Dataset Information

The impact of stroke on employment income: A cohort study using hospital and income tax data in Ontario, Canada.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To document the impact of stroke on employment income among people employed at the time of stroke.

Design

Population-based cohort study.

Participants

People hospitalized for stroke in Ontario, Canada (2010-2014) and people without stroke matched on demographic characteristics.

Main measures

Robust Poisson regression to estimate the effects of stroke on the probability of reporting employment income on tax returns over 3 years. Quantile regression difference-in-differences to estimate the changes in annual employment income attributable to stroke.

Results

Stroke survivors were increasingly less likely to report any employment income poststroke, incidence rate ratios (IRR) 0.87 at 1 year (95% confidence intervals [CI]; 0.85-0.88), 0.82 at 2 years (95% CI; 0.81-0.84) and 0.81 at 3 years (95% CI; 0.79-0.82). IRR for reporting at least 50% of prestroke income levels were 0.76 at 1 year (95% CI; 0.75-0.78), 0.75 at 2 years (95% CI; 0.73-0.77) and 0.73 at 3 years (95% CI; 0.71-0.75). IRR for reporting at least 90% of prestroke income levels were 0.72 at 1 year (95% CI; 0.70-0.74), 0.66 at 2 years (95% CI; 0.64-0.68) and again 0.66 at 3 years (95% CI; 0.64-0.68). Relative changes in annual employment income attributable to stroke varied from a decrease of 13.8% (95% CI; 8.7-18.9) at the 75th income percentile to a decrease of 43.1% (95% CI; 18.7-67.6) at the 25th income percentile.

Conclusions

It is important for healthcare and service providers to recognize the impact of stroke on return to prestroke levels of employment income. Low-income stroke survivors experience a more drastic loss in employment income and may need additional social support.

SUBMITTER: Duong P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11348632 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The impact of stroke on employment income: A cohort study using hospital and income tax data in Ontario, Canada.

Duong Patrick P Egan Mary M Meyer Matthew M Morrison Tricia T Sauvé-Schenk Katrine K

Clinical rehabilitation 20240430 8

<h4>Objective</h4>To document the impact of stroke on employment income among people employed at the time of stroke.<h4>Design</h4>Population-based cohort study.<h4>Participants</h4>People hospitalized for stroke in Ontario, Canada (2010-2014) and people without stroke matched on demographic characteristics.<h4>Main measures</h4>Robust Poisson regression to estimate the effects of stroke on the probability of reporting employment income on tax returns over 3 years. Quantile regression difference ...[more]

PMID: 38689431

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatients who live in minority language situations are generally more likely to experience poor health outcomes, including harmful events. The delivery of healthcare services in a language-concordant environment has been shown to mitigate the risk of poor health outcomes related to chronic disease management in primary care. However, data assessing the impact of language-concordance on the risk of in-hospital harm are lacking. We conducted a population-based study to determine whether admission to a language-discordant hospital is a risk factor for in-hospital harm.MethodsWe used linked administrative health records to establish a retrospective cohort of home care recipients (from 2007 to 2015) who were admitted to a hospital in Eastern or North-Eastern Ontario, Canada. Patient language (obtained from home care assessments) was coded as English (Anglophone group), French (Francophone group), or other (Allophone group); hospital language (English or bilingual) was obtained using language designation status according to the French Language Services Act. We identified in-hospital harmful events using the Hospital Harm Indicator developed by the Canadian Institute for Health Information.ResultsThe proportion of hospitalizations with at least 1 harmful event was greater for Allophones (7.63%) than for Anglophones (6.29%, p < 0.001) and Francophones (6.15%, p < 0.001). Overall, Allophones admitted to hospitals required by law to provide services in both French and English (bilingual hospitals) had the highest rate of harm (9.16%), while Francophones admitted to these same hospitals had the lowest rate of harm (5.93%). In the unadjusted analysis, Francophones were less likely to experience harm in bilingual hospitals than in hospitals that were not required by law to provide services in French (English-speaking hospitals) (RR = 0.88, p = 0.048); the opposite was true for Anglophones and Allophones, who were more likely to experience harm in bilingual hospitals (RR = 1.17, p < 0.001 and RR = 1.41, p < 0.001, respectively). The risk of harm was not significant in the adjusted analysis.ConclusionsHome care recipients residing in Eastern and North-Eastern Ontario were more likely to experience harm in language-discordant hospitals, but the risk of harm did not persist after adjusting for confounding variables.

