Table 5.
Results from a mixed effect logistic regression model on the likelihood of ASB – using fidelity to treatment as a covariate
| Odds ratio | 95 % CI | P | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fixed Effect | |||
| Fidelity | 1.14 | 0.51–2.56 | 0.75 |
| Age | |||
| ≤75 vs 86+ | 1.09 | 0.69–1.73 | 0.74 |
| 76–85 vs 86+ | 0.96 | 0.64–1.44 | 0.84 |
| Female | 0.83 | 0.54–1.29 | 0.40 |
| White | 1.13 | 0.64–2.00 | 0.67 |
| Urinary incontinence a | |||
| Always incontinent vs continent | 1.96 | 1.05–3.61 | 0.03 |
| Frequently incontinent vs continent | 1.34 | 0.77–2.35 | 0.30 |
| Occasionally incontinent vs continent | 1.13 | 0.63–2.03 | 0.69 |
| Catheterized a | 1.07 | 0.50–2.29 | 0.86 |
| ADL hierarchy (0–6) | 1.08 | 0.90–1.28 | 0.40 |
| Ability to communicate (0–3) | 1.26 | 1.00–1.60 | 0.05 |
| Post vs Pre | 1.05 | 0.70–1.60 | 0.81 |
| Post*fidelity b | 0.35 | 0.16–0.76 | 0.01 |
| Random Effect | Variance | St. Error | |
| Home | 0.2110 | 0.1269 |
aDuring the study time period the MDS 3.0 was implemented. During implementation nursing homes were given leeway in documenting status. This resulted in a high number of missing observations for variables such as urinary incontinence and presence of catheter. Sensitivity analyses were performed to determine the overall effect on the models by excluding this variable; the results remained robust
bThis interaction term reflects the difference in changes from pre to post comparing fidelity group to the non-fidelity group, so it is our main interest