for oslo
TRANSCRIPT
Health Impact by joining “Tomo” group
JapanMimihara General HospitalDepartment of General Medicine
Daiju Ueda(SAMURAI)
Health Impact by joining “Tomo” group
JapanMimihara General HospitalDepartment of General Medicine
Daiju Ueda(SAMURAI)
Zelkova Tree↓
“Tomo” group in our hospital.
Our hospital and patientshave benefited a lot from “Tomo”.
“Tomo” group decreases the death rate.
Our hospital and patientshave benefited a lot from “Tomo”.
What is “Tomo” ?
What is “Tomo” ?
“Tomo” means “Friend”
What is “Tomo” ?
Community“Tomo” means “Friend”
What is “Tomo” ?
Develops high Social Capital
(from 1953)
Community“Tomo” means “Friend”
Hospital
Residents Patients
What is “Tomo” ?(from 1953)
Tomo
Health Care Centre
Hospital
Residents Patients
What is “Tomo” ?(from 1953)
Tomo10€ forever/household
What is “Tomo” ?(from 1953)
Residents PatientsTomo
Hospital
Health promotion Discount health check
Residents PatientsTomo
Hospital
Supports our hospital Patients retention
What is “Tomo” ?(from 1953)
Residents PatientsTomo
Hospital
Study meetingVisit each other
What is “Tomo” ?(from 1953)
What is “Tomo” ?(from 1953)
Hospital
Residents PatientsHigh Social Capital
Health promotionPatients retention
Study meetingVisit each other
Supports our hospitalDiscount health check
355,240 households(March 2015)
About 2000 new households/year
“Tomo” group
We have never researched the benefits.
Background
Abstract
We researched the difference of the death rate in our hospital between Tomo group patients and the other in fiscal 2013.
Inpatients8704 patients
57%50%
4388 patients
fiscal 2013Mimihara General Hospital
Outpatients119689 patients
Tomonon Tomo
Death505 patients
50%37%
187 patients
fiscal 2013Mimihara General Hospital
Inpatients8704 patients
Tomonon Tomo
Method
Multivariable logistic-regression models were prepared to estimate the odds ratio and 95% confidence interval about the death rate between Tomo group patients and the other.
ついいけるか？視覚的に.
Main Results
The death rate of patients in Tomo group was lower than the others and its OR was 0.6180(95% CI: 0.530 to 0.7590, P value<0.01)
ResultsMultivariate statistics
Factors Odds Ratio 95% CI P value
Tomo 0.6180 0.530-0.7590 <0.0001
Univariate statisticsFactors All Death P value
Group Tomo 4316 320 <0.0001non Tomo 4388 189
Housemate Solitary 1548 109 0.03not Solitary 6790 338
Sex Male 4424 298 0.0007Female 4280 211
Age <75years old 5914 206 <0.0001≧75years old 2790 303
Days in the hospital ≦14days 6813 272 <0.0001>14days 1887 237
Assessment
There is a significant difference the death rate in the hospital between Tomo and non Tomo.
Patients belongs in Tomo are less likely to die in our hospital.
Assessment
The acute care hospitals provides intensive care. And take over patients to chronic care hospitals who turned in chronic phase.
Assessment
It’s preferable to die not in the acute care hospitals for patients and hospitals.
Assessment
“Tomo”group patients may be highly health-conscious so that they had no need to entering acute care hospitals when they die.
If other hospitals would start similar groups to our Tomo group, similar benefits to the health of patients would be promoted elsewhere.
For the future
Limitation
This research could be improved by more data points as a factor of Multivariable logistic-regression.
For the “Tomo”members…
Thank you.
JapanMimihara General HospitalDepartment of General Medicine
Daiju Ueda(SAMURAI)