Suchergebnisse

ObjectiveTo describe clinical pathways and use of the bundled care funding model, where a patient's treatment and payment is assigned to a group of providers, among individuals who underwent a total joint arthroplasty (TJA) in Ontario. The request for this work was submitted by the Rehabilitative Care Alliance through the Applied Health Research Question (AHRQ) program.
ApproachAdults with TJA from April 1st 2018 to March 31st 2022 were included. Demographics, surgical characteristics, inclusion in bundled care, and use of health services were defined using administrative health data. Results were stratified by location of surgery (bilateral or unilateral hip, knee, or shoulder TJA).
ResultsAmong 152,135 individuals with TJA during the study period, 71,996 individuals (47.3%) received services through a bundled care approach. Rate of bundled care use was highest among individuals with unilateral knee TJA (52.5% in bundled care), and the lowest among individuals with shoulder TJA (13.4% in bundled care). In fiscal year 2018, 33% of TJA patients used bundled care, in fiscal year 2019, over 50% of TJA patients used bundled care and 55% of TJA patients used bundled care by 2021. Most individuals used bundled care following an inpatient surgery (88.9% of individuals following a unilateral knee TJA) as opposed to a same day surgery (11.1% with a unilateral knee TJA).
ConclusionThe purpose of bundled care service delivery is to provide integrated healthcare delivery and therefore improved patient experience and outcomes. Understanding bundled care use may improve healthcare planning and assessment of health services.

ObjectivesThe Rehabilitative Care Alliance issued an Applied Health Research Question request to collect information regarding healthcare and rehabilitation use among COVID-19 positive individuals. The objective of this project is to determine the association between length of stay (LOS) in acute care and the number of rehabilitation services used post COVID-19 diagnosis.
ApproachHospital and rehabilitation service use was identified among individuals diagnosed with COVID-19, using administrative health data. Admission into acute care within 30 days post COVID-19 diagnosis was recorded. Use of inpatient, physiatry and home-care rehabilitative services were collected until March 31st 2021. Outpatient rehabilitation reporting is not mandatory and was not included. Marginalization was evaluated using the Ontario Marginalization Index factor scores. The association between LOS in acute care and number of rehabilitation categories used was assessed using a negative binomial model, stratified by with or without a stay in the ICU and controlling for age, sex, comorbidities and long-term care residence.
ResultsOf 181,139 individuals diagnosed with COVID-19 prior to December 31st 2020, 5% were hospitalized. Of those hospitalized 2.3% then entered rehabilitation compared to 0.06% who were not hospitalized post COVID-19 infection. Rehabilitation users had higher residential instability (mean=0.45 vs -0.01 in the overall cohort), dependency (mean=-0.02 vs -0.27) and material deprivation (mean=0.37 vs 0.19) but similar ethnic diversity (mean=0.87 vs 0.90) compared to the full cohort. LOS in acute care was associated with a 3.3% increased risk of using additional rehabilitation services for individuals without a stay in the ICU (RR 1.033, 95% CI: 1.011 to 1.055; p=0.0036), and a 3.7% increased risk for individuals with a stay in the ICU (RR 1.037, 95% CI: 1.025 to 1.048; p<.0001).
ConclusionsPost COVID-19 diagnosis, a larger proportion of rehabilitation service users were hospitalized compared to all COVID-19+ individuals. Additionally, LOS in acute care was associated with the use of more rehabilitation care categories following a COVID-19 diagnosis, and the association was stronger for more severe cases requiring an ICU stay.

Objective: This study examines the issue of living environments for persons with acquired brain injury (ABI), with the aim of identifying factors that enable or act as barriers to appropriate living environments. Method: A qualitative study involving 31 semi-structured interviews conducted with 56 key informants representing various relevant sectors: institutional, community, residential and non-residential, consumer/advocacy and government/policy from six regions in the province of Ontario, Canada. Results: The study identified such barriers as lack of ABI-specific facilities, beds and trained staff and a poorly coordinated system in many areas, with long wait lists for specialized residential settings. Clients with ABI need individualized treatment, making development of a standardized model of care difficult, particularly for those with co-morbid conditions. Solutions such as more flexible options for clients and better trained staff emerged. Conclusions: The study presents solutions to challenges and limitations in addressing appropriate living environments for persons with ABI.