Search

PurposeIn recent years, consumers today recognise organic foods as high-quality products which can benefit them in various aspects. The tendency to switch consumption behaviours from conventional to ecological food products or organic food has largely been due to the claims that organic crops are grown in eco-friendly and sustainable environments. Thus, the study highlighted unique results on young consumers' purchasing intentions from a new perspective. The paper aims to investigate the factors influencing consumers' purchase decision towards organic food, particularly amongst Generation Y consumers.Design/methodology/approachThe underlying fuzzy set theory is employed to handle the fuzziness of consumers' perceptions since the attributes are usually expressed in linguistic preferences. Overall, the study focussed on five important aspects – health consciousness, environmental concern, social influencing and ethical concern – that also include twenty criteria that had been identified and introduced after a thorough review of related literature.FindingsThe results reveal that the most important criteria in the selected firm are environment protection, chemical instrument, buying attitude and animal testing. In comparison, the cause group includes criteria such as environment protection, natural food and support for training programmes, whilst the effect group includes production practices, monitoring protections and ethically produced food.Research limitations/implicationsThe sample collection from the study focussed on Generation Y consumers who consume organic food in Malaysia. This could lead to the limitation towards external generalisability. The study will provide numerous advantages to the communities. The policy maker should develop a proper marketing strategy to promote organic food as food that is healthier, better in nutrition and safer for society.Originality/valueUtilising fuzzy decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) in analysing the fuzziness of consumers' perceptions towards consumers' purchase decision can be expected to expand the breadth of knowledge to both academic and practical.

PurposeThis paper gives executives new perspective on how well employee learning is being managed in their small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).Design/methodology/approachThe study adopted a rigorous mixed-method approach through questionnaires and semi-structured interviews, from categorizing a sample of Hong Kong SMEs into appropriate growth stages (inception, high-growth or maturity) to exploring their respective learning practices in their workplaces.FindingsThe most popular learning practices in SMEs at each growth stage are compared accordingly with the most/least important learning practices perceived by their employees from another set of results (Tam and Gray, 2021). Differences or mismatches are noted for reporting.Research limitations/implicationsAdditional samples of SMEs, including those in other countries, are encouraged to broaden the horizon.Practical implicationsThe findings help SME executives understand the dynamics of employee learning in their workplaces across growth stages. Knowing what learning practices are offered by the firm and what learning practices are valued by the employee will practically improve the firm’s training/learning strategies to benefit organizational development.Originality/valueIt is among the first studies examining SME learning with firm growth as well as sorting the learning practices into some traceable patterns for managerial convenience.

PurposeThis study explores how virtual learners perceive the use of humor in instructor-developed videos and their other factors for learning effectiveness in an online course.Design/methodology/approachThe study adopted a set of qualitative methods flowing from lesson study, to pilot study, to self-declaration of a learning style, to semi-structured interviews. Through the process, 142 undergraduate business students from the same online course, of different learning styles, discussed their perspectives on the instructor's use of humor and their learning preferences in online situations. Thematic analysis was performed.FindingsFirst, humor is deemed harmless, but its value is perceived at different degrees among the four styles of adult learners for their benefit of learning motivation toward an online course. Second, four common themes that respond to learning effectiveness online are addressed.Research limitations/implicationsSimilar studies with additional samples, including students in other countries, in different age groups and/or on different online courses, are encouraged to strengthen the current findings.Practical implicationsThe results provide evidence to school administrators, course developers and instructors on the importance of using a diverse pedagogy in online education. To motivate virtual learners, being humorous from instructors proves insufficient but developing the course with all respective features for different learners' styles is a clue.Originality/valueIt is among the first studies contextualizing a differential relationship between humor and learners' styles as well as evaluating the effectiveness of an online course from the learning-style standpoint.

