Skip to main content

The impact of the Long-Term Care Homes Act and Public Reporting on physical restraint and potentially inappropriate antipsychotic use in Ontario's long-term care homes

Walker K, Shearkhani S, Bai YQ, McGilton KS, Berta WB, Wodchis WP. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2019; Jul 29 [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1093/gerona/glz143.


Background — We report on the impact of two system-level policy interventions (the Long-Term Care Homes Act [LTCHA] and Public Reporting) on publicly reported physical restraint use and non-publicly reported potentially inappropriate use of antipsychotics in Ontario, Canada.

Methods — We used interrupted time series analysis to model changes in the risk-adjusted use of restraints and antipsychotics before and after implementation of the interventions. Separate analyses were completed for early ([a] volunteered 2010/2011) and late ([b] volunteered March 2012; [c] mandated September 2012) adopting groups of Public Reporting. Outcomes were measured using Resident Assessment Instrument Minimum Data Set (RAI-MDS) data from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2014.

Results — For early adopters, enactment of the LTCHA in 2010 was not associated with changes in physical restraint use, while Public Reporting was associated with an increase in the rate (slope) of decline in physical restraint use. By contrast, for the late-adopters of Public Reporting, the LTCHA was associated with significant decreases in physical restraint use over time, but there was no significant increase in the rate of decline associated with Public Reporting. As the LTCHA was enacted, potentially inappropriate use of antipsychotics underwent a rapid short-term increase in the early volunteer group, but, over the longer term, their use decreased for all three groups of homes.

Conclusions — Public Reporting had the largest impact on voluntary early adopters while legislation and regulations had a more substantive positive effect upon homes that delayed public reporting.

View full text

×