Quality and Safety in Long-Term Care in Ontario: The Impact of Language Discordance.
Ontario
Quality and safety
francophones
language discordance
long-term care
Journal
Journal of the American Medical Directors Association
ISSN: 1538-9375
Titre abrégé: J Am Med Dir Assoc
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100893243
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2021
10 2021
Historique:
received:
29
06
2020
revised:
03
12
2020
accepted:
06
12
2020
pubmed:
13
1
2021
medline:
21
10
2021
entrez:
12
1
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This study compared quality indicators across linguistic groups and sought to determine whether disparities are influenced by resident-facility language discordance in long-term care. Population-based retrospective cohort study using linked databases. Retrospective cohort of newly admitted residents of long-term care facilities in Ontario, Canada, between 2010 and 2016 (N=47,727). Individual residents' information was obtained from the Resident Assessment Instrument Minimum Data Set (RAI-MDS) to determine resident's primary language, clinical characteristics, and health care indicators. Main covariates of interest were primary language of the resident and predominant language of the long-term care facility, which was determined using the French designation status as defined in the French Language Services Act. Primary outcomes were a set of quality and safety indicators related to long-term care: worsening of depression, falls, moderate-severe pain, use of antipsychotic medication, and physical restraints. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the impact of resident's primary language, facility language, and resident-facility language discordance on each quality indicator. Overall, there were few differences between francophones and anglophones for quality and safety indicators. Francophones were more likely to report pain (10.9% vs 9.9%; P = .001) and be physically restrained (7.3% vs 5.2%; P < .001), whereas a greater proportion of anglophones experienced worsening of depressive symptoms (24.0% vs 22.9%; P = .001). However, quality indicators were generally worse for francophones in Non-Designated facilities, except for pain, which was more commonly reported by francophones in French-Designated facilities. Anglophones were more likely to be physically restrained in French-Designated facilities (6.7% vs 5.1%; P < .001). For francophones, quality indicators tended to be worse in the presence of resident-facility language discordance. However, these findings did not persist after adjusting for individual- and facility-level characteristics, suggesting that the disparities observed at the population level cannot be attributed to linguistic factors alone.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33434567
pii: S1525-8610(20)31056-2
doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2020.12.007
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2147-2153.e3Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 AMDA – The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.