Purpose This paper aims to provide owner/managers with access to an evidence-based study for the purpose of improving practice in performance measurement (PM) in their small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Design/methodology/approach As a qualitative case study, it adopted semi-structured interviews to explore the best practices in PM from 32 SMEs in Malaysia. The interviewees were the owner/manager, the supervisor and/or the person who is responsible for human resources in the firm. Thematic analysis was conducted. Findings First, it should be no surprise, as the study echoes previous research, that the traditional, complex PM systems are not functionally suitable for most SMEs. Second, the study identifies five common capabilities (5Cs) in human capital that these SMEs require in their PM practice, all of which are claimed to contribute critically to SME success and sustainability. Research limitations/implications While qualitative studies can obtain in-depth results, it is encouraged to continue similar research with additional samples for comparison, including quantitative studies and SMEs in other countries. Practical implications The findings help SME owners/managers benchmark their current practices in PM and improve toward what peer firms have been doing well to benefit organizational development in a feasible tone. Originality/value This research informs SME practitioners of the 5Cs mechanism found to be effective for long-term organizational survival – including during unprecedented times such as an economic downturn or a pandemic.

PurposeThis study examines employees' learning preferences in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) at different life-cycle stages.Design/methodology/approachThe study has two phases. Phase I classified a sample of 30 Hong Kong SMEs into three different life-cycle stages (inception, high growth or maturity). Phase II then explored/compared their employees' learning practices in terms of importance using a mixed-method design through an online learning questionnaire followed by face-to-face semi-structured interviews.FindingsBased on a list of 32 learning practices common to SME workplaces, the study identified how SME employees perceive the importance of a learning practice. The top 5 and the bottom 5 learning practices in SMEs across life-cycle stages are presented to promote best interests for SME executives.Research limitations/implicationsWhile SME learning is highly varied, this study sheds light on some traceable context about it as an SME grows. Similar studies with additional SMEs, including SMEs in other locations, are encouraged to strengthen the findings.Practical implicationsThe findings help SME executives understand what learning practices are most important (or least important) for their employees, given the life-cycle stage of the firm. Aligning a business with employees' learning preferences in a timely fashion is a managerial decision to be made for driving organizational effectiveness.Originality/valueIt is among the first studies connecting employee learning in SMEs and organizational life cycle to address a critical but missing inquiry.

The CLEAR trial demonstrated that a multi-site body decolonization regimen reduced post-discharge infection and hospitalization in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) carriers. This report describes decolonization efficacy in clearing site-specific MRSA colonization during the trial.We performed a large, multi-center, randomized clinical trial of MRSA decolonization among adult patients after hospital discharge with MRSA infection or colonization. Participants were randomized 1:1 to either MRSA prevention education or education plus decolonization with 4% topical chlorhexidine daily, 0.12% oral chlorhexidine rinse twice daily, and 2% nasal mupirocin twice daily. The intervention was given for five consecutive days twice monthly. Participants were swabbed in the nares, throat, axilla/groin, and wound (if applicable) at baseline, 1, 3, 6, and 9 months after randomization. The primary outcomes of this report are follow-up colonization differences between groups.Among 2,121 participants, 1,058 were randomized to the decolonization group. By one month, MRSA colonization was lower in the decolonization group compared to the education only group (OR = 0.44 [95% Confidence Interval 0.36-0.54, p≤0.001). Similar magnitude of reduction was seen in the nares (OR = 0.34 [0.27-0.42], p 0.001) throat (OR = 0.55 [0.42-0.73], p 0.001), and axilla/groin (OR = 0.57 [0.43-0.75], p 0.001). These differences persisted through month 9 except at the wound site, which had a relatively small sample size. Higher regimen adherence was associated with lower MRSA colonization (p≤0.01).In a randomized clinical trial, a repeated post-discharge decolonization regimen for MRSA carriers reduced MRSA colonization overall and at multiple body sites. Higher treatment adherence was associated with greater reductions in MRSA colonization.

