Skip to main content

Table 3 Results of multinominal regression analysis assessing factors associated with improved and worsening Modified Barthel Index scores from entry to exit of first TCP episode, adjusted for stat

From: Factors associated with success in transition care services among older people in Australia

 

Community

(n = 65,626) a

aOR (95%CI)

Residential

(n = 39,625) b

aOR (95%CI)

Both

(n = 14,469) c

aOR (95%CI)

Improved

(n = 29,446)

Worsened

(n = 16,209)

Improved

(n = 9236)

Worsened

(n = 9588)

Improved

(n = 7270)

Worsened

(n = 2522)

Age (years)

0.98 (0.98–0.99)

0.99 (0.99–0.99)

0.99 (0.98–0.99)

0.98 (0.98–0.99)

0.99 (0.98–0.99)

0.99 (0.98–1.00) d

Female

1.10 (1.06–1.14)

0.83 (0.79–0.87)

1.15 (1.09–1.21)

0.83 (0.79–0.88)

1.16 (1.07–1.26)

0.91 (0.82–1.01) d

Born outside Australia

0.94 (0.91–0.98) d

0.99 (0.94–1.04) d

0.96 (0.91–1.12) d

1.06 (1.01–1.12) d

0.93 (0.85–1.01) d

1.09 (0.97–1.22) d

No carer

1.40 (1.34–1.47)

0.99 (0.94–1.05) d

1.23 (1.15–1.31)

1.08 (1.01–1.16) d

1.38 (1.26–1.52)

1.03 (0.90–1.17) d

Regional/remote/rural

1.17 (1.12–1.22)

0.84 (0.80–0.88)

1.40 (1.31–1.50)

1.56 (1.46–1.67)

1.17 (1.07–1.27)

0.80 (0.72–0.90)

Comorbidities

1.01 (1.00–1.01) d

1.00 (0.99–1.01) d

1.00 (1.00–1.01) d

1.00 (0.99–1.01) d

1.00 (0.99–1.02) d

1.01 (0.99–1.02) d

Dementia

0.58 (0.55–0.63)

0.75 (0.69–0.81)

0.70 (0.66–0.75)

0.69 (0.65–0.73)

0.64 (0.56–0.72)

0.66 (0.56–0.78)

Frailty index score e

0.83 (0.81–0.85)

1.11 (1.07–1.15)

0.94 (0.90–0.97)

1.01 (0.97–1.04) d

0.83 (0.78–0.88)

1.03 (0.96–1.11) d

Hospital LOS (weeks)

0.95 (0.94–0.95)

1.03 (1.02–1.04)

0.96 (0.95–0.95)

1.01 (1.00–1.02) d

0.94 (0.93–0.95)

1.01 (1.00–1.03) d

TCP LOS (weeks)

1.07 (1.06–1.08)

0.74 (0.73–0.74)

1.07 (1.07–1.08)

0.90 (0.89–0.91)

1.06 (1.05–1.07)

0.84 (0.83–0.85)

  1. aOR Adjusted odds ratio; CI Confidence interval; LOS Length of stay; TCP Transition Care Program
  2. a Likelihood ratio χ2 = 23,615.7, DF = 34, p < 0.001. Excluded: 1048 with missing data, 665 deceased
  3. b Likelihood ratio χ2 = 6190.0, DF = 34, p < 0.001. Excluded: 646 with missing data, 1894 deceased
  4. c Likelihood ratio χ2 = 2303.6, DF = 34, p < 0.001. Excluded: 182 with missing data, 146 deceased
  5. d p > 0.05 after correction for multiple hypothesis testing
  6. e Rounded to 0.1 increments; higher scores denote greater frailty