Search

Objectives: To assess patients' views of maximum acceptable waiting times (MAWT) for hip and knee replacement, associated factors and the accuracy of self-reported waiting times., Methods: We mailed 1000 questionnaires each to two random samples of patients either waiting for or who had received an arthroplasty within the preceding 3-12 months. We used linear regression to assess the determinants of patient MAWT, and content analysis to assess reasons for MAWT and ideal waiting time., Results: Of the 1330 responses, 1127 had MAWT data. The sample was 57% women; mean age was 70 +/- 11 years. Median self-reported and actual waiting time was eight months (Spearman correlation = 0.70). Median MAWT was four months and ideal waiting time was two months. The most frequent reasons for MAWT were pain, quality of life and needing time to prepare for surgery. A longer MAWT was associated with younger age, group (waiting), a longer self-reported waiting time, better EQ-5D index, an acceptable waiting time, a perception of fairness and a view that others worse off on the list should go ahead., Conclusions: Patients' views of acceptable waiting times are important for a fair process of establishing waiting time benchmarks for joint replacement.

Background: Some patients with cardiovascular-related chronic diseases such as diabetes and heart disease report financial barriers to achieving optimal health. Previous surveys report that the perception of having a financial barrier is associated with self-reported adverse clinical outcomes. We sought to confirm these findings using linked survey and administrative data to determine, among patients with cardiovascular-related chronic diseases, if there is an association between perceived financial barriers and the outcomes of: (1) disease-related hospitalizations, (2) all-cause mortality and (3) inpatient healthcare costs.Methods: We used ten cycles of the nationally representative Canadian Community Health Survey (administered between 2000 and 2011) to identify a cohort of adults aged 45 and older with hypertension, diabetes, heart disease or stroke. Perceived financial barriers to various aspects of chronic disease care and self-management were identified (including medications, healthful food and home care) from the survey questions, using similar questions to those used in previous studies. The cohort was linked to administrative data sources for outcome ascertainment (Discharge Abstract Database, Canadian Mortality Database, Patient Cost Estimator). We utilized Poisson regression techniques, adjusting for potential confounding variables (age, sex, education, multimorbidity, smoking status), to assess for associations between perceived financial barriers and disease-related hospitalization and all-cause mortality. We used gross costing methodology and a variety of modelling approaches to assess the impact of financial barriers on hospital costs.Results: We identified a cohort of 120,752 individuals over the age of 45 years with one or more of the following: hypertension, diabetes, heart disease or stroke. One in ten experienced financial barriers to at least one aspect of their care, with the two most common being financial barriers to accessing medications and healthful food. Even after adjustment, those with at least one financial barrier had an increased rate of disease-related hospitalization and mortality compared to those without financial barriers with adjusted incidence rate ratios of 1.36 (95% CI: 1.29-1.44) and 1.24 (1.16-1.32), respectively. Furthermore, having a financial barrier to care was associated with 30% higher inpatient costs compared to those without financial barriers.Discussion: This study, using novel linked national survey and administrative data, demonstrates that chronic disease patients with perceived financial barriers have worse outcomes and higher resource utilization, corroborating the findings from prior self-report studies. The overall exposure remained associated with the primary outcome even in spite of adjustment for income. This suggests that a patient's perception of a financial barrier might be used in clinical and research settings as an additional measure along with standard measures of socioeconomic status (ie. income, education, social status).Conclusions: After adjusting for relevant covariates, perceiving a financial barrier was associated with increased rates of hospitalization and mortality and higher hospital costs compared to those without financial barriers. The demonstrable association with adverse outcomes and increased costs seen in this study may provide an impetus for policymakers to seek to invest in interventions which minimize the impact of financial barriers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with cardiovascular-related chronic diseases may face financial barriers to accessing health care, even in Canada, where universal health care insurance is in place. No current theory or framework is adequate for understanding the impact of financial barriers to care on these patients or how they experience financial barriers. The overall objective of this study is to develop a framework for understanding the role of financial barriers to care in the lives of patients with cardiovascular-related chronic diseases and the impact of such barriers on their health. Methods: We will perform an inductive qualitative grounded theory study to develop a framework to understand the effect of financial barriers to care on patients with cardiovascular-related chronic diseases. We will use semistructured interviews (face-to-face and telephone) with a purposive sample of adult patients from Alberta with at least 1 of hypertension, diabetes, heart disease or stroke. We will analyze interview