Project description:IntroductionThere are two main data sources for perinatal data in Ontario, Canada: the BORN BIS and CIHI-DAD. Such databases are used for perinatal health surveillance and research, and to guide health care related decisions.ObjectivesOur primary objective was to examine the level of agreement between the BIS and CIHI-DAD. Our secondary objectives were to identify the differences between the data sources when identifying a low-risk birth (LRB) cohort and to understand their implications.MethodsWe conducted a population-based cohort study comparing characteristics and clinical outcomes of all linkable births in BIS and CIHI-DAD between 1st April 2012 and 31st March 2018. We excluded out-of-hospital births, those with invalid healthcare numbers, non-Ontario residents and gestational age <20 weeks. We compared the portion of the cohort that met the criteria of a provincial definition of LRB based on each data source and compared clinical outcomes between the groups.ResultsDuring the study period, 779,979 eligible births were linkable between the two data sources. After applying the LRB exclusions, there were 129,908 cases in the BIS and 136,184 cases in CIHI-DAD. Most exclusion criteria had almost perfect, substantial or moderate agreement. The agreement for non-cephalic presentation and BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2 (kappa coefficients 0.409 and 0.256, respectively) was fair. Comparison between the two LRB cohorts identified differences in the prevalence of cesarean (14.3% BIS versus 12.0% CIHI-DAD) and NICU admission (8.7% BIS versus 7.5% CIHI-DAD) and only 0.01% difference in the prevalence of ICU admission.ConclusionsOverall, we found high levels of agreement between the BIS and CIHI-DAD. Identifying a LRB cohort in either database may be appropriate, with the caveat of appropriate understanding of the collection, coding and definition of certain outcomes. The decision for selecting a database may depend on which variables are most important in a particular analysis.

Project description:BackgroundThe burden of multimorbidity is a growing clinical and health system problem that is known to be associated with socioeconomic status, yet our understanding of the underlying determinants of inequalities in multimorbidity and longitudinal trends in measured disparities remains limited.MethodsWe included all adult respondents from four cycles of the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) (between 2005 to 2011/12), linked at the individual-level to health administrative data in Ontario, Canada (pooled n = 113,627). Multimorbidity was defined at each survey response as having ≥2 (of 17) high impact chronic conditions, based on claims data. Using a decomposition method of the Erreygers-corrected concentration index (CErreygers), we measured household income inequality and the contribution of the key determinants of multimorbidity (including socio-demographic, socio-economic, lifestyle and health system factors) to these disparities. Differences over time are described. We tested for statistically significant changes to measured inequality using the slope index (SII) and relative index of inequality (RII) with a 2-way interaction on pooled data.ResultsMultimorbidity prevalence in 2011/12 was 33.5% and the CErreygers was - 0.085 (CI: -0.108 to - 0.062), indicating a greater prevalence among lower income groups. In decomposition analyses, income itself accounted more than two-thirds (69%) of this inequality. Age (21.7%), marital status (15.2%) and physical inactivity (10.9%) followed, and the contribution of these factors increased from baseline (2005 CCHS survey) with the exception of age. Other lifestyle factors, including heavy smoking and obesity, had minimal contribution to measured inequality (1.8 and 0.4% respectively). Tests for trends (SII/RII) across pooled survey data were not statistically significant (p = 0.443 and 0.405, respectively), indicating no change in inequalities in multimorbidity prevalence over the study period.ConclusionsA pro-rich income gap in multimorbidity has persisted in Ontario from 2005 to 2011/12. These empirical findings suggest that to advance equality in multimorbidity prevalence, policymakers should target chronic disease prevention and control strategies focused on older adults, non-married persons and those that are physically inactive, in addition to addressing income disparities directly.

