Dataset Information

Independence, institutionalization, death and treatment costs 18 months after rehabilitation of older people in two different primary health care settings.

ABSTRACT: The optimal setting and content of primary health care rehabilitation of older people is not known. Our aim was to study independence, institutionalization, death and treatment costs 18 months after primary care rehabilitation of older people in two different settings.Eighteen months follow-up of an open, prospective study comparing the outcome of multi-disciplinary rehabilitation of older people, in a structured and intensive Primary care dedicated inpatient rehabilitation (PCDIR, n=202) versus a less structured and less intensive Primary care nursing home rehabilitation (PCNHR, n=100).302 patients, disabled from stroke, hip-fracture, osteoarthritis and other chronic diseases, aged ?65years, assessed to have a rehabilitation potential and being referred from general hospital or own residence.Primary: Independence, assessed by Sunnaas ADL Index(SI). Secondary: Hospital and short-term nursing home length of stay (LOS); institutionalization, measured by institutional residence rate; death; and costs of rehabilitation and care. Statistical tests: T-tests, Correlation tests, Pearson's ?2, ANCOVA, Regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses.Overall SI scores were 26.1 (SD 7.2) compared to 27.0 (SD 5.7) at the end of rehabilitation, a statistically, but not clinically significant reduction (p=0.003 95%CI(0.3-1.5)). The PCDIR patients scored 2.2points higher in SI than the PCNHR patients, adjusted for age, gender, baseline MMSE and SI scores (p=0.003, 95%CI(0.8-3.7)). Out of 49 patients staying >28 days in short-term nursing homes, PCNHR-patients stayed significantly longer than PCDIR-patients (mean difference 104.9 days, 95%CI(0.28-209.6), p=0.05). The institutionalization increased in PCNHR (from 12%-28%, p=0.001), but not in PCDIR (from 16.9%-19.3%, p= 0.45). The overall one year mortality rate was 9.6%. Average costs were substantially higher for PCNHR versus PCDIR. The difference per patient was 3528€ for rehabilitation (p<0.001, 95%CI(2455-4756)), and 10134€ for the at-home care (p=0.002, 95%CI(4066-16202)). The total costs of rehabilitation and care were 18702€ (=1.6 times) higher for PCNHR than for PCDIR.At 18 months follow-up the PCDIR-patients maintained higher levels of independence, spent fewer days in short-term nursing homes, and did not increase the institutionalization compared to PCNHR. The costs of rehabilitation and care were substantially lower for PCDIR. More communities should consider adopting the PCDIR model.Clinicaltrials.gov ID NCT01457300.

SUBMITTER: Johansen I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3507889 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Independence, institutionalization, death and treatment costs 18 months after rehabilitation of older people in two different primary health care settings.

Johansen Inger I Lindbak Morten M Stanghelle Johan K JK Brekke Mette M

BMC health services research 20121114

<h4>Background</h4>The optimal setting and content of primary health care rehabilitation of older people is not known. Our aim was to study independence, institutionalization, death and treatment costs 18 months after primary care rehabilitation of older people in two different settings.<h4>Methods</h4>Eighteen months follow-up of an open, prospective study comparing the outcome of multi-disciplinary rehabilitation of older people, in a structured and intensive Primary care dedicated inpatient r ...[more]

PMID: 23150906

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundObjective health measures, such as registered illnesses or frailty, predict mortality and institutionalization in older adults. Also, self-reported assessment of health by simple self-rated health (SRH) has been shown to predict mortality and institutionalization. The aim of this study was to assess the association of objective and subjective health with mortality and institutionalization in Finnish community-dwelling older adults.MethodsIn this prospective study with 10- and 18-year follow-ups, objective health was measured by registered illnesses and subjective health was evaluated by simple SRH, self-reported walking ability (400 m) and self-reported satisfaction in life. The participants were categorized into four groups according to their objective and subjective health: 1. subjectively and objectively healthy, 2. subjectively healthy and objectively unhealthy, 3. subjectively unhealthy and objectively healthy and 4. subjectively and objectively unhealthy. Cox regression model was used in the analyses. Death was used as a competing factor in the institutionalization analyses.ResultsThe mean age of the participants (n = 1259) was 73.5 years (range 64.0-100.0). During the 10- and 18-year follow-ups, 466 (37%) and 877 (70%) died, respectively. In the institutionalization analyses (n = 1106), 162 (15%) and 328 (30%) participants were institutionalized during the 10- and 18-year follow-ups, respectively. In both follow-ups, being subjectively and objectively unhealthy, compared to being subjectively and objectively healthy, was significantly associated with a higher risk of institutionalization in unadjusted models and with death both in unadjusted and adjusted models.ConclusionsThe categorization of objective and subjective health into four health groups was good at predicting the risk of death during 10- and 18-year follow-ups, and seemed to also predict the risk of institutionalization in the unadjusted models during both follow-ups. Poor subjective health had an additive effect on poor objective health in predicting mortality and could therefore be used as part of an older individual's health evaluation when screening for future adverse outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundFollowing periods of acute ill-health and injury, older people are frequently assessed and provided with rehabilitation services. Healthcare practitioners are required to make nuanced decisions about which patients are likely to benefit from and respond to rehabilitation. The clinical currency in which these decisions are transacted is through the term "rehabilitation potential". The aim of this study was to explore information about rehabilitation potential in older people to inform the development of an evidence-based assessment tool.MethodsA systematic mapping review was completed to describe the extent of research and the concepts underpinning rehabilitation potential. We searched Medline, CINHAL, EMBASE, AMED, PsycINFO, PEDro, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ProQuest, Trip and EThOS from inception to December 2020. We included studies which focused on rehabilitation potential and/or assessing for rehabilitation interventions for older people with comorbidities in the hospital and community setting. Reviewer pairs independently screened articles and extracted data against the inclusion criteria. A descriptive narrative approach to analysis was taken.Results13,484 papers were identified and 49 included in the review. Rehabilitation potential was found to encompass two different but interrelated concepts of prognostication and outcome measurement. 1. Rehabilitation potential for prognostication involved the prediction of what could be achieved in programmes of rehabilitation. 2. Rehabilitation potential as an outcome measure retrospectively considered what had been achieved as a result of rehabilitation interventions. Assessments of rehabilitation potential included key domains which were largely assessed by members of the multi-disciplinary team at single time points. Limited evidence was identified which specifically considered rehabilitation potential amongst older people living with frailty.ConclusionsCurrent approaches to rehabilitation potential provide a snapshot of an individual's abilities and conditions which fail to capture the dynamic nature and fluctuations associated with frailty and rehabilitation. New approaches to measures and abilities over time are required which allow for the prognostication of outcomes and potential benefits of rehabilitation interventions for older people living with frailty.

Dataset Information

Independence, institutionalization, death and treatment costs 18 months after rehabilitation of older people in two different primary health care settings.

Publications

Independence, institutionalization, death and treatment costs 18 months after rehabilitation of older people in two different primary health care settings.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets