ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: In exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (ECOPD) requiring hospitalisation greater access to respiratory specialists improves outcome, but is not consistently delivered. The UK National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death 2015 enquiry showed over 25% of patients receiving acute non-invasive ventilation (NIV) for ECOPD died in hospital. On 16 June 2015 the Northumbria Specialist Emergency Care Hospital (NSECH) opened, introducing 24/7 specialty consultant on-call, direct admission from the emergency department to specialty wards and 7-day consultant review. A Respiratory Support Unit opened for patients requiring NIV. Before NSECH the NIV service included mandated training and competency assessment, 24/7 single point of access, initiation of ventilation in the emergency department, a door-to-mask time target, early titration of ventilation pressures and structured weaning. Pneumonia or hypercapnic coma complicating ECOPD have never been considered contraindications to NIV. After NSECH staff-patient ratios increased, the NIV pathway was streamlined and structured daily multidisciplinary review introduced. We compared our outcomes with historical and national data. METHODS: Patients hospitalised with ECOPD between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2016 were identified from coding, with ventilation status and radiological consolidation confirmed from records. Age, gender, admission from nursing home, consolidation, revised Charlson Index, key comorbidities, length of stay, and inpatient and 30-day mortality were captured. Outcomes pre-NSECH and post-NSECH opening were compared and independent predictors of survival identified via logistic regression. RESULTS: There were 6291 cases. 24/7 specialist emergency care was a strong independent predictor of lower mortality. Length of stay reduced by 1 day, but 90-day readmission rose in both ventilated and non-ventilated patients. CONCLUSION: Provision of 24/7 respiratory specialist emergency care improved ECOPD survival and shortened length of stay for both non-ventilated and ventilated patients. The potential implications in respect to service design and provision nationally are substantial and challenging.
ABSTRACT
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the safety, efficacy and cost of Early Supported Discharge (ESD) and Hospital at Home (HAH) compared to Usual Care (UC) for patients with acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD). The structure of ESD/HAH schemes was reviewed, and analyses performed assuming return to hospital during the acute period (prior to discharge from home treatment) was, and was not, considered a readmission. The pre-defined search strategy completed in November 2014 included electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Amed, BNI, Cinahl and HMIC), libraries, current trials registers, national organisations, key respiratory journals, key author contact and grey literature. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ESD/HAH to UC in patients admitted with AECOPD, or attending the emergency department and triaged for admission, were included. Outcome measures were mortality, all-cause readmissions to 6 months and cost. Eight RCTs were identified; seven reported mortality and readmissions. The structure of ESD/HAH schemes, particularly selection criteria applied and level of support provided, varied considerably. Compared to UC, ESD/HAH showed a trend towards lower mortality (RRMH = 0.66; 95% CI 0.40-1.09, p = 0.10). If return to hospital during the acute period was not considered a readmission, ESD/HAH was associated with fewer readmissions (RRMH = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.60-0.90, p = 0.003), but if considered a readmission, the benefit was lost (RRMH = 0.84; 95% CI 0.69-1.01, p = 0.07). Costs were lower for ESD/HAH than UC. ESD/HAH is safe in selected patients with an AECOPD. Further research is required to define optimal criteria to guide patient selection and models of care.