Project description:ObjectiveSmoking is the main modifiable cancer risk factor. The objective of this study was to examine the impact of smoking on health system costs among newly diagnosed adult patients with cancer. Specifically, costs of patients with cancer who were current smokers were compared with those of non-smokers from a publicly funded health system perspective.MethodsThis population-based cohort study of patients with cancer used administrative databases to identify smokers and non-smokers (1 April 2014-31 March 2016) and their healthcare costs in the 12-24 months following a cancer diagnosis. The health services included were hospitalisations, emergency room visits, drugs, home care services and physician services (from the time of diagnosis onwards). The difference in cost (ie, incremental cost) between patients with cancer who were smokers and those who were non-smokers was estimated using a generalised linear model (with log link and gamma distribution), and adjusted for age, sex, neighbourhood income, rurality, cancer site, cancer stage, geographical region and comorbidities.ResultsThis study identified 3606 smokers and 14 911 non-smokers. Smokers were significantly younger (61 vs 65 years), more likely to be male (53%), lived in poorer neighbourhoods, had more advanced cancer stage,and were more likely to die within 1 year of diagnosis, compared with non-smokers. The regression model revealed that, on average, smokers had significantly higher monthly healthcare costs ($5091) than non-smokers ($4847), p<0.05.ConclusionsSmoking status has a significant impact on healthcare costs among patients with cancer. On average, smokers incurred higher healthcare costs than non-smokers. These findings provide a further rationale for efforts to introduce evidence-based smoking cessation programmes as a standard of care for patients with cancer as they have the potential not only to improve patients' outcomes but also to reduce the economic burden of smoking on the healthcare system.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Healthcare interventions on weekends have been associated with increased mortality and adverse clinical outcomes, but these findings are inconsistent. We hypothesized that patients admitted to hospital on weekends who have surgery have an increased risk of death compared with patients who are admitted and have surgery on weekdays. METHODS AND FINDINGS:This matched cohort study included 318,202 adult patients from Ontario health administrative and demographic databases, admitted to acute care hospitals from 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2015. A total of 159,101 patients who were admitted on weekends and underwent noncardiac surgery were classified by day of surgery (weekend versus weekday) and matched 1:1 to patients who both were admitted and had surgery on a weekday (Tuesday to Thursday); matching was based on age (in years), anesthesia basic unit value for the surgical procedure, median neighborhood household income quintile, resource utilization band (a ranking system of overall morbidity), rurality of home location, year of admission, and urgency of admission. Of weekend admissions, 16.2% (25,872) were elective and 53.9% (85,744) had surgery on the weekend of admission. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 30 days of the date of hospital admission. The 30-day all-cause mortality for patients admitted on weekends who had noncardiac surgery was 2.6% (4,211/159,101) versus 2.5% (3,901/159,101) for those who were admitted and had surgery on weekdays (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.05; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.11; P = 0.03). However, there was significant heterogeneity in the increased odds of death according to the urgency of admission and when surgery was performed (weekend versus weekday). For urgent admissions on weekends (n = 133,229), there was no significant increase in odds of mortality when surgery was performed on the weekend (adjusted OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.09; P = 0.7) or on a subsequent weekday (adjusted OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.12; P = 0.2) compared to urgent admissions on weekdays. Elective admissions on weekends (n = 25,782) had increased risk of death both when surgery was performed on the weekend (adjusted OR 3.30; 95% CI 1.98 to 5.49; P < 0.001) and when surgery was performed on a subsequent weekday (adjusted OR 2.70; 95% CI 1.81 to 4.03; P < 0.001). The main limitations of this study were the lack of data regarding reason for admission and cause of increased time interval from admission to surgery for some cases, the small number of deaths in some subgroups (i.e., elective surgery), and the possibility of residual unmeasured confounding from increased illness severity for weekend admissions. CONCLUSIONS:When patients have surgery during their hospitalization, admission on weekends in Ontario, Canada, was associated with a small but significant proportional increase in 30-day all-cause mortality, but there was significant heterogeneity in outcomes depending on the urgency of admission and when surgery was performed. An increased risk of death was found only for elective admissions on weekends; whether this is a function of patient-level factors or represents a true weekend effect needs to be further elucidated. These findings have potential implications for resource allocation in hospitals and the redistribution of elective surgery to weekends.

Project description:BackgroundSince 2011, the Government of Ontario, Canada, has phased in hospital funding reforms hoping to encourage standardised, evidence-based clinical care processes to both improve patient outcomes and reduce system costs. One aspect of the reform - quality-based procedures (QBPs) - replaced some of each hospital's global budget with a pre-set price per episode of care for patients with specific diagnoses or procedures. The QBP initiative included publication and dissemination of a handbook for each of these diagnoses or procedures, developed by an expert technical group. Each handbook was intended to guide hospitals in reducing inappropriate variation in patient care and cost by specifying an evidence-based episode of care pathway. We explored whether, how and why hospitals implemented these episode of care pathways in response to this initiative.MethodsWe interviewed key informants at three levels in the healthcare system, namely individuals who conceived and designed the QBP policy, individuals and organisations supporting QBP adoption, and leaders in five case-study hospitals responsible for QBP implementation. Analysis involved an inductive approach, incorporating framework analysis to generate descriptive and explanatory themes from data.ResultsThe 46 key informants described variable implementation of best practice episode of care pathways across QBPs and across hospitals. Handbooks outlining evidence-based clinical pathways did not address specific barriers to change for different QBPs nor differences in hospitals' capacity to manage change. Hospitals sometimes found it easier to focus on containing and standardising costs of care than on implementing standardised care processes that adhered to best clinical practices.ConclusionImplementation of QBPs in Ontario's hospitals depended on the interplay between three factors, namely complexity of changes required, internal capacity for organisational change, and availability and appropriateness of targeted external facilitators and supports to manage change. Variation in these factors across QBPs and hospitals suggests the need for more tailored and flexible implementation supports designed to fit all elements of the policy, rather than one-size-fits-all handbooks alone. Without such supports, hospitals may enact quick fixes aimed mainly at preserving budgets, rather than pursue evidence- and value-based changes in care management. Overestimating hospitals' change management capacity increases the risk of implementation failure.

Dataset Information

The impact of stroke on employment income: A cohort study using hospital and income tax data in Ontario, Canada.

Objective

Design

Participants

Main measures

Results

Conclusions

Publications

The impact of stroke on employment income: A cohort study using hospital and income tax data in Ontario, Canada.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets