Dataset Information

The impact of hospital language on the rate of in-hospital harm. A retrospective cohort study of home care recipients in Ontario, Canada.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Patients 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.

Methods

We 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.

Results

The 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.

Conclusions

Home 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.

SUBMITTER: Reaume M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7175496 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The impact of hospital language on the rate of in-hospital harm. A retrospective cohort study of home care recipients in Ontario, Canada.

Reaume Michael M Batista Ricardo R Talarico Robert R Rhodes Emily E Guerin Eva E Carson Sarah S Prud'homme Denis D Tanuseputro Peter P

BMC health services research 20200421 1

<h4>Background</h4>Patients 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 ...[more]

PMID: 32316965

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAs the world's linguistic diversity continues to increase at an unprecedented rate, a growing proportion of patients will be at risk of experiencing language barriers in primary care settings. We sought to examine whether patient-family physician language concordance in a primary care setting is associated with lower rates of hospital-based healthcare utilisation and mortality.MethodsWe conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of 497 227 home care recipients living in Ontario, Canada. Patient language was obtained from home care assessments while physician language was obtained from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario. We defined primary care as language concordant when patients and their rostered family physicians shared a mutually intelligible language, and we defined all other primary care as language discordant. The primary outcomes were Emergency Department (ED) visits, hospitalisations and death within 1 year of index home care assessment.ResultsCompared with non-English, non-French speakers who received language-discordant primary care, those who received language-concordant primary care experienced fewer ED visits (53.1% vs 57.5%; p<0.01), fewer hospitalisations (35.0% vs 37.6%; p<0.01) and less mortality (14.4% vs 16.6%; p<0.01) during the study period. In multivariable regression analyses, non-English, non-French speakers had lower risks of ED visits (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.91, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.94), hospitalisations (aHR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90 to 0.98) and death (aHR 0.87, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.93) when they received language-concordant primary care. For francophones, the risk of experiencing an ED visit, a hospitalisation or death was not impacted by the language of their family physician.ConclusionsPatient-family physician language concordance is associated with a lower risk of adverse outcomes in non-English and non-French speakers. Optimising the delivery of language-concordant care could potentially result in significant decreases in the use of acute healthcare services and mortality at the population level.

Project description:BackgroundWhen patients and physicians speak the same language, it may improve the quality and safety of care delivered. We sought to determine whether patient-physician language concordance is associated with in-hospital and postdischarge outcomes among home care recipients who were admitted to hospital.MethodsWe conducted a population-based study of a retrospective cohort of 189 690 home care recipients who were admitted to hospital in Ontario, Canada, between 2010 and 2018. We defined patient language (obtained from home care assessments) as English (Anglophone), French (Francophone) or other (allophone). We obtained physician language from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario. We defined hospital admissions as language concordant when patients received more than 50% of their care from physicians who spoke the patients' primary language. We identified in-hospital (adverse events, length of stay, death) and post-discharge outcomes (emergency department visits, readmissions, death within 30 days of discharge). We used regression analyses to estimate the adjusted rate of mean and the adjusted odds ratio (OR) of each outcome, stratified by patient language, to assess the impact of language-concordant care within each linguistic group.ResultsAllophone patients who received language-concordant care had lower risk of adverse events (adjusted OR 0.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15-0.43) and in-hospital death (adjusted OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.29-0.66), as well as shorter stays in hospital (adjusted rate of mean 0.74, 95% CI 0.66-0.83) than allophone patients who received language-discordant care. Results were similar for Francophone patients, although the magnitude of the effect was smaller than for allophone patients. Language concordance or discordance of the hospital admission was not associated with significant differences in postdischarge outcomes.InterpretationPatients who received most of their care from physicians who spoke the patients' primary language had better in-hospital outcomes, suggesting that disparities across linguistic groups could be mitigated by providing patients with language-concordant care.

Project description:BackgroundFor community-dwelling older persons with dementia, the presence of multimorbidity can create complex clinical challenges for both individuals and their physicians, and can contribute to poor outcomes. We quantified the associations between level of multimorbidity (chronic disease burden) and risk of hospitalization and risk of emergency department (ED) visit in a home care cohort with dementia and explored the role of continuity of physician care (COC) in modifying these relationships.Methods and findingsA retrospective cohort study using linked administrative and clinical data from Ontario, Canada, was conducted among 30,112 long-stay home care clients (mean age 83.0 ± 7.7 y) with dementia in 2012. Multivariable Fine-Gray regression models were used to determine associations between level of multimorbidity and 1-y risk of hospitalization and 1-y risk of ED visit, accounting for multiple competing risks (death and long-term care placement). Interaction terms were used to assess potential effect modification by COC. Multimorbidity was highly prevalent, with 35% (n = 10,568) of the cohort having five or more chronic conditions. In multivariable analyses, risk of hospitalization and risk of ED visit increased monotonically with level of multimorbidity: sub-hazards were 88% greater (sub-hazard ratio [sHR] = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.72-2.05, p < 0.001) and 63% greater (sHR = 1.63; 95% CI: 1.51-1.77, p < 0.001), respectively, among those with five or more conditions, relative to those with dementia alone or with dementia and one other condition. Low (versus high) COC was associated with an increased risk of both hospitalization and ED visit in age- and sex-adjusted analyses only (sHR = 1.11, 95% CI: 1.07-1.16, p < 0.001, for hospitalization; sHR = 1.07, 95% CI: 1.03-1.11, p = 0.001, for ED visit) but did not modify associations between multimorbidity and outcomes (Wald test for interaction, p = 0.566 for hospitalization and p = 0.637 for ED visit). The main limitations of this study include use of fixed (versus time-varying) covariates and focus on all-cause rather than cause-specific hospitalizations and ED visits, which could potentially inform interventions.ConclusionsOlder adults with dementia and multimorbidity pose a particular challenge for health systems. Findings from this study highlight the need to reshape models of care for this complex population, and to further investigate health system and other factors that may modify patients' risk of health outcomes.

Project description:ImportanceReasons for elevated suicide risks among autistic people are unclear, with insufficient population-based research on sex-specific patterns to inform tailored prevention and intervention.ObjectivesTo examine sex-stratified rates of self-harm events and suicide death among autistic individuals compared with nonautistic individuals, as well as the associated sociodemographic and clinical risk factors.Design, setting, and participantsThis population-based matched-cohort study using linked health administrative databases in Ontario, Canada included all individuals with physician-recorded autism diagnoses from April 1, 1988, to March 31, 2018, each matched on age and sex to 4 nonautistic individuals from the general population. Self-harm events resulting in emergency health care from April 1, 2005, to December 31, 2020, were examined for one cohort, and death by suicide and other causes from April 1, 1993, to December 31, 2018, were examined for another cohort. Statistical analyses were conducted between October 2021 and June 2023.ExposurePhysician-recorded autism diagnoses from 1988 to 2018 from health administrative databases.Main outcomes and measuresAutistic and nonautistic individuals who were sex stratified a priori were compared using Andersen-Gill recurrent event models on self-harm events, and cause-specific competing risk models on death by suicide or other causes. Neighborhood-level income and rurality indices, and individual-level broad diagnostic categories of intellectual disabilities, mood and anxiety disorders, schizophrenia spectrum disorders, substance use disorders, and personality disorders were covariates.ResultsFor self-harm events (cohort, 379 630 individuals; median age at maximum follow-up, 20 years [IQR, 15-28 years]; median age of first autism diagnosis claim for autistic individuals, 9 years [IQR, 4-15 years]; 19 800 autistic females, 56 126 autistic males 79 200 nonautistic females, and 224 504 nonautistic males), among both sexes, autism diagnoses had independent associations with self-harm events (females: relative rate, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.61-2.08; males: relative rate, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.28-1.69) after accounting for income, rurality, intellectual disabilities, and psychiatric diagnoses. For suicide death (cohort, 334 690 individuals; median age at maximum follow-up, 19 years [IQR, 14-27 years]; median age of first autism diagnosis claim for autistic individuals, 10 years [IQR, 5-16 years]; 17 982 autistic females, 48 956 autistic males, 71 928 nonautistic females, 195 824 nonautistic males), there was a significantly higher crude hazard ratio among autistic females (1.98; 95% CI, 1.11-3.56) and a nonsignificantly higher crude hazard ratio among autistic males (1.34; 95% CI, 0.99-1.82); the increased risks were associated with psychiatric diagnoses.Conclusions and relevanceThis cohort study suggests that autistic individuals experienced increased risks of self-harm events and suicide death. Psychiatric diagnoses were significantly associated with the increased risks among both sexes, especially for suicide death, and in partially sex-unique ways. Autism-tailored and autism-informed clinical and social support to reduce suicide risks should consider multifactorial mechanisms, with a particular focus on the prevention and timely treatment of psychiatric illnesses.

Project description:BackgroundStigma and high-care needs can present barriers to the provision of high-quality primary care for people with opioid use disorder (OUD) and those prescribed opioids for chronic pain. We explored the likelihood of securing a new primary care provider (PCP) among people with varying histories of opioid use who had recently lost access to their PCP.Methods and findingsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using linked administrative data among residents of Ontario, Canada whose enrolment with a physician practicing in a primary care enrolment model (PEM) was terminated between January 2016 and December 2017. We assigned individuals to 3 groups based upon their opioid use on the date enrolment ended: long-term opioid pain therapy (OPT), opioid agonist therapy (OAT), or no opioid. We fit multivariable models assessing the primary outcome of primary care reattachment within 1 year, adjusting for demographic characteristics, clinical comorbidities, and health services utilization. Secondary outcomes included rates of emergency department (ED) visits and opioid toxicity events. Among 154,970 Ontarians who lost their PCP, 1,727 (1.1%) were OAT recipients, 3,644 (2.4%) were receiving long-term OPT, and 149,599 (96.5%) had no recent prescription opioid exposure. In general, OAT recipients were younger (median age 36) than those receiving long-term OPT (59 years) and those with no recent prescription opioid exposure (44 years). In all exposure groups, the majority of individuals had their enrolment terminated by their physician (range 78.1% to 88.8%). In the primary analysis, as compared to those not receiving opioids, OAT recipients were significantly less likely to find a PCP within 1 year (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50 to 0.61, p < 0.0001). We observed no significant difference between long-term OPT and opioid unexposed individuals (aHR 0.96; 95% CI 0.92 to 1.01, p = 0.12). In our secondary analysis comparing the period of PCP loss to the year prior, we found that rates of ED visits were elevated among people not receiving opioids (adjusted rate ratio (aRR) 1.20, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.22, p < 0.0001) and people receiving long-term OPT (aRR 1.37, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.48, p < 0.0001). We found no such increase among OAT recipients, and no significant increase in opioid toxicity events in the period following provider loss for any exposure group. The main limitation of our findings relates to their generalizability outside of PEMs and in jurisdictions with different financial incentives incorporated into primary care provision.ConclusionsIn this study, we observed gaps in access to primary care among people who receive prescription opioids, particularly among OAT recipients. Ongoing efforts are needed to address the stigma, discrimination, and financial disincentives that may introduce barriers to the healthcare system, and to facilitate access to high-quality, consistent primary care services for chronic pain patients and those with OUD.

Dataset Information

The impact of hospital language on the rate of in-hospital harm. A retrospective cohort study of home care recipients in Ontario, Canada.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

The impact of hospital language on the rate of in-hospital harm. A retrospective cohort study of home care recipients in Ontario, Canada.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets