Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-14T01:14:16.270Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stroke Rehabilitation in Ontario: An Opportunity for Health Care Transformation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2014

Matthew J Meyer ,
John P Meyer ,
Norine Foley ,
Katherine Salter ,
J Andrew McClure  and
Robert Teasell
Matthew J Meyer*
Affiliation:
Aging, Rehabilitation and Geriatric Care Program, Lawson Health Research Institute
John P Meyer
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada
Norine Foley
Affiliation:
Aging, Rehabilitation and Geriatric Care Program, Lawson Health Research Institute
Katherine Salter
Affiliation:
Aging, Rehabilitation and Geriatric Care Program, Lawson Health Research Institute Department of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada
J Andrew McClure
Affiliation:
Aging, Rehabilitation and Geriatric Care Program, Lawson Health Research Institute Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry
Robert Teasell
Affiliation:
Aging, Rehabilitation and Geriatric Care Program, Lawson Health Research Institute Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry
*
The Lawson Health Research Institute, ARGC Parkwood Hospital, 801 Commissioners Rd. E Ste B-3019a, London, Ontario, N6C 5J1, Canada.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In this article, Ontario's stroke rehabilitation system is used to exemplify the challenges faced by rehabilitation and healthcare systems across Canada who are attempting to provide quality care to patients in the face of increasing demands. Currently, Ontario's rehabilitation system struggles in its efforts to provide accessible and comprehensive care to patients recovering from stroke. We begin our exploration by identifying both the primary stakeholders and the underlying factors that have contributed to the current challenges. The framework put forward in the Canadian Medical Association's recommendations for transformation is then used to suggest a vision for a more patient-focused system incorporating three key principles: a broader perspective, a patient-first approach, and greater unity. The use of health information technology, proper incentives, and greater accountability are discussed as mechanisms to improve the quality and efficiency of care.

Type
Review Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences , Volume 38 , Issue 6 , November 2011 , pp. 810 - 814
Copyright
Copyright © The Canadian Journal of Neurological 2011

References

1.Canadian Medical Association. Health care transformation in Canada: Change that works. Care that lasts [Internet]. Ottawa: Canadian Medical Association; c1995-2011 [cited 2011 May 22]. Available from: http://www.cma.ca/multimedia/CMA/Content_Images/Inside_cma/Advocacy/HCT/HCT-2010report_en.pdfGoogle Scholar
2.Canadian Institute for Health Information. Alternate level of care in Canada [Internet]. Ottawa: Canadian Institute for Health Information; c1996-2011 [cited 2011 May 25]. Available from: http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/products/ALC_AIB_FINAL.pdfGoogle Scholar
3.Hall, R, O’Callaghan, C, Bayley, M, et al.Ontario stroke evaluation report 2010: technical report [Internet]. Toronto: Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences; c2011 [cited 2011 May 22]. Available from: http://www.ices.on.ca/file/OSS_TechReport_Final_interactive_April%2021_update1.pdfGoogle Scholar
4.Chan, B, Hayes, B.Cost of stroke in Ontario, 1994/95. CMAJ. 1998;159(6):s2–8.Google Scholar
5.Lewis, M, Trypuc, J, Lindsay, P, O’Callaghan, C, Dishaw, A.Has Ontario’s stroke system really made a difference? Healthc Q. 2006;9(4):50–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Canada Health Act [Internet]. Ottawa: Department of Justice Canada [updated 2011 May 18; cited 2011 May 22]. Available from: http://www.laws.justice.gc.ca/pdf/Statute/C/C-6.pdfGoogle Scholar
7.Willems, D, Bryant, D, O’Callaghan, C.Are stroke survivors getting the rehabilitation services they need? Stroke. 2011;42(3):e337.Google Scholar
8.Lindsay, P, Bayley, M, McDonald, A, Graham, ID, Warner, G, Phillips, S.Toward a more effective approach to stroke: Canadian best practice recommendations for stroke care. CMAJ. 2008;178(11):1418–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Salter, K, Jutai, J, Hartley, M, et al.Impact of early vs delayed admission to rehabilitation on functional outcomes in persons with stroke. J Rehabil Med. 2006;38(2):113–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Musicco, M, Emberti, L, Nappi, G, Caltagirone, C.Early and longterm outcome of rehabilitation in stroke patients: the role of patient characteristics, time of initiation, and duration of interventions. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84(4):551–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Maulden, SA, Gassaway, J, Horn, SD, Smout, RJ, DeJong, G.Timing of initiation of rehabilitation after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(12 Supp 2):S34–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.De Wit, L, Putman, K, Schuback, B, et al.Motor and functional recovery after stroke: a comparison of 4 European rehabilitation centers. Stroke. 2007;38(7):2101–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Kwakkel, G, van Peppen, R, Wagenaar, RC, et al.Effects of augmented exercise therapy time after stroke: a meta-analysis. Stroke. 2004;35(11):2529–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Kwakkel, G, Wagenaar, RC, Koelman, TW, Lankhorst, GJ, Koetsier, JC.Effects of intensity of rehabilitation after stroke. A research synthesis. Stroke. 1997;28(8):1550–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Sonoda, S, Saitoh, E, Nagai, S, Kawakita, M, Kanada, Y.Full-time integrated treatment program, a new system for stroke rehabilitation in Japan: comparison with conventional rehabilitation. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;83(2):88–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Aprile, I, Stasio, ED, Romitelli, F, et al.Effects of rehabilitation on quality of life in patients with chronic stroke. Brain Inj. 2008;22(6):451–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Olsson, BG, Sunnerhagen, KS.Functional and cognitive capacity and health-related quality of life 2 years after day hospital rehabilitation for stroke: a prospective study. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2007;16(5):208–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Studenski, S, Duncan, PW, Perera, S, Reker, D, Lai, SM, Richards, L.Daily functioning and quality of life in a randomized controlled trial of therapeutic exercise for subacute stroke survivors. Stroke. 2005;36(8):1764–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Mayo, NE, Wood-Dauphinee, S, Cote, R, et al.There’s no place like home : an evaluation of early supported discharge for stroke. Stroke. 2000;31(5):1016–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Teng, J, Mayo, NE, Latimer, E, et al.Costs and caregiver consequences of early supported discharge for stroke patients. Stroke. 2003;34(2):528–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21.Smit, P.Pathways for people with stroke to live fully in the community [Internet]. Toronto; Queen’s printer for Ontario; c2006 [updated 2011 May 25; cited 2011 May 25] Available from: http://www.eriestclairlhin.on.ca/WorkArea/showcontent.aspx?id=3916Google Scholar
22.Walker, JD, Morris, K, Frood, J.Alternative level of care in Canada: a summary. Healthc Q. 2009;12(2):21–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.Kerr, S.On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B. Academy of Management Executive. 1995;9(1):7–14.Google Scholar
24.Hultman, K.Making change irresistible. Palo Alto, CA: Davies Black Publishing; 1998.Google Scholar
25.Ilett, PA, Brock, KA, Graven, CJ, Cotton, SM.Selecting patients for rehabilitation after acute stroke: are there variations in practice? Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010;91(5):788–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26.Conroy, BE, DeJong, G, Horn, SD.Hospital-based stroke rehabilitation in the United States. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2009;16(1):34–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed