Inpatient-level care at home delivered by virtual wards and hospital at home: a systematic review and meta-analysis of complex interventions and their components.

BACKGROUND: Technology-enabled inpatient-level care at home services, such as virtual wards and hospital at home, are being rapidly implemented. This is the first systematic review to link the components of these service delivery innovations to evidence of effectiveness to explore implications for practice and research. METHODS: For this review (registered here https://osf.io/je39y ), we searched Cochrane-recommended multiple databases up to 30 November 2022 and additional resources for randomised and non-randomised studies that compared technology-enabled inpatient-level care at home with hospital-based inpatient care. We classified interventions into care model groups using three key components: clinical activities, workforce, and technology. We synthesised evidence by these groups quantitatively or narratively for mortality, hospital readmissions, cost-effectiveness and length of stay. RESULTS: We include 69 studies: 38 randomised studies (6413 participants; largely judged as low or unclear risk of bias) and 31 non-randomised studies (31,950 participants; largely judged at serious or critical risk of bias). The 69 studies described 63 interventions which formed eight model groups. Most models, regardless of using low- or high-intensity technology, may have similar or reduced hospital readmission risk compared with hospital-based inpatient care (low-certainty evidence from randomised trials). For mortality, most models had uncertain or unavailable evidence. Two exceptions were low technology-enabled models that involve hospital- and community-based professionals, they may have similar mortality risk compared with hospital-based inpatient care (low- or moderate-certainty evidence from randomised trials). Cost-effectiveness evidence is unavailable for high technology-enabled models, but sparse evidence suggests the low technology-enabled multidisciplinary care delivered by hospital-based teams appears more cost-effective than hospital-based care for those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations. CONCLUSIONS: Low-certainty evidence suggests that none of technology-enabled care at home models we explored put people at higher risk of readmission compared with hospital-based care. Where limited evidence on mortality is available, there appears to be no additional risk of mortality due to use of technology-enabled at home models. It is unclear whether inpatient-level care at home using higher levels of technology confers additional benefits. Further research should focus on clearly defined interventions in high-priority populations and include comparative cost-effectiveness evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/je39y .

Evaluation of Home Phototherapy for Neonatal Hyperbilirubinemia.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize home phototherapy treatment for neonatal hyperbilirubinemia and assess the risk factors associated with the need for hospital admission during or after home phototherapy. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective study of newborn infants born at ≥35 weeks of gestation who underwent comprehensive home phototherapy (that included daily in-home lactation support and blood draws) over an 18-month period. We excluded infants who lacked a recorded birth date or time, started treatment at age >14 days, or had a conjugated serum bilirubin level of ≥2 mg/dL (≥34.2 µmol/L). The primary study outcome was any hospital admission during or within 24 hours after completion of home phototherapy. Logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for hospitalization. RESULTS: Of the cohort of 1385 infants, 1324 met the inclusion criteria. At the time home phototherapy was initiated, 376 infants (28%) were at or above the American Academy of Pediatrics phototherapy threshold. Twenty-five infants required hospitalization (1.9%; 95% CI, 1.3%-2.8%). Hospital admission was associated with a younger age at phototherapy initiation (OR, 0.63 for each day older in age; 95% CI, 0.44-0.91) and a higher total serum bilirubin level relative to the treatment threshold at phototherapy initiation (OR, 1.71 for each 1 mg/dL above the treatment threshold; 95% CI, 1.40-2.08). CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive home phototherapy successfully treated hyperbilirubinemia in the vast majority of the infants in this cohort.

Intensity of Care, Expenditure, and Place of Death in French Women in the Year Before Their Death From Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Study.

