<div id="summaryView" role="tabpanel" aria-labelledby="tabSummaryView">
Name
Percentage of Residents Whose Bladder Continence Worsened
Short/Other Names

CNT03

Description
Percentage of residents with worsened bladder continence
Interpretation
A high number indicates a higher percentage of residents with worsened bladder continence; thus a lower percentage is desirable.
HSP Framework Dimension

Health System Outputs: Appropriate and effective

Areas of Need

Living With Illness, Disability or Reduced Function

Geographic Coverage

Newfoundland and Labrador, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia, Yukon

Reporting Level/Disaggregation

Province/Territory, Region, Facility, Corporation, Sector (residential and hospital-based continuing care)

Indicator Results

https://www.cihi.ca/sites/default/files/document/ccrs-quick-stats-2016-2017-en.xlsx

</div>
<div id="fullView" role="tabpanel" aria-labelledby="tabFullView">

<div role="button" class="expandableTitle" aria-controls="identifyingInfoRegion">Identifying Information</div>
Name
Percentage of Residents Whose Bladder Continence Worsened
Short/Other Names

CNT03


<div role="button" class="expandableTitle" aria-controls="descAndCalRegion">Indicator Description and Calculation</div>
Description
Percentage of residents with worsened bladder continence
Calculation: Description

Residents whose bladder incontinence worsened (frequency of bladder incontinence increased) on their target assessment compared with their prior assessment

Unit of Analysis: Resident

Calculation: Geographic Assignment

Place of service

Calculation: Type of Measurement

Percentage or proportion

Calculation: Adjustment Applied

The following covariates are used in risk adjustment:
Individual covariates: Personal Severity Index (PSI) subset 1 (diagnoses); PSI subset 2 (non-diagnoses); Cognitive Performance Scale (CPS); Resource Utilization Group (RUG); nursing Case Mix Index (CMI); age younger than 65

Facility-level stratification: Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) Long Form Scale

Calculation: Method of Adjustment

Stratification, direct standardization, indirect standardization
Standard Population:
3,000 facilities in 6 U.S. states and 92 residential care facilities and continuing care hospitals in Ontario and Nova Scotia

Denominator

Description:
Residents with valid assessments whose bladder continence could worsen (did not have maximum score on prior assessment)
Inclusions:
1. Residents with valid assessments. To be considered valid, the target assessment must

a. Be the latest assessment in the quarter

b. Be carried out more than 92 days after the Admission Date

c. Not be an Admission Full Assessment

As this is an incidence indicator, the resident must also have had an assessment in the previous quarter, with 45 to 165 days between the target and prior assessments. If multiple assessments in the previous quarter meet the time period criteria, the latest assessment is selected as the prior assessment.
Exclusions:
1. Residents who are comatose (B1 = 1), end-stage (J5c = 1) or receiving hospice care (P1ao = 1)

2. Residents who have the maximum score for bladder incontinence (H1b = 4) on the previous assessment (cannot get worse)

Numerator

Description:
Residents with a greater value for bladder incontinence (H1b) on their target assessment than on their prior assessment
Inclusions:
1. Residents with valid assessments. To be considered valid, the target assessment must

a. Be the latest assessment in the quarter

b. Be carried out more than 92 days after the Admission Date

c. Not be an Admission Full Assessment

As this is an incidence indicator, the resident must also have had an assessment in the previous quarter, with 45 to 165 days between the target and prior assessments. If multiple assessments in the previous quarter meet the time period criteria, the latest assessment is selected as the prior assessment.
Exclusions:
1. Residents who are comatose (B1 = 1), end-stage (J5c = 1) or receiving hospice care (P1ao = 1)

2. Residents who were completely bladder incontinent (H1b = 4) on the previous assessment (cannot get worse)


<div role="button" class="expandableTitle" aria-controls="backgroundRegion">Background, Interpretation and Benchmarks</div>
Rationale

CCRS quality indicators were developed by interRAI (www.interrai.org), an international research network, to provide organizations with measures of quality across key domains, including physical and cognitive function, safety and quality of life. Each indicator is adjusted for resident characteristics that are related to the outcome and independent of quality of care. The indicators can be used by quality leaders to drive continuous improvement efforts. They are also used to communicate with key stakeholders through report cards and accountability agreements.