Background Nursing home (NH) residents are at high infection and hospital readmission risk. Colonization with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) is common. In ICU and post-hospital discharge settings, decolonization has reduced infection rates. However, the effectiveness of this strategy in NHs is unclear. Methods We performed a cluster randomized trial of 1:1 universal decolonization (decol) vs standard of care bathing (control) in 28 California NHs. After an 18 month baseline evaluation of hospitalization rates due to infection and MDRO prevalence, NHs were randomized to decol or control. Decol consisted of 1) chlorhexidine bathing; 2) nasal povidone iodine bid on admission x 5d and then M-F biweekly x 18 mo. Primary outcome was the probability that a transfer to a hospital was due to infection. Secondary outcome was the probability that a NH discharge was to a hospital. Results Four of 28 NHs dropped from the trial (3 decol, 1 control). Mean facility baseline of hospital transfers due to infection was 58% and 57% in the control and decol groups. In the intervention period, proportions were 57% and 48% in the control and decol groups. When accounting for clustering within NHs, hospital transfers due to infection had an OR of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.82-1.02) in the control group and an OR of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.56-0.95) in the decol group when comparing intervention to baseline period. For the primary outcome, decol had a 18% greater impact v. control (P=0.005, Fig. A). Baseline proportion of NH discharges due to hospitalization was 37% and 39% in the control and decol groups. In the intervention period, proportions were 36% and 33%. When accounting for clustering within NHs, the proportion of discharges due to hospitalization had an OR of 1.14 (95% CI: 1.06-1.22) in the control group and 0.91 (CI: 0.77-1.07) in the decol group when comparing the intervention period to the baseline period. For the secondary outcome, decol had a 23% greater impact v. control (P< 0.0001, Fig. B). In this figure, each nursing home is represented by a circle. The size of the circle represents the amount of contributed patient days to the trial. The groups represent “as randomized” categories. Panel A) compares the probability that a transfer to a hospital was due to infection; panel B) compares the probability that a nursing home discharge was to a hospital. The y-axis represents the odds ratio of these probabilities comparing the baseline to the intervention period. The p values represent the significance of the difference between groups (the trial effect). Conclusion Universal NH decolonization with chlorhexidine and nasal iodophor significantly reduced the proportion of transfers to hospitals due to infection and discharges due to hospitalization. Our findings suggest that NH decolonization reduces serious infections and can decrease morbidity in this vulnerable population. Disclosures Loren G. Miller, MD, MPH, Medline (Grant/Research Support, Other Financial or Material Support, Contributed product) Stryker (Other Financial or Material Support, Contributed product) Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Contributed product) James A. McKinnell, MD, Medline (Grant/Research Support) Raveena Singh, MA, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Gabrielle Gussin, MS, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Ken Kleinman, PhD, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic products) Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic products) Raheeb Saavedra, AS, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Lauren Heim, MPH, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted clinical trials and studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic product) Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted clinical trials and studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic product) Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted clinical trials and studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic product) Shruti K. Gohil, MD, MPH, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Co-Investigator in studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Molnycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Co-Investigator in studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Co-Investigator in studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Susan S. Huang, MD, MPH, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)

Introduction Effective strategies to recruit older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) into nonpharmacological intervention trials are lacking. Methods Recruitment for EXERT, a multisite randomized controlled 18-month trial examining the effects of aerobic exercise on cognitive trajectory in adults with amnestic MCI, involved a diverse portfolio of strategies to enroll 296 participants. Results Recruitment occurred September 2016 through March 2020 and was initially slow. After mass mailings of 490,323 age- and geo-targeted infographic postcards and brochures, recruitment rates increased substantially, peaking at 16 randomizations/month in early 2020. Mass mailings accounted for 52% of randomized participants, whereas 25% were recruited from memory clinic rosters, electronic health records, and national and local registries. Other sources included news broadcasts, public service announcements (PSA), local advertising, and community presentations. Discussion Age- and geo-targeted mass mailing of infographic materials was the most effective approach in recruiting older adults with amnestic MCI into an 18-month exercise trial.