transcripts in triplicate using grounded theory coding techniques, including open, focused and axial coding, following the principle of constant comparison. Interviews and analysis will be done iteratively to theoretical saturation. Member checking will be used to enhance rigour. Interpretation: A comprehensive framework for understanding financial barriers to accessing health care is instrumental for both researchers and clinicians who care for patients with chronic diseases. Such a framework would enable a better understanding of patient behaviour and nonadherence to recommended medical therapies and lifestyle modifications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background People with chronic conditions who do not achieve therapeutic targets have a higher risk of adverse health outcomes. Failure to meet these targets may be due to a variety of barriers. This article examines self-reported financial barriers to health care among people with cardiovascular-related chronic conditions. Data and methods A population-based survey was administered to western Canadians with cardiovascular-related chronic conditions (n = 1,849). Associations between self-reported financial barriers and statin use, the likelihood of stopping use of prescribed medications, and emergency department visits or hospitalizations were assessed. Results More than 10% respondents reported general financial barriers (12%) and lack of drug insurance (14%); 4% reported financial barriers to accessing medications. Emergency department visits or hospitalizations were 70% more likely among those reporting a general financial barrier. Those reporting a financial barrier to medications were 50% less likely to take statins and three times more likely to stop using prescribed medications. Individuals without drug insurance were nearly 30% less likely to take statins. Interpretation In this population, self-reported financial barriers were associated with lower than recommended medication use and increased likelihood of emergency department visits or hospitalization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To improve access to care, many jurisdictions have proposed waiting-time benchmarks and guarantees. We assessed the willingness of patients to consider changing their surgeon to one with a shorter waiting time for arthroplasty. Methods: We mailed a questionnaire to 2 random samples of patients who either were awaiting hip or knee replacement arthroplasty or had had one of these procedures within the preceding 3-12 months. We used logistic regression to assess the determinants of patients' likelihood to consider changing surgeons. Results: Of 1200 responses from a sample of 2000, 557 (46%) were from patients awaiting surgery and 643 (54%) were from people who had undergone surgery. The mean age of respondents was 69.9 years (standard deviation 10.8), and 682 (57%) were women. The median waiting time for surgery was 8 months. Overall, 753 (63%) of the patients were unlikely to consider changing surgeons. Increased likelihood of changing surgeons was associated with male sex (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-2.02), a high school education or higher (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.15-2.62) and having already undergone surgery (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.19-2.46). Decreased likelihood was associated with preference for a particular surgeon before referral (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.42-0.79), a better score on the EuroQol (EQ-5D) index (a measure of health-related quality of life) (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.24-0.66), perception that the waiting time to see the surgeon was acceptable (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.36-0.70), perception that the waiting time to surgery was acceptable (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43-0.91) and perceived fairness of treatment (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.36-0.78). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To obtain patients’ perspectives on acceptable waiting times for hip or knee replacement surgery. Methods A questionnaire with both open- and close-ended items was mailed to 432 consecutive patients who had hip or knee replacement surgery 3–12 months previously in Saskatchewan, Canada. A content analysis was used to analyse the text data from the open-ended questions. Results The sample of 303 (response rate 70%) was 59% female with a mean age of 70 years (SD 11). The median waiting time from the decision date to surgery was 17 weeks. Individuals who rated their waiting time very acceptable (48%) had a median waiting time of 13 weeks compared with a median waiting time of 22 weeks for those who rated it unacceptable (23%). The two most common determinants of acceptability were patient expectations and pain and its impact on patient quality of life. The median maximum acceptable waiting time was 13 weeks and median ideal waiting time, 8.6 weeks. Seventy-nine per cent felt that those in greater need (higher severity) should go before them on the waiting list. Patient ratings of maximum acceptable waiting time were based on: pain and loss of mobility, time needed to prepare for surgery, and severity at the time of seeing the surgeon. In consideration of changing their surgeon to one with a shorter waiting list, 68% would not. Conclusions Patient views on waiting times are not only related to quality of life issues, but also to prior expectations and notions of fairness and priority. Understanding patient views on waiting for surgery has implications for better management of waiting times and experiences for joint replacement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]