Health care utilization of women with breast cancer (BC) during the last year of life, together with the causes and place of death and associated expenditure have been poorly described. Women treated for BC (2014-2015) with BC as a cause of death in 2015 and covered by the national health insurance general scheme (77% of the population) were identified in the French health data system (n = 6,696, mean age: 68.7 years, SD ± 15). Almost 70% died in short-stay hospitals (SSH), 4% in hospital-at-home (HaH), 9% in Rehab, 5% in skilled nursing homes (SNH) and 12% at home. One-third presented cardiovascular comorbidity. During the last year, 90% were hospitalized at least once in SSH, 25% in Rehab, 13% in HaH and 71% received hospital palliative care (HPC), but only 5% prior to their end-of-life stay. During the last month, 85% of women were admitted at least once to a SSH, 42% via the emergency department, 10% to an ICU, 24% received inpatient chemotherapy and 18% received outpatient chemotherapy. Among the 83% of women who died in hospital, independent factors for HPC use were cardiovascular comorbidity (adjusted odds ratio, aOR: 0.83; 95%CI: 0.72-0.95) and, in the 30 days before death, at least one SNH stay (aOR: 0.52; 95%CI: 0.36-0.76), ICU stay (aOR: 0.36; 95%CI: 0.30-0.43), inpatient chemotherapy (aOR: 0.55; 95%CI: 0.48-0.63), outpatient chemotherapy (aOR: 0.60; 95%CI: 0.51-0.70), death in Rehab (aOR: 1.4; 95%CI: 1.05-1.86) or HAH (aOR: 4.5; 95%CI: 2.47-8.1) vs SSH. Overall mean expenditure reimbursed per woman was €38,734 and €42,209 for those with PC. Women with inpatient or outpatient chemotherapy during the last month had lower rates of HPC, suggesting declining use of HPC before death. This study also indicates SSH-centered management with increased use of HPC in HaH and Rehab units and decreased access to HPC in SNH.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of hospital-based specialist palliative care for adults with advanced illness and their caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Serious illness is often characterised by physical/psychological problems, family support needs, and high healthcare resource use. Hospital-based specialist palliative care (HSPC) has developed to assist in better meeting the needs of patients and their families and potentially reducing hospital care expenditure. There is a need for clarity on the effectiveness and optimal models of HSPC, given that most people still die in hospital and also to allocate scarce resources judiciously. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HSPC compared to usual care for adults with advanced illness (hereafter patients) and their unpaid caregivers/families. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, CDSR, DARE and HTA database via the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; CINAHL; PsycINFO; CareSearch; National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) and two trial registers to August 2019, together with checking of reference lists and relevant systematic reviews, citation searching and contact with experts to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the impact of HSPC on outcomes for patients or their unpaid caregivers/families, or both. HSPC was defined as specialist palliative care delivered by a palliative care team that is based in a hospital providing holistic care, co-ordination by a multidisciplinary team, and collaboration between HSPC providers and generalists. HSPC was provided to patients while they were admitted as inpatients to acute care hospitals, outpatients or patients receiving care from hospital outreach teams at home. The comparator was usual care, defined as inpatient or outpatient hospital care without specialist palliative care input at the point of entry into the study, community care or hospice care provided outside of the hospital setting. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias and extracted data. To account for use of different scales across studies, we calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous data. We used an inverse variance random-effects model. For binary data, we calculated odds ratio (ORs) with 95% CIs. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table. Our primary outcomes were patient health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and symptom burden (a collection of two or more symptoms). Key secondary outcomes were pain, depression, satisfaction with care, achieving preferred place of death, mortality/survival, unpaid caregiver burden, and cost-effectiveness. Qualitative data was analysed where available. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 42 RCTs involving 7779 participants (6678 patients and 1101 caregivers/family members). Twenty-one studies were with cancer populations, 14 were with non-cancer populations (of which six were with heart failure patients), and seven with mixed cancer and non-cancer populations (mixed diagnoses). HSPC was offered in different ways and included the following models: ward-based, inpatient consult, outpatient, hospital-at-home or hospital outreach, and service provision across multiple settings which included hospital. For our main analyses, we pooled data from studies reporting adjusted endpoint values. Forty studies had a high risk of bias in at least one domain. Compared with usual care, HSPC improved patient HRQoL with a small effect size of 0.26 SMD over usual care (95% CI 0.15 to 0.37; I2 = 3%, 10 studies, 1344 participants, low-quality evidence, higher scores indicate better patient HRQoL). HSPC also improved other person-centred outcomes. It reduced patient symptom burden with a small effect size of -0.26 SMD over usual care (95% CI -0.41 to -0.12; I2 = 0%, 6 studies, 761 participants, very low-quality evidence, lower scores indicate lower symptom burden). HSPC improved patient satisfaction with care with a small effect size of 0.36 SMD over usual care (95% CI 0.41 to 0.57; I2 = 0%, 2 studies, 337 participants, low-quality evidence, higher scores indicate better patient satisfaction with care). Using home death as a proxy measure for achieving patient's preferred place of death, patients were more likely to die at home with HSPC compared to usual care (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.16; I2 = 0%, 7 studies, 861 participants, low-quality evidence). Data on pain (4 studies, 525 participants) showed no evidence of a difference between HSPC and usual care (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.01; I2 = 0%, very low-quality evidence). Eight studies (N = 1252 participants) reported on adverse events and very low-quality evidence did not demonstrate an effect of HSPC on serious harms. Two studies (170 participants) presented data on caregiver burden and both found no evidence of effect of HSPC (very low-quality evidence). We included 13 economic studies (2103 participants). Overall, the evidence on cost-effectiveness of HSPC compared to usual care was inconsistent among the four full economic studies. Other studies that used only partial economic analysis and those that presented more limited resource use and cost information also had inconsistent results (very low-quality evidence). Quality of the evidence The quality of the evidence assessed using GRADE was very low to low, downgraded due to a high risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Very low- to low-quality evidence suggests that when compared to usual care, HSPC may offer small benefits for several person-centred outcomes including patient HRQoL, symptom burden and patient satisfaction with care, while also increasing the chances of patients dying in their preferred place (measured by home death). While we found no evidence that HSPC causes serious harms, the evidence was insufficient to draw strong conclusions. Although these are only small effect sizes, they may be clinically relevant at an advanced stage of disease with limited prognosis, and are person-centred outcomes important to many patients and families. More well conducted studies are needed to study populations with non-malignant diseases and mixed diagnoses, ward-based models of HSPC, 24 hours access (out-of-hours care) as part of HSPC, pain, achieving patient preferred place of care, patient satisfaction with care, caregiver outcomes (satisfaction with care, burden, depression, anxiety, grief, quality of life), and cost-effectiveness of HSPC. In addition, research is needed to provide validated person-centred outcomes to be used across studies and populations.

