Abstract
Background Multiple long-term care (LTC) reports over the last 30 years issued similar recommendations for improvement across Canadian LTC homes. Our primary objective was to identify the most common recommendations made over the past 10 years. Our secondary objective was to estimate the total cost of studying LTC issues repeatedly over the past 30 years.
Methods The qualitative and cost analyses were conducted in Canada from July to October 2020. Using a list of reports, inquiries and commission from The Royal Society of Canada Working Group on Long-Term Care, we coded recurrent recommendations in LTC reports. We contacted the sponsoring organizations for a cost estimate, including direct and indirect costs. All costs were adjusted to 2020 Canadian dollar values.
Results Of the 80 Canadian LTC reports spanning the years of 1998 to 2020, twenty-four (30%) were based on a national level and 56 (70%) were focused on provinces or municipalities. Report length ranged from 4 to 1491 pages and the median number of contributors was 14 (interquartile range, IQR, 5–26) per report. The most common recommendation was to increase funding to LTC to improve staffing, direct care and capacity (67% of reports). A median of 8 (IQR 3.25– 18) recommendations were made per report. The total cost for all 80 reports was estimated to be $23,626,442.78.
Interpretation Problems in Canadian LTC homes and their solutions have been known for decades. Despite this, governments and non-governmental agencies continue to produce more reports at a monetary and societal cost to Canadians.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The study had no direct funding support. Dr. Wong is supported by the Clinician Scientist Training Program at the University of Toronto, the Vanier Scholarship from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, and the Knowledge Translation Program at St. Michael's Hospital. Trina Thorne is supported by an Alberta SPOR Graduate Studentship, jointly funded by Alberta Innovate and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Dr. Estabrooks and Dr. Straus are supported by a Tier 1 Canada Research Chairs.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Not required for this study.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Funding: The study had no direct funding support. Dr. Wong is supported by the Clinician Scientist Training Program at the University of Toronto, the Vanier Scholarship from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, and the Knowledge Translation Program at St. Michael’s Hospital. Trina Thorne is supported by an Alberta SPOR Graduate Studentship, jointly funded by Alberta Innovate and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Dr. Estabrooks and Dr. Straus are supported by a Tier 1 Canada Research Chairs.
Competing interests: The authors have no competing interests to declare.
Data Availability
Data not available for sharing.
