Inpatient rehabilitation after stroke: A comparison of lengths of stay and outcomes in the veterans affairs and non-veterans affairs health care system

Medical Care

Volumn 39, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 123-137

  Stineman, Margaret G ^a,e   Ross, Richard N ^a   Hamilton, Byron B ^b   Maislin, Greg ^a   Bates, Barbara ^c   Granger, Carl V ^d   Asch, David A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c Phys Med and Rehab Department   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

^e 101 Ralston Penn Center ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Rehabilitation; Veterans affairs

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CLASSIFICATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST CONTROL; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DIAGNOSIS RELATED GROUP; EVALUATION; FEMALE; GERIATRIC ASSESSMENT; GOVERNMENT; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HOME CARE; HUMAN; LENGTH OF STAY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PUBLIC HOSPITAL; SOCIAL SUPPORT; STANDARD; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS; UNITED STATES; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; AGED; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; COST CONTROL; DIAGNOSIS-RELATED GROUPS; FEMALE; GERIATRIC ASSESSMENT; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HOME CARE SERVICES; HOSPITALS, VETERANS; HUMANS; LENGTH OF STAY; LINEAR MODELS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PROGRAM EVALUATION; SOCIAL SUPPORT; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

EID: 0035256352     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00005650-200102000-00003     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. O'Donnell JC, Hamilton BB. Stroke rehabilitation management in the Department of Veterans Affairs: Impact of patient referral source on outcomes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1997:78:929-937.
2. Carter G, Relles D, Buchanan J, et al. A prospective payment system for inpatient rehabilitation. Project memorandum prepared for the Health Care Financing Administration by the RAND/UCLA/Harvard Center for Health Care Financing Policy Research; June 1997. PM-683-HCFA.
3. Harada N, Kominski G, Sofaer S. Development of a resource-based classification scheme for rehabilitation. Inquiry 1993;30:54-63.
4. Hosek S, Kane R, Carney M, et al. Charges and outcomes for rehabilitation care: Implications for the Prospective Payment System. Santa Monica, Calif: RAND Corp; 1986. R-3424-HCFA.
5. Stineman MG, Goin JE, Granger CV, et al. Discharge motor FIM function related groups. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1997;78:980-985.
6. Fiedler RC, Granger CV, Ottenbacher KJ. The uniform data system for medical rehabilitation: Report of first admissions for 1994. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1996;75:125-129.
7. Granger CV, Ottenbacher KJ, Fiedler RC. The uniform data system for medical rehabilitation: Report of first admissions for 1993. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1995;74:62-66.
8. Fiedler RC, Granger CV, Russell CF. Uniform data system for medical rehabilitation: Report of first admissions for 1997. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1998;77:444-450.
9. Stineman MG, Tassoni CJ, Escarce JJ, et al. Development of function related groups version 2.0: A classification system for medical rehabilitation. Health Serv Res 1997;32:529-548.
10. Hamilton BB, Granger CV, Sherwin FS, et al. A Uniform Data System for Medical Rehabilitation. In: Fuhrer MJ, ed. Rehabilitation outcomes: Analysis and measurement. Baltimore, Md: Brookes Publishing Co; 1987:137-147.
11. Uniform Data System for Medical Rehabilitation: Guide for the uniform data set for medical rehabilitation (adult FIM), version 4.0. Buffalo, NY: State University of New York; 1993.
12. Granger CV, Hamilton BB, Keith RA, et al. Advances in functional assessment for medical rehabilitation. Top Geriatr Rehabil 1986;1:59-74.
13. Keith RA, Granger CV, Hamilton BB, et al. The functional independence measure: A new tool for rehabilitation. In: Advances in Clinical Rehabilitation. New York, NY: Springer Publishing Co; 1987:6.
14. Linacre JM, Heinemann AW, Wright BD, et al. The structure and stability of the functional independence measure. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994;75:127-132.
15. Hamilton BB, Laughlin JA, Fiedler RC, et al. Interrater reliability of the 7-level functional independence measure (FIM). Scand J Rehabil Med 1994;26:115-119.