Hospital-Level Care at Home for Acutely Ill Adults: a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Hospitals are standard of care for acute illness, but hospitals can be unsafe, uncomfortable, and expensive. Providing substitutive hospital-level care in a patient's home potentially reduces cost while maintaining or improving quality, safety, and patient experience, although evidence from randomized controlled trials in the US is lacking. OBJECTIVE: Determine if home hospital care reduces cost while maintaining quality, safety, and patient experience. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Adults admitted via the emergency department with any infection or exacerbation of heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or asthma. INTERVENTION: Home hospital care, including nurse and physician home visits, intravenous medications, continuous monitoring, video communication, and point-of-care testing. MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcome was direct cost of the acute care episode. Secondary outcomes included utilization, 30-day cost, physical activity, and patient experience. KEY RESULTS: Nine patients were randomized to home, 11 to usual care. Median direct cost of the acute care episode for home patients was 52% (IQR, 28%; p = 0.05) lower than for control patients. During the care episode, home patients had fewer laboratory orders (median per admission: 6 vs. 19; p < 0.01) and less often received consultations (0% vs. 27%; p = 0.04). Home patients were more physically active (median minutes, 209 vs. 78; p < 0.01), with a trend toward more sleep. No adverse events occurred in home patients, one occurred in control patients. Median direct cost for the acute care plus 30-day post-discharge period for home patients was 67% (IQR, 77%; p < 0.01) lower, with trends toward less use of home-care services (22% vs. 55%; p = 0.08) and fewer readmissions (11% vs. 36%; p = 0.32). Patient experience was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of substitutive home-hospitalization compared to in-hospital usual care reduced cost and utilization and improved physical activity. No significant differences in quality, safety, and patient experience were noted, with more definitive results awaiting a larger trial. Trial Registration NCT02864420.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Telehealth: A Comparison between Home Telemonitoring, Nurse Telephone Support, and Usual Care in Chronic Heart Failure Management.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost effectiveness of home telemonitoring (HTM) and nurse telephone support (NTS) compared with usual care (UC) in the management of patients with chronic heart failure, from a third-party payer's perspective. METHODS: We developed a Markov model with a 20-year time horizon to analyze the cost effectiveness using the original study (Trans-European Network-Home-Care Management System) and various data sources. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the decision uncertainty in our model. RESULTS: In the original scenario (which concerned the cost inputs at the time of the original study), HTM and NTS interventions yielded a difference in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained compared with UC: 2.93 and 3.07, respectively, versus 1.91. An incremental net monetary benefit analysis showed €7,697 and €13,589 in HTM and NTS versus UC at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of €20,000, and €69,100 and €83,100 at a WTP threshold of €80,000, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were €12,479 for HTM versus UC and €8,270 for NTS versus UC. The current scenario (including telenurse cost inputs in NTS) yielded results that were slightly different from those for the original scenario, when comparing all New York Heart Association (NYHA) classes of severity. NTS dominated HTM, compared with UC, in all NYHA classes except NYHA IV. CONCLUSIONS: This modeling study demonstrated that HTM and NTS are viable solutions to support patients with chronic heart failure. NTS is cost-effective in comparison with UC at a WTP of €9000/QALY or higher. Like NTS, HTM improves the survival of patients in all NYHA classes and is cost-effective in comparison with UC at a WTP of €14,000/QALY or higher.

Supported Discharge Teams for older people in hospital acute care: a randomised controlled trial.

