Home care service utilization in British Columbia: Substitute or complement to acute care?

The desire to promote efficient allocation of health resources and effective patient care has focused attention on home care as an alternative to acute hospital service. in particular, clinical home care is suggested as a substitute for the final days of hospital stay. This dissertation evaluates the relationship between hospital and home care services for residents of British Columbia, Canada beginning in 1993/94 using data from the British Columbia Linked Health database. ^ Lengths of stay for patients referred to home care following hospital discharge are compared to those for patients not referred to home care. Ordinary least squares regression analysis adjusts for age, gender, admission severity, comorbidity, complications, income, and other patient, physician, and hospital characteristics. Home care clients tend to have longer stays in hospital than patients not referred to home care (β = 2.54, p = 0.0001). Longer hospital stays are evident for all home care client groups as well as both older and younger patients. Sensitivity analysis for referral time to direct care and extreme lengths of stay are consistent with these findings. Two stage regression analysis indicates that selection bias is not significant.^ Patients referred to clinical home care also have different health service utilization following discharge compared to patients not referred to home care. Home care nursing clients use more medical services to complement home care. Rehabilitation clients initially substitute home care for physiotherapy services but later are more likely to be admitted to residential care. All home care clients are more likely to be readmitted to hospital during the one year follow-up period. There is also a strong complementary association between direct care referral and homemaker support. Rehabilitation clients have a greater risk of dying during the year following discharge. ^ These results suggest that home care is currently used as a complement rather than a substitute for some acute health services. Organizational and resource issues may contribute to the longer stays by home care clients. Program planning and policies are required if home care is to provide an effective substitute for acute hospital days. ^

COMPARISON OF THE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THE INVESTOR-OWNED AND VOLUNTARY MULTIHOSPITAL SECTORS

Objectives. The central objective of this study was to systematically examine the internal structure of multihospital systems, determining the management principles used and the performance levels achieved in medical care and administrative areas.^ The Universe. The study universe consisted of short-term general American hospitals owned and operated by multihospital corporations. Corporations compared were the investor-owned (for-profit) and the voluntary multihospital systems. The individual hospital was the unit of analysis for the study.^ Theoretical Considerations. The contingency theory, using selected aspects of the classical and human relations schools of thought, seemed well suited to describe multihospital organization and was used in this research.^ The Study Hypotheses. The main null hypotheses generated were that there are no significant differences between the voluntary and the investor-owned multihospital sectors in their (1) hospital structures and (2) patient care and administrative performance levels.^ The Sample. A stratified random sample of 212 hospitals owned by multihospital systems was selected to equally represent the two study sectors. Of the sampled hospitals approached, 90.1% responded.^ The Analysis. Sixteen scales were constructed in conjunction with 16 structural variables developed from the major questions and sub-items of the questionnaire. This was followed by analysis of an additional 7 structural and 24 effectiveness (performance) measures, using frequency distributions. Finally, summary statistics and statistical testing for each variable and sub-items were completed and recorded in 38 tables.^ Study Findings. While it has been argued that there are great differences between the two sectors, this study found that with a few exceptions the null hypotheses of no difference in organizational and operational characteristics of non-profit and for-profit hospitals was accepted. However, there were several significant differences found in the structural variables: functional specialization, and autonomy were significantly higher in the voluntary sector. Only centralization was significantly different in the investor owned. Among the effectiveness measures, occupancy rate, cost of data processing, total manhours worked, F.T.E. ratios, and personnel per occupied bed were significantly higher in the voluntary sector. The findings indicated that both voluntary and for-profit systems were converging toward a common hierarchical corporate management approach. Factors of size and management style may be better descriptors to characterize a specific multihospital group than its profit or nonprofit status. (Abstract shortened with permission of author.) ^