scholarly journals Use of health services in the last year of life and cause of death in people with intellectual disability: a retrospective matched cohort study

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. e020268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Brameld ◽  
Katrina Spilsbury ◽  
Lorna Rosenwax ◽  
Helen Leonard ◽  
James Semmens

ObjectiveTo describe the cause of death together with emergency department presentations and hospital admissions in the last year of life of people with intellectual disability.MethodA retrospective matched cohort study using de-identified linked data of people aged 20 years or over, with and without intellectual disability who died during 2009 to 2013 in Western Australia. Emergency department presentations and hospital admissions in the last year of life of people with intellectual disability are described along with cause of death.ResultsOf the 63 508 deaths in Western Australia from 2009 to 2013, there were 591 (0.93%) decedents with a history of intellectual disability. Decedents with intellectual disability tended to be younger, lived in areas of more social disadvantage, did not have a partner and were Australian born compared with all other decedents. A matched comparison cohort of decedents without intellectual disability (n=29 713) was identified from the general population to improve covariate balance.Decedents with intellectual disability attended emergency departments more frequently than the matched cohort (mean visits 3.2 vs 2.5) and on average were admitted to hospital less frequently (mean admissions 4.1 vs 6.1), but once admitted stayed longer (average length of stay 5.2 days vs 4.3 days). People with intellectual disability had increased odds of presentation, admission or death from conditions that have been defined as ambulatory care sensitive and are potentially preventable. These included vaccine-preventable respiratory disease, asthma, cellulitis and convulsions and epilepsy.ConclusionPeople with intellectual disability were more likely to experience potentially preventable conditions at the end of their lives. This indicates a need for further improvements in access, quality and coordination of healthcare to provide optimal health for this group.

2019 ◽  
Vol 191 (44) ◽  
pp. E1207-E1216 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Gardner ◽  
Kathleen Pajer ◽  
Paula Cloutier ◽  
Lisa Currie ◽  
Ian Colman ◽  
...  

CMAJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. E537-E545 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergei Muratov ◽  
Justin Lee ◽  
Anne Holbrook ◽  
J. Michael Paterson ◽  
Jason R. Guertin ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Consolaro ◽  
Fredy Suter ◽  
Nadia Rubis ◽  
Stefania Pedroni ◽  
Chiara Moroni ◽  
...  

AbstractBackground and AimWhile considerable success has been achieved in the management of patients hospitalized with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), far less progress has been made with early outpatient treatment. We assessed whether the implementation of a home treatment algorithm – designed based upon on a pathophysiologic and pharmacologic rationale - during the initial, mild phase of COVID-19, could effectively reduce hospital admissions.MethodsThis fully academic, matched-cohort study evaluated outcomes in 108 consecutive consenting patients with mild COVID-19 managed at home by their family doctors from January 2021 to May 2021, according to the proposed treatment algorithm and in 108 age-, sex-, and comorbidities-matched patients who were given other therapeutic schedules (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04854824). The primary outcome was COVID-19-related hospitalization. Analyses were by intention-to-treat.ResultsOne (0.9%) patient in the ‘recommended’ cohort and 12 (11.1%) in the ‘control’ cohort were admitted to hospital (P=0.0136). The proposed algorithm reduced, by 85%, the cumulative length of hospital stays (from 141 to 19 days) and related costs (from € 60.316 to € 9.058). Only 9.8 patients needed to be treated with the recommended algorithm to prevent one hospitalization event. The rate of resolution of major symptoms was numerically, but not significantly, higher in the ‘recommended’ compared to the ‘control’ cohort (97.2% versus 93.5%, respectively; P=0.322). Other symptoms lingered in a lower proportion of patients in the ‘recommended’ than in the‘control’ cohort (20.4% versus 63.9%, respectively; P<0.001), and for a shorter period.ConclusionThe adoption of the proposed outpatient treatment algorithm during the early, mild phase of COVID-19 reduced the incidence of subsequent hospitalization and related costs.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren Lapointe-Shaw ◽  
Chaim M Bell ◽  
Peter C Austin ◽  
Lusine Abrahamyan ◽  
Noah M Ivers ◽  
...  

BackgroundIn-hospital medication review has been linked to improved outcomes after discharge, yet there is little evidence to support the use of community pharmacy-based interventions as part of transitional care.ObjectiveTo determine whether receipt of a postdischarge community pharmacy-based medication reconciliation and adherence review is associated with a reduced risk of death or re-admission.DesignPropensity score-matched cohort study.SettingOntario, CanadaParticipantsPatients over age 66 years discharged home from an acute care hospital from 1 April 2007 to 16 September 2016.ExposureMedsCheck, a publicly funded medication reconciliation and adherence review provided by community pharmacists.Main outcomeThe primary outcome was time to death or re-admission (defined as an emergency department visit or urgent rehospitalisation) up to 30 days. Secondary outcomes were the 30-day count of outpatient physician visits and time to adverse drug event.ResultsMedsCheck recipients had a lower risk of 30-day death or re-admission (23.4% vs 23.9%, HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.00, p=0.02), driven by a decreased risk of death (1.7% vs 2.1%, HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.86) and rehospitalisation (11.0% vs 11.4%, HR 0.96, 95% 0.93–0.99). In a post hoc sensitivity analysis with pharmacy random effects added to the propensity score model, these results were substantially attenuated. There was no significant difference in 30-day return to the emergency department (22.5% vs 22.8%, HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.01) or adverse drug events (1.5% vs 1.5%, HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.12). MedsCheck recipients had more outpatient visits (mean 2.11 vs 2.09, RR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.02, p=0.02).Conclusions and relevanceAmong older adults, receipt of a community pharmacy-based medication reconciliation and adherence review was associated with a small reduced risk of short-term death or re-admission. Due to the possibility of unmeasured confounding, experimental studies are needed to clarify the relationship between postdischarge community pharmacy-based medication review and patient outcomes.


Midwifery ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 125-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hazel C. Woodcock ◽  
Anne W. Read ◽  
Carol Bower ◽  
Fiona J. Stanley ◽  
Diane J. Moore

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document