Background: Supported Discharge Teams aim to help with the transition from hospital to home, whilst reducing hospital length-of-stay. Despite their obvious attraction, the evidence remains mixed, ranging from strong support for disease-specific interventions to less favourable results for generic services. Objective: To determine whether older people referred to a Supported Discharge Team have: (i) reduced length-of-stay in hospital; (ii) reduced risk of hospital readmission; and (iii) reduced healthcare costs. Methods: Randomised controlled trial with follow-up to 6 months; 103 older women and 80 men (n = 183) (mean age 79), in hospital, were randomised to receive either Supported Discharge Team or usual care. Home-based rehabilitation was delivered by trained Health Care Assistants up to four times a day, 7 days a week, under the guidance of registered nurses, allied health and geriatricians for up to 6 weeks. Results: Participants randomised to the Supported Discharge Team spent less time in hospital during the index admission (mean 15.7 days) in comparison to usual care (mean 21.6 days) (mean difference 5.9: 95% CI 0.6, 11.3 days: P = 0.03) and spent less time in hospital in the 6 months following discharge home. Supported discharge group costs were calculated at mean NZ$10,836 (SD NZ$12,087) compared to NZ$16,943 (SD NZ$22,303) in usual care. Conclusion: A Supported Discharge Team can provide an effective means of discharging older people home early from hospital and can make a cost-effective contribution to managing increasing demand for hospital beds.

A trial based economic evaluation of occupational therapy discharge planning for older adults: the HOME randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost effectiveness of two occupational therapy-led discharge planning interventions from the HOME trial. DESIGN: An economic evaluation was conducted within the superiority randomized HOME trial to assess the difference in costs and health-related outcomes associated with the enhanced program and the in-hospital consultation. Total costs of health and community service utilization were used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, activities of daily living and quality-adjusted life years. SETTING: Medical and acute care wards of Australian hospitals ( n=5). SUBJECTS: A total of 400 people ≥ 70 years of age. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to either (1) an enhanced program (HOME), involving pre/post discharge visits and two follow-up phone calls, or (2) an in-hospital consultation using the home and community environment assessment and the Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living assessment. MAIN MEASURES: Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living (global measure of activities of daily living) and SF-12V2, transformed into SF-6D (quality-adjusted life year) measured at baseline and three months post discharge. RESULTS: The cost of the enhanced program was higher than that of the in-hospital consultation. However, a higher proportion of patients showed improvement in activities of daily living in the enhanced program with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $61,906.00 per person with clinically meaningful improvement. CONCLUSION: Health services would not save money by implementing the enhanced program as a routine intervention in medical and acute care wards. Future research should incorporate longer time horizons and consider which patient groups would benefit from home visits.

Dehospitalisation at a general hospital in Minas Gerais: challenges and prospects. / A desospitalização em um hospital público geral de Minas Gerais: desafios e possibilidades.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the dehospitalisation process at a general public hospital in Minas Gerais, Brazil, from the perspective of managers, health workers, users and their families. METHODS: This is a qualitative, exploratory, descriptive study based on the principles of methodological and theoretical dialectics. The participants were 24 hospital health workers and 15 companions of users going through the process of dehospitalisation. Data were collected from April to June 2015 using semi-structured interviews and a field journal records and subsequently subjected to content analysis. RESULTS: Analysis of the empirical material led to the construction of the following categories: Dehospitalisation: viewpoint of the institution and Family organisation for the dehospitalisation process. CONCLUSION: The study reveals a deficiency in the implementation, systematisation, internal reorganisation and continuity of care after dehospitalisation. Current dehospitalisation strategies do not favour comprehensiveness and continuity of home care.

Early discharge hospital at home.

