R E H A B I L I T A T I O N - Ontario Hospital Association
R E H A B I L I T A T I O N - Ontario Hospital Association R E H A B I L I T A T I O N - Ontario Hospital Association
SUMMARY OF RESULTS (CONT’D)CLINICAL UTILIZATION AND OUTCOMESFigures 12 and 13 show thewide variation in Average ActiveRehabilitation Length of Stay forhip fracture and hip and kneeErie St.Clair (LHIN 1)replacement clients at the LHINlevel. Note that the provincialSouth West (LHIN 2)average Active RehabilitationWaterloo Wellington (LHIN 3)Length of Stay for hip fracturesHamilton Niagara Haldimand Brant (LHIN 4)(25 days) is twice as long as thatfor hip and knee replacementsCentral West (LHIN 5)(13 days). This may beMississauga Halton (LHIN 6)attributable, in part, to theToronto Central (LHIN 7)different levels of care required forthese groups. For example, manyCentral (LHIN 8)joint replacement clients undergoCentral East (LHIN 9)a standard, elective procedureand may show functionalSouth East (LHIN 10)improvement in a shorterChamplain (LHIN 11)period of time.North Simcoe Muskoka (LHIN 12)In both groups, there areNorth East (LHIN 13)variations in average length ofstay among LHINs. For example,North West (LHIN 14)the highest average length of stayfor clients with hip fractures isfound in the Champlain LHIN, at32 days, and the lowest averageSource: National Rehabilitation Reporting System, CIHI, 2005–2006.length of stay for this group isfound in the North East LHIN, at16 days. In contrast, the highestaverage length of stay for clients with hip and knee replacements is found in the South WestLHIN, at 23 days, and the lowest average length of stay for this group is found in the NorthWest LHIN, at 8 days.The length of stay in a rehabilitation program can potentially be influenced by many factors,such as age, the presence of comorbid conditions, the number of beds in a facility, thenumber of transfers, staffing and the availability of needed post-discharge care resources.It should be noted that LHINs may vary considerably in the number of hospitals within theirboundaries, the populations they serve and the services they provide. While these differencesmust be considered in the interpretation of indicator results, they do not necessarily explainthe findings. Where variation in indicator results is observed, further investigation is warrantedto explore the opportunities for shared learning and process improvement.Active Rehabilitation Length of Stay for Hip and Knee Replacement Clients by LHIN0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0Number of DaysProvincial Average12.7Figure 13PAGE 32
PERFORMANCE ALLOCATION TABLECLINICAL UTILIZATION AND OUTCOMESHospitalCommunityServedLHINAll Rehabilitation Client Groups Stroke Orthopedic ConditionsAverage Active Average Active Average Active Length ofAverage Total Rehabilitation Length of Average Total Rehabilitation Length of Average Total Rehabilitation StayFunction Change Length of Stay Stay Efficiency Function Change Length of Stay Stay Efficiency Function Change Length of Stay EfficiencyPROVINCIAL AVERAGE 19.7 23.7 1.5 21.6 35.9 0.8 20.6 16.4 2.0Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care Toronto 7 17.7 37.7 0.5 24.5 45.6 0.6 21.7 36.8 0.7Bluewater Health Sarnia 1 20.5 25.9 1.3 20.4 37.0 0.7 21.0 16.0 2.0Bridgepoint Health Toronto 7 25.4 31.3 1.3 23.0 52.4 0.5 26.4 24.5 1.5Chatham-Kent Health Alliance Chatham 1 18.9 21.4 1.2 18.6 33.7 0.9 20.7 17.4 1.4Cornwall Community Hospital Cornwall 11 16.2 36.3 0.5 17.6 48.3 0.4 16.2 31.8 0.5Grand River Hospital Kitchener 3 16.5 21.1 1.5 22.8 36.1 1.2 15.5 15.3 1.7Grey Bruce Health Services Owen Sound 2 22.4 29.9 0.9 25.0 36.5 0.8 19.6 15.2 1.5Guelph General Hospital Guelph 3 12.0 8.9 1.5 10.4 8.1 1.4 13.5 8.7 1.7Halton Healthcare Oakville 6 19.3 15.7 1.7 16.6 26.7 0.9 19.6 12.9 2.0Hamilton Health Sciences Corporation Hamilton 4 21.2 32.2 1.1 22.8 34.3 0.8 24.5 22.9 1.8Hôpital Montfort Hospital Ottawa 11 12.9 13.0 1.1 12.4 13.9 0.8 14.7 12.8 1.2Hôpital régional de SudburyRegional HospitalSudbury 13 17.0 40.0 0.5 17.9 37.3 0.5 17.5 41.0 0.4Hôtel-Dieu Grace Hospital Windsor 1 19.4 7.5 3.4 11.9 8.2 1.6 24.2 6.0 4.8Humber River Regional Hospital Toronto 8 25.1 10.2 3.0 18.5 12.0 1.8 25.7 9.3 3.2Huron Perth Healthcare Alliance Stratford 2 22.6 32.4 1.2 22.0 46.5 0.8 25.7 22.5 1.7Joseph Brant Memorial Hospital Burlington 4 22.0 21.7 1.4 25.2 31.0 1.1 23.1 19.6 1.6Lakeridge Health Oshawa 9 27.8 33.1 1.5 32.6 52.6 0.8 27.7 21.7 2.2Leamington District Memorial Hospital Leamington 1 16.1 9.7 1.6 12.6 7.6 1.6 18.8 