McClaran J, Tover-Berglas R, Glass K C
Division of Geriatric Medicine, Montreal General Hospital, PQ.
CMAJ. 1991 Nov 15;145(10):1259-65.
To examine the lengths of stay of chronic status patients in an acute care hospital, to identify discharge stages that contribute to excessive stays, to estimate the length of stay at each discharge stage and to link hospital bed-day utilization by the discharge stage to the experience of the patient.
Two-year prospective cohort study. The number of hospital days retrospective to the date of the current admission were included in the analysis.
University hospital.
All 115 inpatients formally declared as achieving chronic status by July 31, 1987.
Lengths of stay (total days and days at acute and chronic status) for chronic status patients, including those still in hospital at the end of the study period. Each bed-day was assigned to a discharge stage that corresponded to the patient's status. The disposition of each patient by the end of the study period was reviewed.
The study population spent a total of 101 585 days in hospital. The total length of stay per patient was nearly four times that stated in the hospital's annual report, in which the figure was calculated only on the basis of discharge data. On average only 77.2 (8.7%) of the days were spent in acute care. The remaining days were at the chronic level: 24.1% were spent waiting for completion of an application to a long-term care facility, 25.3% for application approval and 41.9% for an available bed in the assigned long-term care institution. For 30 patients no initiation of the discharge process was ever undertaken. As the number of patients in each progressive discharge stage decreased, the wait per patient increased. By the end of the study period only 32 patients had been transferred to a public long-term care facility; 22 were still in hospital, and 35 had died waiting for placement.
Although considered to be a useful measure of hospital efficiency, length of stay determined from discharge data creates an iceberg effect when applied to chronic status patients in acute care hospitals. Lack of access to the assigned resource is the most important reason for a delay in discharge. Interventions, whether undertaken at the patient, hospital or provincial level, must to some degree address this issue. Further study is required to determine which risk factors will predict lags at each discharge stage. Since our discharge staging reflects not only the experience of the patient but also the utilization of hospital bed-days and access to provincial resources, it provides a common language for clinicians, hospital administrators and systems planners.
研究急性护理医院中慢性病患者的住院时间,确定导致住院时间过长的出院阶段,估计每个出院阶段的住院时间,并将出院阶段的医院病床日使用情况与患者的经历联系起来。
为期两年的前瞻性队列研究。分析中纳入了自本次入院日期起回顾性统计的住院天数。
大学医院。
截至1987年7月31日正式宣布达到慢性病状态的所有115名住院患者。
慢性病患者的住院时间(总天数以及急性和慢性病状态下的天数),包括研究期结束时仍住院的患者。每个病床日被分配到一个与患者状态相对应的出院阶段。回顾了研究期结束时每位患者的处置情况。
研究人群共住院101585天。每位患者的总住院时间几乎是医院年度报告中所述时间的四倍,该报告中的数字仅根据出院数据计算得出。平均而言,只有77.2天(8.7%)用于急性护理。其余时间处于慢性病阶段:24.1%用于等待长期护理机构申请的完成,25.3%用于申请批准,41.9%用于在指定长期护理机构等待可用床位。有30名患者从未启动出院程序。随着每个渐进出院阶段患者数量的减少,每位患者的等待时间增加。到研究期结束时,只有32名患者被转至公立长期护理机构;22名仍住院,35名在等待安置过程中死亡。
虽然住院时间被认为是衡量医院效率的一个有用指标,但从出院数据确定的住院时间应用于急性护理医院的慢性病患者时会产生冰山效应。无法获得指定资源是出院延迟的最重要原因。无论是在患者、医院还是省级层面进行的干预,都必须在一定程度上解决这个问题。需要进一步研究以确定哪些风险因素会预测每个出院阶段的延迟。由于我们的出院阶段划分不仅反映了患者的经历,还反映了医院病床日的使用情况以及获得省级资源的情况,它为临床医生、医院管理人员和系统规划人员提供了一种通用语言。