BACKGROUND: Early discharge hospital at home is a service that provides active treatment by healthcare professionals in the patient's home for a condition that otherwise would require acute hospital inpatient care. This is an update of a Cochrane review. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and cost of managing patients with early discharge hospital at home compared with inpatient hospital care. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases to 9 January 2017: the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group (EPOC) register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and EconLit. We searched clinical trials registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing early discharge hospital at home with acute hospital inpatient care for adults. We excluded obstetric, paediatric and mental health hospital at home schemes.   DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and EPOC. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the body of evidence for the most important outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We included 32 trials (N = 4746), six of them new for this update, mainly conducted in high-income countries. We judged most of the studies to have a low or unclear risk of bias. The intervention was delivered by hospital outreach services (17 trials), community-based services (11 trials), and was co-ordinated by a hospital-based stroke team or physician in conjunction with community-based services in four trials.Studies recruiting people recovering from strokeEarly discharge hospital at home probably makes little or no difference to mortality at three to six months (risk ratio (RR) 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 1.48, N = 1114, 11 trials, moderate-certainty evidence) and may make little or no difference to the risk of hospital readmission (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.66, N = 345, 5 trials, low-certainty evidence). Hospital at home may lower the risk of living in institutional setting at six months (RR 0.63, 96% CI 0.40 to 0.98; N = 574, 4 trials, low-certainty evidence) and might slightly improve patient satisfaction (N = 795, low-certainty evidence). Hospital at home probably reduces hospital length of stay, as moderate-certainty evidence found that people assigned to hospital at home are discharged from the intervention about seven days earlier than people receiving inpatient care (95% CI 10.19 to 3.17 days earlier, N = 528, 4 trials). It is uncertain whether hospital at home has an effect on cost (very low-certainty evidence).Studies recruiting people with a mix of medical conditionsEarly discharge hospital at home probably makes little or no difference to mortality (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.49; N = 1247, 8 trials, moderate-certainty evidence). In people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) there was insufficient information to determine the effect of these two approaches on mortality (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.12, N = 496, 5 trials, low-certainty evidence). The intervention probably increases the risk of hospital readmission in a mix of medical conditions, although the results are also compatible with no difference and a relatively large increase in the risk of readmission (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.58, N = 1276, 9 trials, moderate-certainty evidence). Early discharge hospital at home may decrease the risk of readmission for people with COPD (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.13, N = 496, 5 trials low-certainty evidence). Hospital at home may lower the risk of living in an institutional setting (RR 0.69, 0.48 to 0.99; N = 484, 3 trials, low-certainty evidence). The intervention might slightly improve patient satisfaction (N = 900, low-certainty evidence). The effect of early discharge hospital at home on hospital length of stay for older patients with a mix of conditions ranged from a reduction of 20 days to a reduction of less than half a day (moderate-certainty evidence, N = 767). It is uncertain whether hospital at home has an effect on cost (very low-certainty evidence).Studies recruiting people undergoing elective surgeryThree studies did not report higher rates of mortality with hospital at home compared with inpatient care (data not pooled, N = 856, low-certainty evidence; mainly orthopaedic surgery). Hospital at home may lead to little or no difference in readmission to hospital for people who were mainly recovering from orthopaedic surgery (N = 1229, low-certainty evidence). We could not establish the effects of hospital at home on the risk of living in institutional care, due to a lack of data. The intervention might slightly improve patient satisfaction (N = 1229, low-certainty evidence). People recovering from orthopaedic surgery allocated to early discharge hospital at home were discharged from the intervention on average four days earlier than people allocated to usual inpatient care (4.44 days earlier, 95% CI 6.37 to 2.51 days earlier, , N = 411, 4 trials, moderate-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether hospital at home has an effect on cost (very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Despite increasing interest in the potential of early discharge hospital at home services as a less expensive alternative to inpatient care, this review provides insufficient evidence of economic benefit (through a reduction in hospital length of stay) or improved health outcomes.

Early supported discharge services for people with acute stroke.

