Dataset Information

Use of hospital-related health care among Health Links enrollees in the Central Ontario health region: a propensity-matched difference-in-differences study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Health Links are a new model of providing care coordination for high-cost, high-needs patients in Ontario. We evaluated use of hospital-related health care services among Health Links patients in the Central Local Health Integration Network (LHIN) of Ontario in the year before versus after program enrolment and compared rates of use with those among similar patients with complex needs not enrolled in the program (comparator group).

Methods

We identified all patients who received a Health Links coordinated care plan before Jan. 1, 2015, using linked registry and health administrative data. We used propensity scores to match (1:1) enrollees (registry) with comparator patients (administrative data). Using a difference-in-differences approach with generalized estimating equations, we evaluated 5 measures of Health Link performance: rates of hospital admission, emergency department visits, days in acute care, 30-day readmissions and 7-day postdischarge primary care follow-up.

Results

Of the 344 enrollees in the registry, we matched 313 [91.0%] to comparator patients. All measured sociodemographic, comorbidity and health care use characteristics were balanced between the 2 groups (all standardized differences < 0.10). For enrollees, the rate of days in acute care per person-year increased by 35% (incidence rate ratio 1.35 [confidence interval 1.11-1.65]) after versus before the index date, but differences were nonsignificant for all other measures. Difference-in-differences analyses revealed greater reductions in hospital admissions, emergency department visits and acute care days after the index date in the comparator group than among enrollees.

Interpretation

Initial implementation of the Health Link program in the Central LHIN did not reduce selected indicators of Health Link performance among enrollees. As the Health Link program evolves and standardization is implemented, future research may reveal effects from the initiative in other outcomes or with longer follow-up.

SUBMITTER: Mondor L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5741420 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:It is not known whether equity-oriented primary care investment that seeks to scale up the delivery of effective care in disadvantaged communities can reduce health inequality within high-income settings that have pre-existing universal primary care systems. We provide some non-randomised controlled evidence by comparing health inequality trends between two similar jurisdictions-one of which implemented equity-oriented primary care investment in the mid-to-late 2000s as part of a cross-government strategy for reducing health inequality (England), and one which invested in primary care without any explicit equity objective (Ontario, Canada). METHODS:We analysed whole-population data on 32,482 neighbourhoods (with mean population size of approximately 1,500 people) in England, and 18,961 neighbourhoods (with mean population size of approximately 700 people) in Ontario. We examined trends in mortality amenable to healthcare by decile groups of neighbourhood deprivation within each jurisdiction. We used linear models to estimate absolute and relative gaps in amenable mortality between most and least deprived groups, considering the gradient between these extremes, and evaluated difference-in-difference comparisons between the two jurisdictions. RESULTS:Inequality trends were comparable in both jurisdictions from 2004-6 but diverged from 2007-11. Compared with Ontario, the absolute gap in amenable mortality in England fell between 2004-6 and 2007-11 by 19.8 per 100,000 population (95% CI: 4.8 to 34.9); and the relative gap in amenable mortality fell by 10 percentage points (95% CI: 1 to 19). The biggest divergence occurred in the most deprived decile group of neighbourhoods. DISCUSSION:In comparison to Ontario, England succeeded in reducing absolute socioeconomic gaps in mortality amenable to healthcare from 2007 to 2011, and preventing them from growing in relative terms. Equity-oriented primary care reform in England in the mid-to-late 2000s may have helped to reduce socioeconomic inequality in health, though other explanations for this divergence are possible and further research is needed on the specific causal mechanisms.