Author(s): McKinnell, James A; Singh, Raveena D; Miller, Loren G; Kleinman, Ken; Gussin, Gabrielle; He, Jiayi; Saavedra, Raheeb; Dutciuc, Tabitha D; Estevez, Marlene; Chang, Justin; Heim, Lauren; Yamaguchi, Stacey; Custodio, Harold; Gohil, Shruti K; Park, Steven; Tam, Steven; Robinson, Philip A; Tjoa, Thomas; Nguyen, Jenny; Evans, Kaye D; Bittencourt, Cassiana E; Lee, Bruce Y; Mueller, Leslie E; Bartsch, Sarah M; Jernigan, John A; Slayton, Rachel B; Stone, Nimalie D; Zahn, Matthew; Mor, Vincent; McConeghy, Kevin; Baier, Rosa R; Janssen, Lynn; O'Donnell, Kathleen; Weinstein, Robert A; Hayden, Mary K; Coady, Micaela H; Bhattarai, Megha; Peterson, Ellena M; Huang, Susan S | Abstract: BackgroundMultidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) spread between hospitals, nursing homes (NHs), and long-term acute care facilities (LTACs) via patient transfers. The Shared Healthcare Intervention to Eliminate Life-threatening Dissemination of MDROs in Orange County is a regional public health collaborative involving decolonization at 38 healthcare facilities selected based on their high degree of patient sharing. We report baseline MDRO prevalence in 21 NHs/LTACs.MethodsA random sample of 50 adults for 21 NHs/LTACs (18 NHs, 3 LTACs) were screened for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp. (VRE), extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing organisms (ESBL), and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) using nares, skin (axilla/groin), and peri-rectal swabs. Facility and resident characteristics associated with MDRO carriage were assessed using multivariable models clustering by person and facility.ResultsPrevalence of MDROs was 65% in NHs and 80% in LTACs. The most common MDROs in NHs were MRSA (42%) and ESBL (34%); in LTACs they were VRE (55%) and ESBL (38%). CRE prevalence was higher in facilities that manage ventilated LTAC patients and NH residents (8% vs l1%, P l .001). MDRO status was known for 18% of NH residents and 49% of LTAC patients. MDRO-colonized adults commonly harbored additional MDROs (54% MDRO+ NH residents and 62% MDRO+ LTACs patients). History of MRSA (odds ratio [OR] = 1.7; confidence interval [CI]: 1.2, 2.4; P = .004), VRE (OR = 2.1; CI: 1.2, 3.8; P = .01), ESBL (OR = 1.6; CI: 1.1, 2.3; P = .03), and diabetes (OR = 1.3; CI: 1.0, 1.7; P = .03) were associated with any MDRO carriage.ConclusionsThe majority of NH residents and LTAC patients harbor MDROs. MDRO status is frequently unknown to the facility. The high MDRO prevalence highlights the need for prevention efforts in NHs/LTACs as part of regional efforts to control MDRO spread.

Objective Determine the prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp. (VRE), extended-spectrum beta-lactamase producing organisms (ESBLs), and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) among residents and in the environment of nursing homes (NHs). Design Point prevalence sampling of residents and environmental sampling of high-touch objects in resident rooms and common areas. Setting Twenty-eight NHs in Southern California from 2016 to 2017. Participants NH participants in Project PROTECT, a cluster-randomized trial of enhanced bathing and decolonization vs routine care. Methods Fifty residents were randomly sampled per NH. Twenty objects were sampled, including 5 common room objects plus 5 objects in each of 3 rooms (ambulatory, total care, and dementia care residents). Results A total of 2797 swabs were obtained from 1400 residents in 28 NHs. Median prevalence of multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) carriage per NH was 50% (range: 24%-70%). Median prevalence of specific MDROs were as follows: MRSA, 36% (range: 20%-54%); ESBL, 16% (range: 2%-34%); VRE, 5% (range: 0%-30%); and CRE, 0% (range: 0%-8%). A median of 45% of residents (range: 24%-67%) harbored an MDRO without a known MDRO history. Environmental MDRO contamination was found in 74% of resident rooms and 93% of common areas. Conclusions and Implications In more than half of the NHs, more than 50% of residents were colonized with MDROs of clinical and public health significance, most commonly MRSA and ESBL. Additionally, the vast majority of resident rooms and common areas were MDRO contaminated. The unknown submerged portion of the iceberg of MDRO carriers in NHs may warrant changes to infection prevention and control practices, particularly high-fidelity adoption of universal strategies such as hand hygiene, environmental cleaning, and decolonization.