BACKGROUND: People with stroke conventionally receive a substantial part of their rehabilitation in hospital. Services have now been developed that offer people in hospital an early discharge with rehabilitation at home (early supported discharge: ESD). OBJECTIVES: To establish if, in comparison with conventional care, services that offer people in hospital with stroke a policy of early discharge with rehabilitation provided in the community (ESD) can: 1) accelerate return home, 2) provide equivalent or better patient and carer outcomes, 3) be acceptable satisfactory to patients and carers, and 4) have justifiable resource implications use. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (January 2017), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2017, Issue 1) in the Cochrane Library (searched January 2017), MEDLINE in Ovid (searched January 2017), Embase in Ovid (searched January 2017), CINAHL in EBSCO (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature; 1937 to December 2016), and Web of Science (to January 2017). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished, and ongoing trials we searched six trial registries (March 2017). We also performed citation tracking of included studies, checked reference lists of relevant articles, and contacted trialists. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting stroke patients in hospital to receive either conventional care or any service intervention that has provided rehabilitation and support in a community setting with an aim of reducing the duration of hospital care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The primary patient outcome was the composite end-point of death or long-term dependency recorded at the end of scheduled follow-up. Two review authors scrutinised trials, categorised them on their eligibility and extracted data. Where possible we sought standardised data from the primary trialists. We analysed the results for all trials and for subgroups of patients and services, in particular whether the intervention was provided by a co-ordinated multidisciplinary team (co-ordinated ESD team) or not. We assessed risk of bias for the included trials and used GRADE to assess the quality of the body of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 17 trials, recruiting 2422 participants, for which outcome data are currently available. Participants tended to be a selected elderly group of stroke survivors with moderate disability. The ESD group showed reductions in the length of hospital stay equivalent to approximately six days (mean difference (MD) -5.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) -3 to -8 days; P < 0.0001; moderate-grade evidence). The primary outcome was available for 16 trials (2359 participants). Overall, the odds ratios (OR) for the outcome of death or dependency at the end of scheduled follow-up (median 6 months; range 3 to 12) was OR 0.80 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.95, P = 0.01, moderate-grade evidence) which equates to five fewer adverse outcomes per 100 patients receiving ESD. The results for death (16 trials; 2116 participants) and death or requiring institutional care (12 trials; 1664 participants) were OR 1.04 (95% CI 0.77 to 1.40, P = 0.81, moderate-grade evidence) and OR 0.75 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.96, P = 0.02, moderate-grade evidence), respectively. Small improvements were also seen in participants' extended activities of daily living scores (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.14, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.25, P = 0.01, low-grade evidence) and satisfaction with services (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.38, P = 0.02, low-grade evidence). We saw no clear differences in participants' activities of daily living scores, patients subjective health status or mood, or the subjective health status, mood or satisfaction with services of carers. We found low-quality evidence that the risk of readmission to hospital was similar in the ESD and conventional care group (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.51, P = 0.59, low-grade evidence). The evidence for the apparent benefits were weaker at one- and five-year follow-up. Estimated costs from six individual trials ranged from 23% lower to 15% greater for the ESD group in comparison to usual care.In a series of pre-planned analyses, the greatest reductions in death or dependency were seen in the trials evaluating a co-ordinated ESD team with a suggestion of poorer results in those services without a co-ordinated team (subgroup interaction at P = 0.06). Stroke patients with mild to moderate disability at baseline showed greater reductions in death or dependency than those with more severe stroke (subgroup interaction at P = 0.04). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Appropriately resourced ESD services with co-ordinated multidisciplinary team input provided for a selected group of stroke patients can reduce long-term dependency and admission to institutional care as well as reducing the length of hospital stay. Results are inconclusive for services without co-ordinated multidisciplinary team input. We observed no adverse impact on the mood or subjective health status of patients or carers, nor on readmission to hospital.

Early Discharge Programme on Hospital-at-Home Evaluation for Patients with Immediate Postoperative Course after Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: To audit the safety of the early hospital discharge care model offered by a Hospital-at-home (HAH) unit during early postoperative follow-up of these patients, and to determine whether this care model is more efficient compared to the traditional care model. METHODS: A prospective study of 50 patients included consecutively for 1 year in an early discharge programme after laparoscopic colorectal surgery was performed. As of day 3 after surgery, if the patient met the relevant inclusion criteria they were transferred to the HAH unit. The domiciliary protocol consists of daily clinical follow-up and a series of analytical controls with the purpose of early detection of postoperative complications. If the clinical course was favourable on day 7 after the postoperative period the patient was discharged. RESULTS: A total of 66% were males, and the mean age was 60.6 years. The surgical procedure most commonly performed was sigmoidectomy. The mean stay was 5.5 days. There were no deaths during follow-up. The average estimated cost per day of stay in a HAH system was EUR 174.29 whilst the same average cost on a surgery ward stood at EUR 1,032.42. CONCLUSIONS: For patients undergoing major colorectal surgery with minimally invasive surgical technique, an early hospital discharge care programme by means of referral to a HAH unit is a safe and efficient care model which entails a significant cost saving for the public healthcare system.

The cost-effectiveness of hospital-based telephone coaching for people with type 2 diabetes: a 10 year modelling analysis.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is a burdensome condition for individuals to live with and an increasingly costly condition for health services to treat. Cost-effective treatment strategies are required to delay the onset and slow the progression of diabetes related complications. The Diabetes Telephone Coaching Study (DTCS) demonstrated that telephone coaching is an intervention that may improve the risk factor status and diabetes management practices of people with T2DM. Measuring the cost effectiveness of this intervention is important to inform funding decisions that may facilitate the translation of this research into clinical practice. The purpose of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of telephone coaching, compared to usual diabetes care, in participants with poorly controlled T2DM. METHODS: A cost utility analysis was undertaken using the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Outcomes Model to extrapolate outcomes collected at 6 months in the DTCS over a 10 year time horizon. The intervention's impact on life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) and costs was estimated. Costs were reported from a health system perspective. A 5 % discount rate was applied to all future costs and effects. One-way sensitivity analyses were conducted to reflect uncertainty surrounding key input parameters. RESULTS: The intervention dominated the control condition in the base-case analysis, contributing to cost savings of $3327 per participant, along with non-significant improvements in QALE (0.2 QALE) and life expectancy (0.3 years). CONCLUSIONS: The cost of delivering the telephone coaching intervention continuously, for 10 years, was fully recovered through cost savings and a trend towards net health benefits. Findings of cost savings and net health benefits are rare and should prove attractive to decision makers who will determine whether this intervention is implemented into clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12609000075280.

SCI Hospital in Home Program: Bringing Hospital Care Home for Veterans With Spinal Cord Injury.

The complex nature of spinal cord injury (SCI) and the level of care required for health maintenance frequently result in repeated hospital admissions for recurrent medical complications. Prolonged hospitalizations of persons with SCI have been linked to the increased risk of hospital-acquired infections and development or worsening pressure ulcers. An evidence-based alternative for providing hospital-level care to patients with specific diagnoses who are willing to receive that level of care in the comfort of their home is being implemented in a Department of Veterans Affairs SCI Home Care Program. The SCI Hospital in Home (HiH) model is similar to a patient-centered interdisciplinary care model that was first introduced in Europe and later tested as part of a National Demonstration and Evaluation Study through Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and School of Public Health. This was funded by the John A. Hartford Foundation and the Department of Veterans Affairs. The objectives of the program are to support veterans' choice and access to patient-centered care, reduce the reliance on inpatient medical care, allow for early discharge, and decrease medical costs. Veterans with SCI who are admitted to the HiH program receive daily oversight by a physician, daily visits by a registered nurse, access to laboratory services, oxygen, intravenous medications, and nursing care in the home setting. In this model, patients may typically access HiH services either as an "early discharge" from the hospital or as a direct admit to the program from the emergency department or SCI clinic. Similar programs providing acute hospital-equivalent care in the home have been previously implemented and are successfully demonstrating decreased length of stay, improved patient access, and increased patient satisfaction.

Hospital utilization after a telemonitoring program: a pilot study.

The long-term effects of remote monitoring on hospital utilization and health care costs are understudied in home health care. The researchers performed a retrospective study, in a hospital-based home health care agency, to consider the effects of remote monitoring in 326 patients with heart failure 90 days after discharge from services. While statistical significance was not noted, clinical significance suggests that there was a decreased hospital utilization rate and decreased average cost per hospitalization in the remote monitoring group.

Home-based detoxification for neonatal abstinence syndrome reduces length of hospital admission without prolonging treatment.

AIM: Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) is a drug withdrawal syndrome, secondary to in utero chemical exposure and characterised by tremor, irritability and feed intolerance. It often requires prolonged hospital treatment and separation of families. Outpatient therapy may reduce this burden, but current literature is sparse. This review aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of our home-based detoxification programme and compare it with standard inpatient care. METHODS: Infants requiring treatment for NAS between January 2004 and December 2010 were reviewed. Data on demographics, drug exposure, length of stay and type of therapy were compared between infants selected for home-based therapy and those treated conventionally. RESULTS: Of the 118 infants who were admitted for treatment of NAS, 38 (32%) were managed at home. Infants receiving home-based detoxification had shorter hospital stays (mean 19 days vs. 39 days), with no increase in total duration of treatment (mean 36 days vs. 41 days), and were more likely to be breastfeeding on discharge from hospital care (45% vs. 22%). CONCLUSION: In selected infants, home-based detoxification is associated with reduced hospital stays and increased rates of breastfeeding, without prolonging therapy. Safety of the infants remains paramount, which precludes many from entering such a programme.

Hospital at home for elderly acute patients: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The increasing elderly population has led to a growing demand for healthcare services. A hospital at home treatment model offers an alternative to standard hospital admission, with the potential to reduce readmission and healthcare consumption while improving patients' quality of life. However, there is little evidence regarding hospital at home treatment in a Danish setting. This article describes the protocol for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing standard hospital admission to hospital at home treatment. The main aim of the intervention is to reduce 30-day acute readmission after discharge and improve the quality of life of elderly acute patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A total of 849 elderly acute patients will be randomised in a 1:2 ratio to either the control or intervention group in the trial. The control group will receive standard hospital treatment in a hospital emergency department while the intervention group will receive treatment at home. The primary outcomes of the trial are the rate of 30-day acute readmission and quality of life, assessed using the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5-Level instrument. Primary analyses are based on the intention-to-treat principle. Secondary outcomes are basic functional mobility, resource use in healthcare, primary and secondary healthcare cost, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, and the mortality rate 3 months after discharge. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The RCT was approved by the Ethical Committee, Central Denmark Region (no. 1-10-72-67-20). Results will be presented at relevant national and international meetings and conferences and will be published in international peer-reviewed journals. Furthermore, we plan to communicate the results to relevant stakeholders in the Danish healthcare system. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05360914.