16. Stineman MG, Shea J, Jette A, et al. The functional independence measure: Tests of scaling, assumption, structure, and reliability across 20 diverse impairment categories. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1996;77:1101-1108.
17. Stineman MG, Escarce JJ, Goin JE, et al. A case-mix classification system for medical rehabilitation. Med Care 1994;32:366-379.
18. Bates BE, Stineman MG. Outcome indicators for stroke across the full continuum of post-acute rehabilitation services: Application of an algorithm treatment. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. In press.
19. Eilertsen TB, Kramer AM, Schlenker RE, et al. Application of functional independence measure-function related groups and resource utilization groups-Version III systems across post acute settings. Med Care 1998;36:695-705.
20. Medicare Payment Advisory Commission. Post-acute care providers: Moving toward prospective payment. Report to the Congress: Medicare Payment Policy. Washington, DC: MedPAC; March 1999:79-98. Chap 5.
21. National Center for Cost Containment, Department of Veterans Affairs. Stroke/lower extremity amputees algorithms guide. Milwaukee, Wis: National Center for Cost Containment; 1996.
22. National Center for Cost Containment, Department of Veterans Affairs. Outcomes of the stroke/lower extremity amputees algorithms implementation project. Milwaukee, Wis: National Center for Cost Containment; 1997.
23. Sutton JP, DeJong G, Song H, et al. Impact of a function-based payment model on the financial performance of acute inpatient medical rehabilitation providers: A simulation analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1997;78:1290-1297.
24. Carter GM, Relles DA, Buchanan JL, et al. A classification system for inpatient rehabilitation patients: A review and proposed revisions to the functional independence measure-function related groups. Project memorandum prepared for the Health Care Financing Administration by the RAND/UCLA/Harvard Center for Health Care Financing Policy Research; June 1997. PM-682-HCFA
25. Stineman MG, Granger CV. Outcome, efficiency, and time-trend pattern analysis for stroke rehabilitation. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1998;77:197.
26. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC). Radiology 1982;143:29-36.
27. Harrell FE, Lee KL, Mark DB. Tutorial in biostatistics: Issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med 1996;15:361-387.
28. SAS Institute, Inc. SAS software, version 6.12. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, Inc; 1996.
29. Granger CV, Cotter AC, Hamilton BB, et al. Functional assessment scales: A study of persons after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1993;74:133-138.
30. Licciardone JC. Use of Veterans Administration outpatient facilities by older, rural veterans. J Am Osteopath Assoc 1990;90:331-336.
31. Wolinsky FD, Coe RM, Mosely RR, et al. Veterans' and nonveterans' use of health services: A comparative analysis. Med Care 1985;23:1358-1371.
32. Kramer AM, Steiner JF, Schlenker RE, et al. Outcomes and costs after hip fracture and stroke: A comparison of rehabilitation settings. JAMA 1997;277:396-404.
33. Kazis LE, Miller DR, Clark J, et al. Health-related quality of life in patients served by the Department of Veterans Affairs. Arch Intern Med 1998;158:626-632.
34. Ashton CM, Petersen NJ, Wray NP, et al. The Veterans Affairs medical care system: Hospital and clinic utilization statistics for 1994. Med Care 1998;36:793-803.
35. Strauss GD, Sack DA, Lesser I. Which veterans go to VA psychiatric hospitals for care? A pilot study. Hosp Community Psychiatry 1985;36:962-965.
36. Virgo KS, Price RK, Spitznagel EL, et al. Substance abuse as a predictor of VA medical care utilization among Vietnam veterans. J Behav Serv Res 1999;26:126-139.
37. Page WF. Why veterans choose Veterans Administration hospitalization: A multivariate model. Med Care 1982;20:308-320.
38. Kashner TM, Muller A, Richter E, et al. Private health insurance and veterans use of Veterans Affairs care. Med Care 1998;36:1085-1097.
39. Borowsky SJ, Cowper DC. Dual use of VA and non-VA primary care. J Gen Intern Med 1999;14:274-280.
40. Verville RE, Gonzalez EG. Legislation and regulations affecting rehabilitation of the aging patient. In: Felsenthal G, Garrison SJ, Steinberg FU, eds. Rehabilitation of the aging and elderly patient. Baltimore, Md: Williams & Wilkins; 1994:535.
41. Kizer KW. Transforming the Veterans Health Care System: The "New VA." JAMA 1996;275:1069.