Nursing home residents are at risk for acquiring and transmitting MDROs. A serial point-prevalence study of 605 residents in 3 facilities using random sampling found MDRO colonization in 45% of residents: methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA, 26%); extended-spectrum β-lactamase–producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL, 17%); vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp. (VRE, 16%); carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE, 1%). MDRO colonization was associated with history of MDRO, care needs, incontinence, and catheters.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;1485–1488

Purpose This article reveals a managerial issue that multinational corporations (MNCs) in China are at a strategic crossroad where their employees are competing with the same sources of guanxi networks for different business deals simultaneously. Design/methodology/approach Triggered by a real company case in China and guided by a literature review on business guanxi, the author bridged them into a specific inquiry, as little was known and should be further examined. Findings The author identified a paradoxical/applied scenario in MNCs between the use of guanxi and overall firm performance damaged by overusing it. Research limitations/implications Empirical studies are deemed necessary to seek more understanding between the role of guanxi and MNCs in China. Practical implications Guanxi is not a straightforward guarantee of business achievements in China. Management should note the influence of its actors – own employees – who can potentially diminish the positive returns of guanxi on overall firm’s achievements because of non-obvious interplays among employees and “contacts” on the overlapping guanxi networks. The larger the organisation, the higher the risk is. Originality/value This article proposes a new line of thoughts for practitioners about the effect of business guanxi on overall firm performance and serves as a starting point for academics to explore empirical research. The concept of overlapping guanxi networks is institutionalised and discussed. A three-step rule is also suggested for MNCs as a basic solution.

Background The prevalence of MDROs in nursing homes (NH) is much higher than that of hospitals. Decolonization to reduce the reservoir of MDRO carriage in NH residents may be a strategy to address MDRO spread within and among healthcare facilities. Methods PROTECT is an 18-month cluster randomized trial of 1:1 universal decolonization vs. routine care in 28 NHs in California. Decolonization consists of chlorhexidine (CHG) bathing plus twice daily nasal iodophor on admission and Monday–Friday biweekly. We assessed pre- vs. post-intervention MDRO prevalence by sampling 50 randomly selected residents at each NH as an outcome unrelated to the trial’s primary intent (infection, hospitalization reduction). NH residents had nasal swabs cultured for methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), and skin (axilla/groin) swabs taken for MRSA, vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE), extended-spectrum β-lactamase producers (ESBL), and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE). Generalized linear mixed models (GLM) assessed the difference in differences of MDRO prevalence using an arm by period interaction term, clustering by NH. Results Four NHs dropped from the trial. Among the 24 NHs that remained, MDRO colonization at baseline was 49.4% and 47.5% of residents in control (N = 650) vs. decolonization (N = 550) NHs, with no difference in MRSA, VRE, ESBL, and CRE (Table 1). Among remaining NHs, decolonization was associated with 28.8% raw decrease in MDRO prevalence in decolonization sites (GLM OR = 0.51, P < 0.001), 24.3% raw decrease in MRSA (OR = 0.66, P = 0.03), 61.0% raw decrease in VRE (OR = 0.17, P < 0.001), and 51.9% raw decrease in ESBL (OR = 0.40, P < 0.001). CRE increased, but numbers were small (Control arm: 10 in baseline, 4 in intervention; intervention arm: 1 in baseline, 2 in intervention, P = NS). Conclusion Universal NH decolonization with CHG bathing and nasal iodophor resulted in a marked decrease in Gram-positive and Gram-negative MDRO prevalence. This decrease may lower MDRO acquisition, infection, and antibiotic use within NHs, as well as regional MDRO spread to other healthcare facilities. Disclosures All Authors: No reported Disclosures.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore how employees in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) practise and view workplace learning at three different life-cycle stages. Design/methodology/approach – It is a qualitative study using a sample of 30 Hong Kong SMEs classified into inception, high-growth or maturity stage, from which firms in each stage were randomly selected and interviewed until data saturation was reached. Snowball sampling was adopted during interviews and data were examined through thematic analysis. Findings – Consistent themes (patterns) from 134 semi-structured interviews are identified, addressing both similarities and differences in the nature of the practice of workplace learning in SMEs between life-cycle stages. Research limitations/implications – More similar comparative studies in other parts of the world, including quantitative surveys on larger samples, with either SMEs or multinational corporations, are encouraged to enrich the current findings. Practical implications – If organisational growth is a priority, SME owner/managers should support employees’ work and learning in a timely fashion. As the study finds, individual learning and inter-organisational learning are considered “a must to have” for employees, regardless of which stage the firm is at. When an SME enters high-growth, however, more opportunities for group learning are particularly beneficial. For mature SMEs, it is essential for learning to move towards systemisation and include a professional development component to meet employees’ career expectations, not just their work demands. Originality/value – The results advance the body of knowledge in SME learning from the life-cycle perspective. As one of the first studies in bridging these areas, it brings new implications to academic researchers and SME practitioners.

