from an acute hospital, select cardiovascular and respiratory conditions, impaired functional status, and receipt of antibiotics or Beers criteria medications. Facility staffing and care quality measures were important risk factors among long-stay residents but not in short-stay residents. CONCLUSIONS: Short-stay residents had lower crude 30- and 90-day incidence rates of P&I hospitalizations than long-stay LTCF residents. Differences in risk factors for P&I between short- and long-stay populations suggest the importance of considering distinct profiles of post-acute and long-term care residents in infection prevention and control strategies in LTCFs. These findings can help clinicians target interventions to subgroups of LTCF residents at highest P&I risk.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".