Home Heart Hospital Associated With Reduced Hospitalizations and Costs Among High-Cost Patients With Cardiovascular Disease.

BACKGROUND: There is no widely accepted care model for managing high-need, high-cost (HNHC) patients. We hypothesized that a Home Heart Hospital (H3), which provides longitudinal, hospital-level at-home care, would improve care quality and reduce costs for HNHC patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate associations between enrollment in H3, which provides longitudinal, hospital-level at-home care, care quality, and costs for HNHC patients with CVD. METHODS: This retrospective within-subject cohort study used insurance claims and electronic health records data to evaluate unadjusted and adjusted annualized hospitalization rates, total costs of care, part A costs, and mortality rates before, during, and following H3. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were enrolled in H3 between February 2019 and October 2021. Patients' mean age was 75 years and 50% were female. Common comorbidities included congestive heart failure (50%), atrial fibrillation (37%), coronary artery disease (44%). Relative to pre-enrollment, enrollment in H3 was associated with significant reductions in annualized hospitalization rates (absolute reduction (AR): 2.4 hospitalizations/year, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: -0.8, -4.0; p < 0.001; total costs of care (AR: -$56 990, 95% CI: -$105 170, -$8810; p < 0.05; and part A costs (AR: -$78 210, 95% CI: -$114 770, -$41 640; p < 0.001). Annualized post-H3 total costs and part A costs were significantly lower than pre-enrollment costs (total costs of care: -$113 510, 95% CI: -$151 340, -$65 320; p < 0.001; part A costs: -$84 480, 95% CI: -$121 040, -$47 920; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Longitudinal home-based care models hold promise for improving quality and reducing healthcare spending for HNHC patients with CVD.

Should alternatives to conventional hospitalisation be promoted in an era of financial constraint?

BACKGROUND: Because the current economic crisis has led to austerity in health policies, with severe restrictions on public health care, avoiding unnecessary admissions and shortening hospital stays is rapidly becoming an urgent priority. Alternatives to hospitalisation replace or shorten hospital processes, including diagnosis, monitoring, treatment and follow-up. This review aims to present the available evidence on alternatives to conventional hospitalisation for medical disorders; options for surgery, psychiatry and palliative care are largely excluded. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Narrative review. RESULTS: The main alternatives to conventional hospitalisation include day centres (DC), quick diagnosis units (QDU), hospital at home (HaH) and, in some circumstances, telemonitoring. DC increase patient comfort, reduce costs and can improve efficiency. In generally healthy patients with suspected severe disease, QDU may be a good alternative to hospitalisation for diagnostic procedures. However, their cost-effectiveness remains to be clearly proven. Randomised controlled trials have shown that hospital-at-home (HaH) can lead to earlier hospital discharges, improve outcomes and reduce costs in patients with prevalent chronic diseases. Although telemonitoring seems to be promising and its use is increasing, methodologically sounder studies with a higher level of evidence are needed to assess its clinical effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Factors such as ageing, the need for an earlier diagnosis of suspected severe disease, the increasing complexity of medical care and the increasing costs of hospitalisation mean that, whenever possible, giving priority to less expensive alternatives to hospital admission, such as QDU, DC, HaH and telemedicine, is an urgent task in the current economic crisis.

Hospital-based home care for children with cancer: feasibility and psychosocial impact on children and their families.

BACKGROUND: To assess the feasibility and psychosocial impact of a hospital-based home care (HBHC) program for children with cancer. PROCEDURE: A HBHC program was carried out with 51 children (0-18 years) with cancer to assess its feasibility in terms of satisfaction, care preferences, safety, and cost. A controlled trial was conducted to assess children's health-related quality of life (HRQOL) using the parent-reported and self-reported PedsQL generic core scale and PedsQL cancer module, and the psychosocial impact on the family by PedsQL family impact module comprising a subsample of 28 children and 43 parents in the home care group, and 47 children and 66 parents receiving standard hospital care. RESULTS: All parents in the HBHC program were satisfied and preferred home care. There were no serious adverse events associated with HBHC, and costs did not increase. When adjusting for age, gender, diagnosis and time since diagnosis, we found significant higher HRQOL scores in parent-reported physical health (P = 0.04; 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.2-19.5) and worry (P = 0.04; 95% CI: -0.4-20.6) in the home-care group indicating better physical health and less worry for children in the home-care group. No significant difference was found in the Family Impact Module. CONCLUSION: This study indicates that HBHC is a feasible alternative to hospital care for children with cancer, and is greatly preferred by parents. Specific aspects of children's HRQOL may be improved with HBHC and the psychosocial burden on the family does not increase.