Background MDROs can spread between hospitals, nursing homes (NH), and long-term acute care facilities (LTACs) via shared patients. SHIELD OC is a regional decolonization collaborative involving 38 of 104 countywide adult facilities identified by their high degree of direct and indirect patient sharing with one another. We report baseline MDRO prevalence in these facilities. Methods Adult patients in 38 facilities (17 hospitals, 18 NHs, 3 LTACs) underwent point-prevalence screening between September 2016–April 2017 for MRSA, VRE, ESBL, and CRE using nares, skin (axilla/groin), and peri-rectal swabs. In NHs and LTACs, residents were randomly selected until 50 sets of swabs were obtained. Swabbing in hospitals involved all patients in contact precautions. An additional set of swabs were also performed for all LTAC admissions from November 2016–February 2017. Results The overall prevalence of any MDRO among patients was 64% (44%–88%) in NHs, 80% (range 72%–86%) in LTACs, and 64% (54–84%) in hospitals (contact precaution patients) (Table 1). Only 25%, 64%, and 81% of patients were already known to harbor an MDRO in NHs, LTACs, and hospitals, respectively. Known MDRO patients also harbored another MDRO 49%, 63%, and 34% of the time for NHs, LTACs, and hospitals, respectively. In LTACs, MDRO point prevalence was 38% higher than the usual admission prevalence (65% higher for MRSA, 34% higher for VRE, 95% higher for ESBL, and 50% higher for CRE). Conclusion MDRO carriage in highly inter-connected NHs and LTACs was widespread, rivaling that found in hospitalized patients on contact precautions. MRSA, VRE, and ESBL carriage far outnumbered CRE carriage. A history of MDRO was insensitive for identifying MDRO carriers, and many patients carried multiple MDROs. The extensive MDRO burden and transmission in long-term care settings suggests that regional MDRO prevention efforts must include MDRO control in long-term care facilities. Disclosures R. D. Singh, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; J. A. McKinnell, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; L. G. Miller, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; K. Kleinman, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; L. Heim, Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; T. D. Dutciuc, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; M. Estevez, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; G. Gussin, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; L’Oreal: Consultant, Consulting fee; J. Chang, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; E. M. Peterson, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; B. Y. Lee, GSK: Consultant, Consulting fee; R. A. Weinstein, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; OpGen Company: Study support, Provided services at no charge; M. K. Hayden, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Sage is contributing product to healthcare facilities participating in a regional collaborative on which I am a co-investigator. Neither I nor my hospital receive product.; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Research support; CDC: Grant Investigator and Receipt of contributed product, Research grant; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; OpGen Company: Study support, Provided services at no charge for studies; S. K. Gohil, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. Park, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. Tam, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; R. Saavedra, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. Yamaguchi, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; H. Custodio, Xttrium Laboratories: Study coordination, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Study coordination, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Study coordination, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; J. Nguyen, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; T. Tjoa, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; J. He, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; M. H. Coady, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; R. Platt, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting clinical studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting clinical studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting clinical studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product; receive research funds from Clorox, but Clorox has no role in the design; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. S. Huang, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product

