Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T03:55:07.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Waiting Time for Nursing Home Admission in a Voluntary Single-Entry System

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2010

Laurence Thompson
Affiliation:
Health Services Utilization and Research Commission, Saskatoon

Abstract

As community services replace institutional beds, clients must be ensured ready access to nursing home care when truly required. This study explores predictors of waiting time for nursing home admission in a typical voluntary single-entry system in Saskatchewan. The study examined a district-wide cohort of 777 clients awaiting a first nursing home admission over two years in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. Median waiting time was 107 days. In multivariate time-to-event analysis, independently assessed priority status predicted a three times greater rate of admission. Living alone, living in seniors housing attached to a nursing home, and being ambulatory only with assistance also shortened waiting time. Co-operation problems increased waiting time. The study shows that in a voluntary single-entry system, admission is not solely by priority status.

Résumé

La substitution des services communautaires aux lits en établissements doit s'accompagner d'un accès rapide aux centres d'accueil en cas de nécessité pressante. Cette étude explore les variables prédictives du délai d'admission en centre d'accueil dans un cas type d'admission simple volontaire en Saskatchewan. L'étude examine, sur une période de deux ans, un groupe de 777 sujets d'un même district attendant leur admission en centre d'accueil à Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. Le délai d'attente moyen s'elève à 107 jours. Dans cette analyse multivariable temps-événement, des facteurs de priorité évalués séparément donnaient lieu à un taux d'admission trois fois plus rapide. Vivre seul, vivre en résidence pour aînés adjacente à un centre d'accueil et ne pouvoir marcher sans aide raccourcissaient également le temps d'attente. Le manque de collaboration augmentait le délai d'admission. L'étude signale que dans un système d'admission volontaire simple, l'admission ne repose pas seulement sur les facteurs de priorité.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association on Gerontology 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Federal/Provincial/Territorial Subcommittee on Continuing Care. Future directions in continuing care. Ottawa: Health and Welfare Canada, 1992.Google Scholar
2.Eggert, GM, Bowlyow, JE, Nichols, CW. Gaining control of the long term care system: First returns from the ACCESS experiment. The Gerontologist 1980; 20(3):356–63.Google Scholar
3.Hollander, MJ, Pallan, P. A new planning and resource allocation framework for institutional and community based long term care services.Paper presented at the II European Congress of Gerontology,Madrid, Spain,September, 1991.Google Scholar
4.Shapiro, E, Tate, RB. Is health care use changing? A comparison between physician, hospital, nursing-home, and home-care use of two elderly cohorts. Medical Care 1989; 27(11):1002–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Federal/Provincial/Territorial Subcommittee on Continuing Care. Description of long-term-care services in provinces and territories of Canada, September 1991. Ottawa: Health and Welfare Canada, 1991.Google Scholar
6.Alberta Health. Program description: Single point of entry for long term care services in Alberta. Edmonton: Alberta Health, 1990.Google Scholar
7.Deber, RB, Williams, AP. Policy, payment and participation: Long-term care reform in Ontario. Canadian Journal on Aging 1995; 14(2):294318.Google Scholar
8.Beland, F, Shapiro, E. Ten provinces in search of a long term care policy. In: Marshall, VW, McPherson, BD, eds. Aging: Canadian Perspectives. Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press, 1994; 245–67.Google Scholar
9.Health Services Utilization and Research Commission. Long-term Care in Saskatchewan: Final Report. Saskatoon: Health Services Utilization and Research Commission, 1994.Google Scholar
10.Health Services Utilization and Research Commission. Barriers to Community Care: Summary Report. Saskatoon: Health Services Utilization and Research Commission, 1994.Google Scholar
11.Saskatchewan Health, Continuing Care Branch. Continuing Care Assessment (H31–22R). Regina: Government of Saskatchewan, n.d.Google Scholar
12.Hirdes, JP, Brown, KS. The statistical analysis of event histories in longitudinal studies of aging. Canadian Journal on Aging 1994; 13(3):332–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Shapiro, E, Roos, NP. Predictors and patterns of nursing home and home care use. In: Petersen, MD, White, DL, eds., Health care of the elderly: An information sourcebook. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1989.Google Scholar
14.Shapiro, E, Tate, R. Who is really at risk of institutionalization? The Gerontologist 1988; 28(2):237–45.Google Scholar
15.Shapiro, E, Tate, RB. Predictors of long term care facility use among the elderly. Canadian Journal on Aging 1985; 4(1):1119.Google Scholar
16.Branch, LG, Jette, AM. A prospective study of long-term care institutionalization among the aged. American Journal of Public Health 1982; 72(12):1373–9.Google Scholar
17.Glazebrook, K, Rockwood, K, Stolee, P et al. . A case control study of the risks for institutionalization of elderly people in Nova Scotia. Canadian Journal on Aging 1994; 13(1):104–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Falcone, D, Bolda, E, Leak, SC. Waiting for placement: An exploratory analysis of determinants of delayed discharges of elderly hospital patients. Health Services Research 1991; 26(3):339–74.Google ScholarPubMed
19.Coburn, AF, Fortinsky, RH, McGuire, CA. The impact of Medicaid reimbursement policy on subacute care in hospitals. Medical Care 1989; 27(1):2533.Google Scholar
20.Shapiro, E, Tate, RB, Tabisz, E. Waiting times for nursing-home placement: The impact of patients' choices. Canadian Medical Association Journal 1992; 146(8): 1343–8.Google Scholar