Interpretation

A high number indicates a higher percentage of residents with worsened bladder continence; thus a lower percentage is desirable.

HSP Framework Dimension

Health System Outputs: Appropriate and effective

Areas of Need

Living With Illness, Disability or Reduced Function

Targets/Benchmarks

CIHI: None

Health Quality Ontario (external): 12% for long-term care

References

Canadian Institute for Health Information. CCRS Quality Indicators Risk Adjustment Methodology. 2013.

Canadian Institute for Health Information. When a Nursing Home Is Home: How Do Canadian Nursing Homes Measure Up on Quality? 2013.

Health Quality Ontario. Long-Term Care Benchmarking Resource Guide. 2013.

Health Quality Ontario. Results From Health Quality Ontario’s Benchmark Setting for Long-Term Care Indicators. 2017.

Health Quality Ontario. Health Quality Ontario Indicator Library. Accessed October 4, 2017.

Hirdes JP, Mitchell L, Maxwell CJ, White N. Beyond the "iron lungs of gerontology": Using evidence to shape the future of nursing homes in Canada. Canadian Journal on Aging. 2011.

Hirdes JP, Poss JW, Caldarelli H, et al. An evaluation of data quality in Canada's Continuing Care Reporting System (CCRS): Secondary analyses of Ontario data submitted between 1996 and 2011. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making. 2013.

Jones RN, Hirdes JP, Poss JW, et al. Adjustment of nursing home quality indicators. BMC Health Services Research. 2010.


<div role="button" class="expandableTitle" aria-controls="availabilityRegion">Availability of Data Sources and Results</div>
Data Sources

CCRS

Available Data Years

Type of Year:
Fiscal
First Available Year:
2003
Last Available Year:
2016

Geographic Coverage

Newfoundland and Labrador, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia, Yukon

Reporting Level/Disaggregation

Province/Territory, Region, Facility, Corporation, Sector (residential and hospital-based continuing care)


<div role="button" class="expandableTitle" aria-controls="resultRegion">Result Updates</div>
Update Frequency

Every year

Indicator Results

Web Tool:
Quick Stats
URL: https://www.cihi.ca/sites/default/files/document/ccrs-quick-stats-2016-2017-en.xlsx

Updates

Not applicable


<div role="button" class="expandableTitle" aria-controls="qualityRegion">Quality Statement</div>
Caveats and Limitations

The Continuing Care Reporting System (CCRS) frame does not currently contain all facilities in all provinces and territories that make up the CCRS population of interest. Users should be cautious when interpreting results from CCRS, as the population covered by CCRS may not be representative of all continuing care facilities across Canada.

Coverage is incomplete in the following jurisdictions:

– Manitoba (includes all facilities in Winnipeg Regional Health Authority only)
– New Brunswick
– Nova Scotia

Indicators are risk-adjusted to control for potential confounding factors.

Trending Issues

Since 2003, the number of facilities and jurisdictions submitting to CCRS has been increasing. With the addition of new jurisdictions, it is possible that differences in care practices may impact indicator rates; however, changes to the underlying population would be controlled for using risk adjustment. There is also evidence to suggest that trending and use of data from the entire time series is not an issue and that data quality is consistent over time (Hirdes et al., 2013).

Comments

The CCRS quality indicators use four rolling quarters of data for calculations in order to have a sufficient number of assessments for risk adjustment. Since residents are assessed on a quarterly basis, each resident can contribute to the indicator up to four times.

Although the CCRS quality indicators are reported publicly at the provincial/territorial level only, indicator results are available at other levels (facility, corporation, region) to data submitters in the CCRS eReports application. Data in CCRS eReports is updated on a quarterly basis.

</div>