Background The majority of healthcare-associated infections due to MDROs occur in the post-discharge setting. Understanding MDRO spread and containment in NHs can help identify infection prevention activities needed to care for vulnerable patients in a medical home setting. Methods We conducted a baseline point prevalence study of MDRO colonization in residents of 28 Southern California NHs participating in a decolonization trial. In Fall 2016, residents were randomly sampled to obtain a set of 50 nares and skin (axilla/groin) swabs from each NH. Nasal swabs were processed for MRSA and skin swabs were processed for MRSA, VRE, ESBL, and CRE. In addition, environmental swabs were collected from high touch objects in resident rooms (bedrail, call button/TV remote, door knobs, light switch, bathroom) and common areas (nursing station, table, chair, railing, and drinking fountain). Results A total of 2,797 body swabs were obtained from 1400 residents. Overall, 48.6% (N = 680) of residents harbored MDROs. MRSA was found in 37% of residents (29.5% nares, 24.4% skin), followed by ESBL in 16% (Table 1). Resident MDRO status was only known for 11% of MRSA (59/518), 18% ESBL (40/228), 4% VRE (4/99), and none of the CRE (0/13) carriers. Colonization did not differ between long stay (48.8%, 534/1094) vs. post-acute (47.7%, 146/306) residents (P = NS), but bedbound residents were more likely to be MDRO colonized (58.7%, 182/310) vs. ambulatory residents (45.7%, 497/1088, P Conclusion One in two NH residents are colonized with MDROs, which is largely unknown to the facility. MDRO carriage is associated with total care needs, but not long stay status. Environmental contamination in resident rooms and common areas is common. The burden of MDRO colonization and contamination is sufficiently high that universal strategies to reduce colonization and transmission are warranted. Disclosures J. A. McKinnell, Allergan: Research Contractor, Scientific Advisor and Speaker’s Bureau, Consulting fee, Research support and Speaker honorarium; Achaogen: Research Contractor, Scientific Advisor and Shareholder, Research support; Cempra: Research Contractor and Scientific Advisor, Research support; Theravance: Research Contractor, Research support; Science 37: Research Contractor, Salary; Expert Stewardship, LLC: Board Member and Employee, Salary; Thermo Fisher: Scientific Advisor, Salary; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; L. Miller, 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; R. D. Singh, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; J. Mendez, Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; R. Franco, Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; G. Gussin, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; L’Oreal: Consultant, Consulting fee; J. Chang, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; T. D. Dutciuc, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; R. Saavedra, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; K. Kleinman, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; E. M. Peterson, Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; L. Heim, Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; A. Miner, Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; M. Estevez, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; H. Custodio, Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. Yamaguchi, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; J. Nguyen, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; A. Varasteh, Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Product: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; B. Launer, 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. Agrawal, Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; T. Tjoa, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; J. He, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. Park, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. Tam, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. K. Gohil, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. S. Huang, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product

Objective To compare patients with autopsy-confirmed Alzheimer disease (AD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) on the frequency of behaviors related to frontal system dysfunction and the association of these behaviors with dementia severity. Methods We performed a cross-sectional survey of a longitudinal cohort at a university research center for AD on a volunteer sample of 19 DLB and 38 AD participants with autopsy-confirmed diagnoses, similar in age (DLB: 77.3, AD: 77.5), education (DLB: 15.2, AD: 14.7), and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score (DLB: 20.6, AD: 20.5), with impairment ranging from mild deficits to moderate dementia. The Frontal Systems Behavior Scale (FrSBe)-Family Rating Form assessing patient apathy, disinhibition, and executive dysfunction by a knowledgeable informant was used. Results A two-way analysis of variance with the FrSBe total as the dependent variable revealed a significant MMSE by diagnosis interaction (F(1,53) = 9.34, p = 0.004). Mean FrSBe total for AD patients showed significant impairment across the range of dementia severity, whereas it was relatively preserved for DLB patients in the early stage of disease. The interaction term showed the same pattern for the executive dysfunction (F(1,53) = 7.62, p = 0.008), disinhibition (F(1,53) = 4.90, p = 0.031), and apathy (F(1,53) = 9.77, p = 0.003) subscales. Conclusion Although frontal behavioral symptoms in AD patients were present regardless of stage of dementia, DLB patients showed significant frontal dysfunction only in later stages. Results suggest that frontal subcortical circuits associated with behaviors assessed by the FrSBe are affected early in AD but not until later stages in DLB. Assessing specific behaviors related to frontal systems, coupled with stage of cognitive decline, may aid in clinical differentiation of AD and DLB.

In the world of business and management, the practice of workplace learning is deemed important for firms to survive or stay competitive. However, firm characteristics such as business priorities, management styles, and limited internal resources and capabilities are always organizational factors that affect how firms may practice workplace learning. According to organizational life cycle (OLC) theory, during the firm’s growth from inception, to high-growth, to maturity, firm characteristics differ and the internal resources and capabilities of the firm develop. The literature has discussed the dynamics of organizational life cycle, but little is knownabout how it possibly relates to workplace learning. The paper synthesises the OLC literature and draws the characteristics of three common stages for firms (large or small) to conceptualize different patterns of workplace learning practices, promoting a new page of empirical research potential.