I’ve posted before about the Green House model for nursing facilities.  The research team that had previously done some work in this area (linked to in the post above) has now published another study under the auspices of the Commonwealth Fund.  The current longitudinal study of the Green House model yielded the following conclusions:

  • Green House residents reported significantly higher satisfaction with their facility as a place to live than did residents of the other two traditional nursing homes, and better scores on many dimensions of self-reported quality of life.
  • In terms of care and health outcomes, Green House residents experienced lower rates of depression, bed rest, reduced activ-ity, and decline in functional abilities, but did have higher rates of incontinence than did one of the comparison settings.
  • Green House residents reported significantly higher scores on emotional well-being indicators.

Here’s hoping that with or without the assistance of RWJF (described in the post linked to above) or other non-direct-nursing-facility-care funding sources the Green House model can take hold and spread across more and more facilities.  The limiting factor (aside from cash) is the fact that many nursing facility residents are either short-stay residents, or are not well enough, to take advantage of, and contribute to, the Green House model of care.  What do we do for such other residents?

David Harlow