Hospital-at-home Integrated Care Program for Older Patients With Orthopedic Processes: An Efficient Alternative to Usual Hospital-Based Care.

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes and costs for patients with orthogeriatric conditions in a home-based integrated care program versus conventional hospital-based care. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental longitudinal study. SETTING: An acute care hospital, an intermediate care hospital, and the community of an urban area in the North of Barcelona, in Southern Europe. PARTICIPANTS: In a 2-year period, we recruited 367 older patients attended at an orthopedic/traumatology unit in an acute hospital for fractures and/or arthroplasty. INTERVENTION: Patients were referred to a hospital-at-home integrated care unit or to standard hospital-based postacute orthogeriatric unit, based on their social support and availability of the resource. MEASUREMENTS: We compared home-based care versus hospital-based care for Relative Functional Gain (gain/loss of function measured by the Barthel Index), mean direct costs, and potential savings in terms of reduction of stay in the acute care hospital. RESULTS: No differences were found in Relative Functional Gain, median (Q25-Q75) = 0.92 (0.64-1.09) in the home-based group versus 0.93 (0.59-1) in the hospital-based group, P =.333. Total health service direct cost [mean (standard deviation)] was significantly lower for patients receiving home-based care: €7120 (3381) versus €12,149 (6322), P < .001. Length of acute hospital stay was significantly shorter in patients discharged to home-based care [10.1 (7)] than in patients discharged to the postacute orthogeriatric hospital-based unit [15.3 (12) days, P < .001]. CONCLUSION: The hospital-at-home integrated care program was suitable for managing older patients with orthopedic conditions who have good social support for home care. It provided clinical care comparable to the hospital-based model, and it seems to enable earlier acute hospital discharge and lower direct costs.

Rehabilitation Profiles of Older Adult Stroke Survivors Admitted to Intermediate Care Units: A Multi-Centre Study.

BACKGROUND: Stroke is a major cause of disability in older adults, but the evidence around post-acute treatment is limited and heterogeneous. We aimed to identify profiles of older adult stroke survivors admitted to intermediate care geriatric rehabilitation units. METHODS: We performed a cohort study, enrolling stroke survivors aged 65 years or older, admitted to 9 intermediate care units in Catalonia-Spain. To identify potential profiles, we included age, caregiver presence, comorbidity, pre-stroke and post-stroke disability, cognitive impairment and stroke severity in a cluster analysis. We also proposed a practical decision tree for patient's classification in clinical practice. We analyzed differences between profiles in functional improvement (Barthel index), relative functional gain (Montebello index), length of hospital stay (LOS), rehabilitation efficiency (functional improvement by LOS), and new institutionalization using multivariable regression models (for continuous and dichotomous outcomes). RESULTS: Among 384 patients (79.1±7.9 years, 50.8% women), we identified 3 complexity profiles: a) Lower Complexity with Caregiver (LCC), b) Moderate Complexity without Caregiver (MCN), and c) Higher Complexity with Caregiver (HCC). The decision tree showed high agreement with cluster analysis (96.6%). Using either linear (continuous outcomes) or logistic regression, both LCC and MCN, compared to HCC, showed statistically significant higher chances of functional improvement (OR = 4.68, 95%CI = 2.54-8.63 and OR = 3.0, 95%CI = 1.52-5.87, respectively, for Barthel index improvement ≥20), relative functional gain (OR = 4.41, 95%CI = 1.81-10.75 and OR = 3.45, 95%CI = 1.31-9.04, respectively, for top Vs lower tertiles), and rehabilitation efficiency (OR = 7.88, 95%CI = 3.65-17.03 and OR = 3.87, 95%CI = 1.69-8.89, respectively, for top Vs lower tertiles). In relation to LOS, MCN cluster had lower chance of shorter LOS than LCC (OR = 0.41, 95%CI = 0.23-0.75) and HCC (OR = 0.37, 95%CI = 0.19-0.73), for LOS lower Vs higher tertiles. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that post-stroke rehabilitation profiles could be identified using routine assessment tools and showed differential recovery. If confirmed, these findings might help to develop tailored interventions to optimize recovery of older stroke patients.

Hospital-at-home integrated care programme for older patients with orthopaedic conditions: Early community reintegration maximising physical function.

OBJECTIVE: Older citizens with orthopaedic conditions need specialised care for the facilitation of early community reintegration and restitution of physical function. We introduced a new community care programme as an alternative to usual hospital rehabilitation for orthopaedic patients. STUDY DESIGN: This was an observational study of a cohort of older orthopaedic patients attending a hospital-at-home integrated care programme (HHU), compared with a contemporary cohort of users of a geriatric rehabilitation unit (GRU) in the urban area of Badalona, Catalonia, Spain. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Functional gain at discharge was measured using the Barthel Index (BI). Other outcomes were: length of intervention (days), rehabilitation efficiency and discharge destination. RESULTS: Over the 2 years of the study we assessed 270 patients (69 at HHU; 201 at GRU). We found no significant differences in baseline characteristics between HHU and GRU groups-mean (IQR) or % age 83 (79-87) vs. 84 (79-88), cognitive impairment 27.5% vs. 24.9%, functional decline 40 (31-48) vs. 43 (32-58). Overall, we found no statistically significant differences between HHU and GRU groups on functional gain: 35 (22-45) vs. 32 (18-46), and discharge home 85.5% vs. 86.1%. Length of intervention was shorter in the HHU group, 43 (32-56) vs. 57 (44-81); p<0.01, for hip fracture patients. In a multivariate analysis, the adjusted mean difference in rehabilitation efficiency between HHU and GRU groups in the hip fracture subgroup was 0.27 (0.09 to 0.46); p=0.004. CONCLUSIONS: This hospital-at-home service obtained similar clinical results to the usual hospital-based rehabilitation care, and for hip fracture patients attending that service, rehabilitation efficiency was better.