OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of postacute care site on stroke outcomes. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Four northern California hospitals that are part of a single health maintenance organization. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with stroke (N=222) enrolled between February 2008 and July 2010. INTERVENTION: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Baseline and 6-month assessments were performed using the Activity Measure for Post Acute Care (AM-PAC), a test of self-reported function in 3 domains: Basic Mobility, Daily Activities, and Applied Cognition. RESULTS: Of the 222 patients analyzed, 36% went home with no treatment, 22% received home health/outpatient care, 30% included an inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) in their care trajectory, and 13% included a skilled nursing facility (but not IRF) in their care trajectory. At 6 months, after controlling for important variables such as age, functional status at acute care discharge, and total hours of rehabilitation, patients who went to an IRF had functional scores that were at least 8 points higher (twice the minimally detectable change for the AM-PAC) than those who went to a skilled nursing facility in all 3 domains and in 2 of 3 functional domains compared with those who received home health/outpatient care. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with stroke may make more functional gains if their postacute care includes an IRF. This finding may have important implications as postacute care delivery is reshaped through health care reform.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of postacute care site on stroke outcomes. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Four northern California hospitals that are part of a single health maintenance organization. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with stroke (N=222) enrolled between February 2008 and July 2010. INTERVENTION: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Baseline and 6-month assessments were performed using the Activity Measure for Post Acute Care (AM-PAC), a test of self-reported function in 3 domains: Basic Mobility, Daily Activities, and Applied Cognition. RESULTS: Of the 222 patients analyzed, 36% went home with no treatment, 22% received home health/outpatient care, 30% included an inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) in their care trajectory, and 13% included a skilled nursing facility (but not IRF) in their care trajectory. At 6 months, after controlling for important variables such as age, functional status at acute care discharge, and total hours of rehabilitation, patients who went to an IRF had functional scores that were at least 8 points higher (twice the minimally detectable change for the AM-PAC) than those who went to a skilled nursing facility in all 3 domains and in 2 of 3 functional domains compared with those who received home health/outpatient care. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with stroke may make more functional gains if their postacute care includes an IRF. This finding may have important implications as postacute care delivery is reshaped through health care reform.
Authors: Stephen M Haley; Wendy J Coster; Patricia L Andres; Larry H Ludlow; Pengsheg Ni; Tamara L Y Bond; Samuel J Sinclair; Alan M Jette Journal: Med Care Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: A M Kramer; J F Steiner; R E Schlenker; T B Eilertsen; C A Hrincevich; D A Tropea; L A Ahmad; D G Eckhoff Journal: JAMA Date: 1997-02-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Stephen M Haley; Patricia L Andres; Wendy J Coster; Mark Kosinski; Pengsheng Ni; Alan M Jette Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Courtney J Balentine; Kelly Kenzik; Daniel I Chu; Melanie S Morris; Sara J Knight; Cynthia J Brown; Smita Bhatia Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2018-05-18 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Ickpyo Hong; Amol Karmarkar; Winston Chan; Yong-Fang Kuo; Trudy Mallinson; Kenneth J Ottenbacher; James S Goodwin; Clark R Andersen; Timothy A Reistetter Journal: Am J Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 2.159
Authors: Kathryn H Bowles; Sarah J Ratcliffe; John H Holmes; Sue Keim; Sheryl Potashnik; Emilia Flores; Diane Humbrecht; Christina R Whitehouse; Mary D Naylor Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2018-11-08 Impact factor: 4.669
Authors: Michael E Reznik; Seth A Margolis; Ali Mahta; Linda C Wendell; Bradford B Thompson; Christoph Stretz; James L Rudolph; Olga Boukrina; A M Barrett; Lori A Daiello; Richard N Jones; Karen L Furie Journal: Stroke Date: 2021-10-05 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Leda F Espinoza; Laura C Simko; Richard Goldstein; Kara A McMullen; Chloe Slocum; Julie K Silver; David N Herndon; Oscar E Suman; Walter J Meyer; Nicole S Gibran; Karen Kowalske; Ross Zafonte; Colleen M Ryan; Jeffrey C Schneider Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2019-07-03 Impact factor: 4.060
Authors: Zainab Magdon-Ismail; Alyse Sicklick; Robin Hedeman; Janet Prvu Bettger; Joel Stein Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 1.889