Rehabilitation Outcomes by Site of Service
A comparison of hospitals to subacute care units of freestanding skilled nursing facilities (1996). Study prepared by Abt Associates, commissioned by the American Health Care Association.
Objective: Compare rehabilitation outcomes in skilled vs acute rehabilitation settings
Design: 20,757 acute rehabilitation outcomes for stroke, hip fracture and “other disabling impairments” were compared to 1,611 SNF Subacute outcomes. Records matched on numerous factors, including, age, length of stay, admission disability, treatment intensity and charges, but no formal case-severity measure.
Results: Patients in a SNF, subacute setting achieved identical outcomes as measured with FIM as patients in the acute rehabilitation setting. Overall, hospital charges were 29.7% higher than the SNF subacute.
Conclusions: Skilled rehabilitation setting is an appropriate and less expensive alternative to the acute rehabilitation setting.
Relevance: In certain markets (especially the east coast) many patients discharged to acute rehabilitation facilities or IRFs (Inpatient Rehab Facility) could be going to a skilled setting and obtain the same outcome for less cost.
Remark: At the time of this study, SeniorMetrix Principals were employed by NovaCare. NovaCare was acknowledged for its participation in this study.
