COVID-19 exposures and infection control among home care agencies
Open accessAbstract
Background and objectives Home care agencies (HCAs) provide caregivers, who perform an important role in maintaining the health and well-being of older adults. However, during the COVID-19 pandemic, paid caregivers had the potential to inadvertently spread COVID-19. We sought to characterize the effects of COVID-19 on HCAs and examine HCAs' infection prevention and control (IPC) policies.Research design and methods This was a qualitative analysis of data collected from a national survey of HCAs. Surveys were e-mailed to members of a national HCA association on March 18, 2020. Questions included queries on demographics, COVID-19 exposures, effects of COVID-19, and IPC protocols.Results 1204 HCAs responded with an average census of 96.2 (5-2800) patients daily. Across 36 states, 238 HCAs reported COVID-19 cases or exposures among caregivers. HCAs experienced challenges related to changing patient needs (e.g. decreased caregiver requests), staffing shortages (e.g., fear of COVID-19, inability to train caregivers), and management issues (e.g., inability to obtain supplies). ICP protocols varied in how HCAs followed recommended guidelines, responded to COVID-19 exposures, performed infection surveillance, and implemented precautions. Additionally, HCAs had varying policies for caregiver PTO.Conclusions HCAs experienced COVID-19 exposures and/or cases early in the pandemic. HCAs identified staffing and PPE shortages, and lack of IPC guidance as challenges. Although caregivers are providing essential care for millions of older adults, they have been largely absent from federal, state, and health system strategies for mitigating the spread of COVID-19. Future policies must include HCAs and their caregivers to optimize care for older adults.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 17 · Cited by 53
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Buck J.I. The roles of and competency requirements for paraprofessionals Harris M. Ed.), Handbook of home health care administration 6th ed. 2017 Jones & Bartlett Learning. Burlington, MA
- Authors
- Rowe, T. A., Patel, M., O’Conor, R., McMackin, S., Hoak, V., & Lindquist, L. A.
- Affiliations
- Northwestern University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Rowe, Theresa A.
- Venue
- Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-11
- Volume
- 91
- Pages
- 104214
- ISSN
- 0167-4943 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC7390796
- OpenAlex
- W3045550891
- Cited by
- 53
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 1.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Infection Control in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Infection Control and Ventilation
- Keywords
- COVID-19 pandemic, home care agencies, infection control, professional caregivers, labor shortage, personal protective equipment shortage, infection surveillance, older adults, long-term care
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review