Home › Research › Health systems and care delivery
Do Patients Retain their Family Physicians after Long-Term Care Entry? A Retrospective Cohort Study
Emiliyan Staykov, Danial Qureshi, Mary Scott, Robert Talarico, Amy T Hsu, Michelle Howard, Andrew P Costa, Celeste Fung et al.. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 2020-06-22
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
Out of 50,089 LTC residents, 12.1% retained their family physicians post-LTC admission. Resident factors associated with reduced odds of retention included physical impairment [odds ratio OR (95% confidence interval, CI) = 0.59 (0.42‒0.83)], cognitive impairment [0.39 (0.33‒0.47)], and a dementia diagnosis [0.80 (0.74‒0.86)]. Physician factors associated with lower retention included a greater distance from the LTC home to the family physician's clinic [30+ kilometers 0.41 (0.35‒0.48)], having a physician who is female [0.90 (0.83‒0.98)], an international medical graduate [0.89 (0.81‒0.97)] or someone who practices in a capitation-based Family Health Organization [0.86 (0.78‒0.95)]. Factors associated with greater odds of retention were residing in a rural LTC home [2.23 (1.78‒2.79)], having a rural family physician [1.70 (1.52‒1.90)], or a family physician who has billed LTC fee codes in the past year [2.64 (2.45‒2.85)]. CONCLUSIONS AND Few LTC residents retained their family physician post-LTC admission, underscoring this healthcare transition as a breakdown point in relational continuity. Factors that influenced retention included resident health, LTC home geography, and family physician demographics and practice patterns.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Staykov, E., Qureshi, D., Scott, M., Talarico, R., Hsu, A. T., Howard, M., et al. (2020). Do Patients Retain their Family Physicians after Long-Term Care Entry? A Retrospective Cohort Study. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2020.04.016
Vancouver
Staykov E, Qureshi D, Scott M, Talarico R, Hsu AT, Howard M, et al. Do Patients Retain their Family Physicians after Long-Term Care Entry? A Retrospective Cohort Study. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association. 2020. doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2020.04.016. PMID: 32586719.
BibTeX
@article{staykov2020-32586719,
author = {Staykov, Emiliyan and Qureshi, Danial and Scott, Mary and Talarico, Robert and Hsu, Amy T and Howard, Michelle and Costa, Andrew P and Fung, Celeste and others},
title = {{Do Patients Retain their Family Physicians after Long-Term Care Entry? A Retrospective Cohort Study}},
journal = {Journal of the American Medical Directors Association},
year = {2020},
doi = {10.1016/j.jamda.2020.04.016},
pmid = {32586719},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2020.04.016}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Out of 50,089 LTC residents, 12.1% retained their family physicians post-LTC admission.
- Resident factors associated with reduced odds of retention included physical impairment [odds ratio OR (95% confidence interval, CI) = 0.59 (0.42‒0.83)], cognitive impairment [0.39 (0.33‒0.47)], and a dementia diagnosis [0.80 (0.74‒0.86)].
- Physician factors associated with lower retention included a greater distance from the LTC home to the family physician's clinic [30+ kilometers 0.41 (0.35‒0.48)], having a physician who is female [0.90 (0.83‒0.98)], an international medical graduate [0.89 (0.81‒0.97)] or someone who practices in a capitation-based Family Health Organization [0.86 (0.78‒0.95)].
- Factors associated with greater odds of retention were residing in a rural LTC home [2.23 (1.78‒2.79)], having a rural family physician [1.70 (1.52‒1.90)], or a family physician who has billed LTC fee codes in the past year [2.64 (2.45‒2.85)].
- CONCLUSIONS AND Few LTC residents retained their family physician post-LTC admission, underscoring this healthcare transition as a breakdown point in relational continuity.
Study details
- Study designcohort study
- Effect size12.1%
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 59/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a cohort study following people over time. Scored zero for sample size, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record, multicenter collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 33 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 59 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of the American Medical Directors Association) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A cohort study following people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 2 / 5 | 2020 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 32586719) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 33 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 33 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 59 out of 100. |
| Total | 59 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Health systems and care delivery
Also tagged “assisted-living”
199 studies in the library carry the topic tag “assisted-living”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 199 tagged studies.