Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRosen, Amy K.
dc.contributor.authorBerlowitz, Dan R.
dc.contributor.authorAnderson, Jennifer J.
dc.contributor.authorAsh, Arlene S.
dc.contributor.authorKazis, Lewis E.
dc.contributor.authorMoskowitz, Mark A.
dc.date2022-08-11T08:10:42.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T17:17:07Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T17:17:07Z
dc.date.issued1999-07-20
dc.date.submitted2010-07-01
dc.identifier.citationInt J Qual Health Care. 1999 Feb;11(1):37-46. <a href="http://intqhc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/11/1/37">Link to article on publisher's site</a>
dc.identifier.issn1353-4505 (Linking)
dc.identifier.pmid10411288
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/47554
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: Although decline in functional status has been recommended as a quality indicator in long-term care, studies examining its use provide no consensus on which definition of functional status outcome is the most appropriate to use for quality assessment. We examined whether different definitions of decline in functional status affect judgments of quality of care provided in Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) long-term care facilities. METHODS: Six measures of functional status outcome that are prominent in the literature were considered. The sample consisted of 15 409 individuals who resided in VA long-term care facilities at any time from 4/1/95 to 10/1/95. Activities of daily living variables were used to generate measures of functional status. Differences between residents' baseline and semi-annual assessments were considered and facility performance using the various definitions of functional status were described. RESULTS: The percentage of residents seen as declining in functional status ranged from 7.7% to 31.5%, depending upon the definition applied. The definition of functional status also affected rankings, z-scores, and 'outlier' status for facilities. CONCLUSION: Judgments of facility performance are sensitive to how outcome measures are defined. Careful selection of an appropriate definition of functional status outcome is needed when assessing quality in long-term care.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=10411288&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a>
dc.relation.urlhttp://intqhc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/11/1/37
dc.subjectActivities of Daily Living
dc.subjectAged
dc.subjectEvaluation Studies as Topic
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectLong-Term Care
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectMiddle Aged
dc.subjectNursing Homes
dc.subject*Quality Assurance, Health Care
dc.subject*Recovery of Function
dc.subjectRetrospective Studies
dc.subjectUnited States
dc.subjectUnited States Department of Veterans Affairs
dc.subjectBiostatistics
dc.subjectEpidemiology
dc.subjectHealth Services Research
dc.titleFunctional status outcomes for assessment of quality in long-term care
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitleInternational journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care / ISQua
dc.source.volume11
dc.source.issue1
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/qhs_pp/688
dc.identifier.contextkey1378834
html.description.abstract<p>OBJECTIVE: Although decline in functional status has been recommended as a quality indicator in long-term care, studies examining its use provide no consensus on which definition of functional status outcome is the most appropriate to use for quality assessment. We examined whether different definitions of decline in functional status affect judgments of quality of care provided in Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) long-term care facilities.</p> <p>METHODS: Six measures of functional status outcome that are prominent in the literature were considered. The sample consisted of 15 409 individuals who resided in VA long-term care facilities at any time from 4/1/95 to 10/1/95. Activities of daily living variables were used to generate measures of functional status. Differences between residents' baseline and semi-annual assessments were considered and facility performance using the various definitions of functional status were described.</p> <p>RESULTS: The percentage of residents seen as declining in functional status ranged from 7.7% to 31.5%, depending upon the definition applied. The definition of functional status also affected rankings, z-scores, and 'outlier' status for facilities.</p> <p>CONCLUSION: Judgments of facility performance are sensitive to how outcome measures are defined. Careful selection of an appropriate definition of functional status outcome is needed when assessing quality in long-term care.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathqhs_pp/688
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences
dc.source.pages37-46


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record