Search

Objective: This study explores differences in spending and utilization of health care services for an older person with frailty before and after a hip fracture. Data Sources: We used individual‐level patient data from five care settings. Study Design: We compared utilization and spending of an older person aged older than 65 years for 365 days before and after a hip fracture across 11 countries and five domains of care as follows: acute hospital care, primary care, outpatient specialty care, post–acute rehabilitative care, and outpatient drugs. Utilization and spending were age and sex standardized.. Data Collection/Extraction Methods: The data were compiled by the International Collaborative on Costs, Outcomes, and Needs in Care (ICCONIC) across 11 countries as follows: Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United States. Principal Findings: The sample ranged from 1859 patients in Spain to 42,849 in France. Mean age ranged from 81.2 in Switzerland to 84.7 in Australia. The majority of patients across countries were female. Relative to other countries, the United States had the lowest inpatient length of stay (11.3), but the highest number of days were spent in post–acute care rehab (100.7) and, on average, had more visits to specialist providers (6.8 per year) than primary care providers (4.0 per year). Across almost all sectors, the United States spent more per person than other countries per unit ($13,622 per hospitalization, $233 per primary care visit, $386 per MD specialist visit). Patients also had high expenditures in the year prior to the hip fracture, mostly concentrated in the inpatient setting. Conclusion: Across 11 high‐income countries, there is substantial variation in health care spending and utilization for an older person with frailty, both before and after a hip fracture. The United States is the most expensive country due to high prices and above average utilization of post–acute rehab care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The objectives of this study are to compare the relative use of different postacute care settings in different countries and to compare three important outcomes as follows: total expenditure, total days of care in different care settings, and overall longevity over a 1‐year period following a hip fracture. Data Sources: We used administrative data from hospitals, institutional and home‐based long‐term care (LTC), physician visits, and medications compiled by the International Collaborative on Costs, Outcomes, and Needs in Care (ICCONIC) from five countries as follows: Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden. Data Extraction Methods: Data were extracted from existing administrative data systems in each participating country. Study Design: This is a retrospective cohort study of all individuals admitted to acute care for hip fracture. Descriptive comparisons were used to examine aggregate institutional and home‐based postacute care. Care trajectories were created to track sequential care settings after acute‐care discharge through institutional and community‐based care in three countries where detailed information allowed. Comparisons in patient characteristics, utilization, and costs were made across these trajectories and countries. Principal Findings: Across five countries with complete LTC data, we found notable variations with Germany having the highest days of home‐based services with relatively low costs, while Sweden incurred the highest overall expenditures. Comparisons of trajectories found that France had the highest use of inpatient rehabilitation. Germany was most likely to discharge hip fracture patients to home. Over 365 days, France averaged the highest number of days in institution with 104, Canada followed at 94, and Germany had just 87 days of institutional care on average. Conclusion: In this comparison of LTC services following a hip fracture, we found international differences in total use of institutional and noninstitutional care, longevity, and total expenditures. There exist opportunities to organize postacute care differently to maximize independence and mitigate costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]