11.6 1.7Listowel and Wingham Hospitals Alliance Listowel 2 19.3 16.6 1.6 25.2 19.8 1.7 17.6 15.2 1.7Markham Stouffville Hospital Markham 8 15.3 12.4 1.6 19.6 22.0 1.2 14.1 9.5 1.7North Bay General Hospital North Bay 13 23.6 30.0 1.3 27.5 40.4 1.2 20.6 19.1 2.1North York General Hospital Toronto 8 16.8 15.6 1.2 12.8 11.5 1.2 18.7 14.6 1.5Northumberland Hills Hospital Cobourg 9 22.2 27.6 1.2 19.2 42.1 0.5 25.2 22.5 1.6Pembroke Regional Hospital Pembroke 11 24.2 26.1 1.4 24.9 30.5 1.1 24.1 23.9 1.8Penetanguishene General Hospital Inc. Penetangui-12 15.4 18.6 0.9 21.0 31.5 0.6 13.4 13.9 0.9(The)—North Simcoe Hospital Alliance shenePeterborough Regional Health Centre Peterborough 9 18.4 36.5 0.7 22.7 42.5 0.8 19.1 36.7 0.7Providence Continuing Care Centre Kingston 10 22.6 37.0 1.0 21.3 49.5 0.5 25.9 23.3 1.4Above-Average Performance Average Performance Below-Average PerformancePAGE 33
- Page 1: HospitalReportR E H A B I L I T A T
- Page 5 and 6: A SNAPSHOT OF HOSPITAL ACTIVITYIN O
- Page 7 and 8: Table 2 depicts the total number of
- Page 9 and 10: “HIGH-PERFORMING” HOSPITALSHIGH
- Page 11 and 12: INTERPRETATION OF BOX PLOTS AND PER
- Page 13 and 14: SYSTEM INTEGRATION AND CHANGEINTEGR
- Page 15 and 16: SUMMARY OF RESULTS (CONT’D)SYSTEM
- Page 17 and 18: SUMMARY OF RESULTS (CONT’D)SYSTEM
- Page 19 and 20: PERFORMANCE ALLOCATION TABLEThe per
- Page 21 and 22: SYSTEM INTEGRATION AND CHANGECommun
- Page 23 and 24: CLIENT PERSPECTIVESPERSPECTIVESThis
- Page 25 and 26: SUMMARY OF RESULTS (CONT’D)CLIENT
- Page 28 and 29: CLIENT PERSPECTIVESCommunityHospita
- Page 30 and 31: CLINICAL UTILIZATION AND OUTCOMESUT
- Page 32 and 33: SUMMARY OF RESULTSAll RCGsHospital-
- Page 34 and 35: SUMMARY OF RESULTS (CONT’D)CLINIC
- Page 38 and 39: 8CLINICAL UTILIZATION AND OUTCOMESP
- Page 40 and 41: FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE AND CONDITION
- Page 42 and 43: SUMMARY OF RESULTSFINANCIAL PERFORM
- Page 44 and 45: FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE AND CONDITION
- Page 46: APPENDIX A: DATA SOURCESThe followi
- Page 49: To download a copy of Hospital Repo
SUMMARY OF RESULTS (CONT’D)CLINICAL UTILIZATION AND OUTCOMESFigures 12 and 13 show thewide variation in Average ActiveRehabilitation Length of Stay forhip fracture and hip and kneeErie St.Clair (LHIN 1)replacement clients at the LHINlevel. Note that the provincialSouth West (LHIN 2)average Active RehabilitationWaterloo Wellington (LHIN 3)Length of Stay for hip fracturesHamilton Niagara Haldimand Brant (LHIN 4)(25 days) is twice as long as thatfor hip and knee replacementsCentral West (LHIN 5)(13 days). This may beMississauga Halton (LHIN 6)attributable, in part, to theToronto Central (LHIN 7)different levels of care required forthese groups. For example, manyCentral (LHIN 8)joint replacement clients undergoCentral East (LHIN 9)a standard, elective procedureand may show functionalSouth East (LHIN 10)improvement in a shorterChamplain (LHIN 11)period of time.North Simcoe Muskoka (LHIN 12)In both groups, there areNorth East (LHIN 13)variations in average length ofstay among LHINs. For example,North West (LHIN 14)the highest average length of stayfor clients with hip fractures isfound in the Champlain LHIN, at32 days, and the lowest averageSource: National Rehabilitation Reporting System, CIHI, 2005–2006.length of stay for this group isfound in the North East LHIN, at16 days. In contrast, the highestaverage length of stay for clients with hip and knee replacements is found in the South WestLHIN, at 23 days, and the lowest average length of stay for this group is found in the NorthWest LHIN, at 8 days.The length of stay in a rehabilitation program can potentially be influenced by many factors,such as age, the presence of comorbid conditions, the number of beds in a facility, thenumber of transfers, staffing and the availability of needed post-discharge care resources.It should be noted that LHINs may vary considerably in the number of hospitals within theirboundaries, the populations they serve and the services they provide. While these differencesmust be considered in the interpretation of indicator results, they do not necessarily explainthe findings. Where variation in indicator results is observed, further investigation is warrantedto explore the opportunities for shared learning and process improvement.Active Rehabilitation Length of Stay for Hip and Knee Replacement Clients by LHIN0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0Number of DaysProvincial Average12.7Figure 13PAGE 32
Change language