TY - JOUR T1 - Comparison of long-term care in an acute care institution and in a long-term care institution JF - Canadian Medical Association Journal JO - CMAJ SP - 1107 LP - 1113 VL - 159 IS - 9 AU - R. Friedman AU - N. Kalant Y1 - 1998/11/03 UR - http://www.cmaj.ca/content/159/9/1107.abstract N2 - BACKGROUND: Acute care hospitals in Quebec are required to reserve 10% of their beds for patients receiving long-term care while awaiting transfer to a long-term care facility. It is widely believed that this is inefficient because it is more costly to provide long-term care in an acute care hospital than in one dedicated to long-term care. The purpose of this study was to compare the quality and cost of long-term care in an acute care hospital and in a long-term care facility. METHODS: A concurrent cross-sectional study was conducted of 101 patients at the acute care hospital and 102 patients at the long-term care hospital. The 2 groups were closely matched in terms of age, sex, nursing care requirements and major diagnoses. Several indicators were used to assess the quality of care: the number of medical specialist consultations, drugs, biochemical tests and radiographic examinations; the number of adverse events (reportable incidents, nosocomial infections and pressure ulcers); and anthropometric and biochemical indicators of nutritional status. Costs were determined for nursing personnel, drugs and biochemical tests. A longitudinal study was conducted of 45 patients who had been receiving long-term care at the acute care hospital for at least 5 months and were then transferred to the long-term care facility where they remained for at least 6 months. For each patient, the number of adverse events, the number of medical specialist consultations and the changes in activities of daily living status were assessed at the 2 institutions. RESULTS: In the concurrent study, no differences in the number of adverse events were observed; however, patients at the acute care hospital received more drugs (5.9 v. 4.7 for each patient, p < 0.01) and underwent more tests (299 v. 79 laboratory units/year for each patient, p < 0.001) and radiographic examinations (64 v. 46 per 1000 patient-weeks, p < 0.05). At both institutions, 36% of the patients showed anthropometric and biochemical evidence of protein-calorie undernutrition; 28% at the acute care hospital and 27% at the long-term care hospital had low serum iron and low transferrin saturation, compatible with iron deficiency. The longitudinal study showed that there were more consultations (61 v. 37 per 1000 patient-weeks, p < 0.02) and fewer pressure ulcers (18 v. 34 per 1000 patient-weeks, p < 0.05) at the acute care hospital than at the long-term care facility; other measures did not differ. The cost per patient-year was $7580 higher at the acute care hospital, attributable to the higher cost of drugs ($42), the greater use of laboratory tests ($189) and, primarily, the higher cost of nursing ($7349). For patients requiring 3.00 nursing hours/day, the acute care hospital provided more hours than the long-term care facility (3.59 v. 3.03 hours), with a higher percentage of hours from professional nurses rather than auxiliary nurses or nursing aides (62% v. 28%). The nurse staffing pattern at the acute care hospital was characteristic of university-affiliated acute care hospitals. INTERPRETATION: The long-term care provided in the acute care hospital involved a more interventionist medical approach and greater use of professional nurses (at a significantly higher cost) but without any overall difference in the quality of care. ER -