A comparison of home care quality indicator rates in two Canadian provinces

BMC Health Services Research

Dawn M Guthrie¹  Amanda M Mofina¹ 

[1] Department of Kinesiology and Physical Education, Wilfrid Laurier University, 75 University Ave. W, Waterloo, ON N2L 3C5, Canada

关键词: RAI-HC;    Standardized assessment;    Home care;    Quality indicators;   

Others  :  1134242
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6963-14-37

 received in 2013-05-14, accepted in 2014-01-22,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Home care is becoming an increasingly vital sector in the health care system yet very little is known about the characteristics of home care clients and the quality of care provided in Canada. We describe these clients and evaluate home care quality indicator rates in two regions.

Methods

A cross-sectional analysis of assessments completed for older (age 65+) home care clients in both Ontario (n = 102,504) and the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority (n = 9,250) of Manitoba, using the Resident Assessment Instrument for Home Care (RAI-HC). This assessment has been mandated for use in these two regions and the indicators are generated directly from items within the assessment. The indicators are expressed as rates of negative outcomes (e.g., falls, dehydration). Client-level risk adjustment of the indicator rates was used to enable fair comparisons between the regions.

Results

Clients had a mean age of 83.2 years, the majority were female (68.6%) and the regions were very similar on these demographic characteristics. Nearly all clients (92.4%) required full assistance with instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs), approximately 35% had activities of daily living (ADL) impairments, and nearly 50% had some degree of cognitive impairment, which was higher among clients in Ontario (48.8% vs. 37.0%). The highest quality indicator rates were related to clients who had ADL/rehabilitation potential but were not receiving therapy (range: 66.8%-91.6%) and the rate of cognitive decline (65.4%-76.3%). Ontario clients had higher unadjusted rates across 18 of the 22 indicators and the unadjusted differences between the two provinces ranged from 0.6% to 28.4%. For 13 of the 19 indicators that have risk adjustment, after applying the risk adjustment methodology, the difference between the adjusted rates in the two regions was reduced.

Conclusions

Home care clients in these two regions are experiencing a significant level of functional and cognitive impairment, health instability and daily pain. The quality indicators provide some important insight into variations between the two regions and can serve as an important decision-support tool for flagging potential quality issues and isolating areas for improvement.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Mofina and Guthrie; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Canadian Home Care Association: Portraits of home care in Canada. Mississauga, Ontario: Canadian Home Care Association; 2008:1-20.
• [2]Canadian Health Care Association: From the Margins to the Mainstream: Portraits of home care in Canada 2008. Ottawa, Ontario: Canadian Health Care Association; 2008.
• [3]Canadian Institute for Health Information: Health Care in Canada, 2011: A focus on seniors and Aging. Ottawa, Ontario; 2011.
• [4]The National Association for Home Care & Hospice: Basic statistics about home care. Washington, DC: National Association for Home Care & Hospice; 2010:1-14.
• [5]Bernstein AB, Hing E, Moss AJ, Allen KF, Siller AB, Tiggle RB: Health care in America: Trends in utilization. Hyattsville, Maryland: National Center for Health Statistics; 2003.
• [6]Masotti P, Green M, Shortt S, Hunter D, Szala-Meneok K: (Eds):Adverse events in community care: developing a research agenda. Healthc Q 2007, 10:63-69.
• [7]Hirdes JP, Fries BE, Morris JN, Ikegami N, Zimmerman D, Dalby DM, et al.: Home care quality indicators (HCQIs) based on the MDS-HC. Gerontologist 2004, 44:665-679.
• [8]Dalby DM, Hirdes JP, Fries BE: Risk adjustment methods for home care quality indicators (HCQIs) based on the minimum data set for home care. BMC Health Serv Res 2005, 5:7. BioMed Central Full Text
• [9]Bos JT, Frijters DHM, Wagner C, Carpenter GI, Finne-Soveri H, Topinkova E, et al.: Variations in quality of home care between sites across Europe, as measured by home care quality indicators. Aging Clin Exp Res 2007, 19:323-329.
• [10]Madigan EA: A description of adverse events in home healthcare. Home Healthc Nurse 2007, 25:191-197.
• [11]Health Canada: Canada health act - annual report 2008–2009. Ottawa, Ontario: Health Canada; 2009:1-240.
• [12]Morris J: interRAI HC - home care. interRAI 2007, 2011:3-16.
• [13]Morris JN, Bernabei R, Ikegami N, Gilgen R, Frijters D, Hirdes JP, et al.: RAI-Home Care (RAI-HC) Assessment Manual for Version 2.0. Washington, DC: interRAI Corporation; 1999.
• [14]Iezzoni LI: Risk adjustment for measuring health care outcomes. Chicago, Illinois: Health Administration Press; 2003.
• [15]Dalby DM, Hirdes JP: The relationship between agency characteristics and quality of home care. Home Health Care Serv Q 2008, 27:59-74.
• [16]Health Quality Ontario [internet. Toronto, Ontario; 2011. [cited 2014 Jan. 23]. Available from http://www.hqontario.ca/public-reporting/home-care webcite
• [17]Doran DM, Hirdes J, Blais R, Baker GR, Pickard J, Jantzi M: The nature of safety problems among Canadian homecare clients: evidence from the RAI-HC reporting system. J Nurs Manag 2009, 17:165-174.
• [18]Burrows AB, Morris JN, Simon SE, Hirdes JP, Phillips CD: Development of an MDS-based depression rating scale for use in nursing homes. Age Ageing 2000, 29:165-172.
• [19]Martin L, Poss JW, Hirdes JP, Jones RN, Stones MJ, Fries BE: Predictors of a new depression diagnosis among older adults admitted to complex continuing care: implications for the Depression Rating Scale (DRS). Age Ageing 2008, 37:51-56.
• [20]Morris JN, Fries BE, Mehr DR, Hawes C, Mor V, Lipsitz L: MDS cognitive performance scale. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 1994, 49:M174-M182.
• [21]Hartmaier SL, Sloane PD, Guess HA, Koch GG, Mitchell CM, Phillips CD: Validation of the minimum data set cognitive performance scale: agreement with the mini-mental state examination. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 1995, 50A:M128-M133.
• [22]Morris JN, Fries BE, Morris SA: Scaling ADLs within the MDS. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 1999, 54A:M546-M553.
• [23]Hirdes JP, Frijters DH, Teare GF: The MDS-CHESS scale: a new measure to predict mortality in institutionalized older people. J Am Geriatr Soc 2003, 51:96-100.
• [24]Armstrong JJ, Stolee P, Hirdes JP, Poss JW: Examining three frailty conceptualizations in their ability to predict negative outcomes for home-care clients. Age Ageing 2010, 39:755-758.
• [25]Fries BE, Simon SE, Morris JN, Flodstrom C, Bookstein FL: Pain in US nursing homes: validating a pain scale for the minimum data set. Gerontologist 2001, 41:173-179.
• [26]Doran DM, Hirdes JP, Blais R, Baker GR, Poss JW, Li X, et al.: Adverse events among Ontario home care clients associated with emergency room visit or hospitalization: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Health Serv Res 2013, 13:227. BioMed Central Full Text
• [27]Blais R, Sears NA, Doran DM, Baker GR, Macdonald M, Mitchell L, et al.: Assessing adverse events among home care clients in three Canadian provinces using chart review. BMJ Quality and Safety 2013, 22:989-997.