Project description:BackgroundMost health care spending is concentrated within a small group of high-cost health care users. To inform health policies, we examined the characteristics of index hospital admissions and their predictors among incident older high-cost users compared to older non-high-cost users in Ontario.MethodsUsing Ontario administrative data, we identified incident high-cost users aged 66 years or more and matched them 1:3 on age, gender and Local Health Integration Network with non-high-cost users aged 66 years or more. We defined high-cost users as patients within the top 5% most costly high-cost users during fiscal year 2013/14 but not during 2012/13. An index hospital admission, the main outcome, was defined as the first unplanned hospital admission during 2013/14, with no hospital admissions in the preceding 12 months. Descriptively, we analyzed the attributes of index hospital admissions, including costs. We identified predictors of index hospital admissions using stratified logistic regression.ResultsOver half (95 375/175 847 [54.2%]) of all high-cost users had an unplanned index hospital admission, compared to 8838/527 541 (1.7%) of non-high-cost users. High-cost users had a poorer health status, longer acute length of stay (mean 7.5 d v. 2.9 d) and more frequent designation as alternate level of care before discharge (20.8% v. 1.7%) than did non-high-cost users. Ten diagnosis codes accounted for roughly one-third of the index hospital admission costs in both cohorts. Although many predictors were similar between the cohorts, a lower risk of an index hospital admission was associated with residence in long-term care, attachment to a primary care provider and recent consultation by a geriatrician among high-cost users.InterpretationThe high prevalence of index hospital admissions and the corresponding costs are a distinctive feature of incident older high-cost users. Improved access to specialist outpatient care, home-based social care and long-term care when required are worth further investigation.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the use of epinephrine (adrenaline) before defibrillation for treatment of in-hospital cardiac arrest due to a ventricular arrhythmia and examine its association with patient survival.DesignPropensity matched analysis.Setting2000-18 data from 497 hospitals participating in the American Heart Association’s Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry.ParticipantsAdults aged 18 and older with an index in-hospital cardiac arrest due to an initial shockable rhythm treated with defibrillation.InterventionsAdministration of epinephrine before first defibrillation.Main outcome measuresSurvival to discharge; favorable neurological survival, defined as survival to discharge with none, mild, or moderate neurological disability measured using cerebral performance category scores; and survival after acute resuscitation (that is, return of spontaneous circulation for >20 minutes). A time dependent, propensity matched analysis was performed to adjust for confounding due to indication and evaluate the independent association of epinephrine before defibrillation with study outcomes.ResultsAmong 34 820 patients with an initial shockable rhythm, 7054 (20.3%) were treated with epinephrine before defibrillation, contrary to current guidelines. In comparison with participants treated with defibrillation first, participants receiving epinephrine first were less likely to have a history of myocardial infarction or heart failure, but more likely to have renal failure, sepsis, respiratory insufficiency, and receive mechanical ventilation before in-hospital cardiac arrest (standardized differences >10% for all). Treatment with epinephrine before defibrillation was strongly associated with delayed defibrillation (median 4 minutes v 0 minutes). In propensity matched analysis (6569 matched pairs), epinephrine before defibrillation was associated with lower odds of survival to discharge (22.4% v 29.7%; adjusted odds ratio 0.69; 95% confidence interval 0.64 to 0.74; P<0.001), favorable neurological survival (15.8% v 21.6%; 0.68; 0.61 to 0.76; P<0.001) and survival after acute resuscitation (61.7% v 69.5%; 0.73; 0.67 to 0.79; P<0.001). The above findings were consistent in a range of sensitivity analyses, including matching according to defibrillation time.ConclusionsContrary to current guidelines that prioritize immediate defibrillation for in-hospital cardiac arrest due to a shockable rhythm, one in five patients are treated with epinephrine before defibrillation. Use of epinephrine before defibrillation was associated with worse survival outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundHospitalizations due to medical and surgical complications of substance use disorder (SUD) are rising. Most hospitals lack systems to treat SUD, and most people with SUD do not engage in treatment after discharge.ObjectiveDetermine the effect of a hospital-based addiction medicine consult service, the Improving Addiction Care Team (IMPACT), on post-hospital SUD treatment engagement.DesignCohort study using multivariable analysis of Oregon Medicaid claims comparing IMPACT patients with propensity-matched controls.Participants18-64-year-old Oregon Medicaid beneficiaries with SUD, hospitalized at an Oregon hospital between July 1, 2015, and September 30, 2016. IMPACT patients (n = 208) were matched to controls (n = 416) using a propensity score that accounted for SUD, gender, age, race, residence region, and diagnoses.InterventionsIMPACT included hospital-based consultation care from an interdisciplinary team of addiction medicine physicians, social workers, and peers with lived experience in recovery. IMPACT met patients during hospitalization; offered pharmacotherapy, behavioral treatments, and harm reduction services; and supported linkages to SUD treatment after discharge.OutcomesHealthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) measure of SUD treatment engagement, defined as two or more claims on two separate days for SUD care within 34 days of discharge.ResultsOnly 17.2% of all patients were engaged in SUD treatment before hospitalization. IMPACT patients engaged in SUD treatment following discharge more frequently than controls (38.9% vs. 23.3%, p < 0.01; aOR 2.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29-3.58). IMPACT participation remained associated with SUD treatment engagement when limiting the sample to people who were not engaged in treatment prior to hospitalization (aOR 2.63; 95% CI 1.46-4.72).ConclusionsHospital-based addiction medicine consultation can improve SUD treatment engagement, which is associated with reduced substance use, mortality, and other important clinical outcomes. National expansion of such models represents an opportunity to address an enduring gap in the SUD treatment continuum.