Interventions to Improve Hospital Admission and Discharge Management: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews

A pilot study testing a new transition of care model from hospital to the community for Hispanic/Latino adults with diabetes to reduce emergency department visits and hospital re-admissions

BACKGROUND

Hispanic/Latino populations have the second highest prevalence of diabetes (12.5%) among ethnic minority groups in the USA. They also have higher rates of uncontrolled diabetes and diabetes-related complications. Approximately 29% of diabetes care costs are attributed to inpatient hospital care. To reduce hospital length of stay and re-admission rates for diabetes, the American Diabetes Association (ADA) recommends a "structured discharge plan tailored to the individual patient with diabetes." However, limited research exists on the feasibility and applicability of a transition of care model specifically tailored for the Hispanic/Latino population.

METHODS

We conducted a 2-year pilot study to develop a practical, patient-centered, and culturally competent transition of care (TOC) model for Hispanic/Latino adults with diabetes discharged from the hospital to the community. Feasibility outcomes included recruitment rates, questionnaire completion rates, adherence to a 30-day post-discharge phone call, and resource needs and utilization for study implementation. Participant-centered outcomes included 30-day post-discharge emergency department (ED) visits, 30-day post-discharge unplanned re-admissions, follow-up visits within 2 weeks of discharge, and patient satisfaction with the TOC model.

RESULTS

Twelve participants were enrolled over the study period, with weekly enrollment ranging from 0 to 4 participants. Participants' average age in years was 47 (± 11.6); the majority were male (85%), and 75% had type 2 diabetes. Recruitment involved the support of 4 bilingual staff. The estimated time to review the chart, approach participants, obtain informed consent, complete questionnaires, and provide discharge instructions was approximately 2.5 h. Of the 10 participants who completed the 30-day post-discharge phone call, none had ED visits or unplanned hospital re-admissions within 30 days post-discharge, and all had a follow-up with a medical provider within 2 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing a patient-centered and culturally competent TOC model for Hispanic/Latino adults with diabetes discharged from the hospital to the community is feasible when considering key resources for success. These include a bilingual team with dedicated and funded time, alignment with existing discharge process and integration into the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) systems.

Mi Puente (My Bridge) Care Transitions Program for Hispanic/Latino Adults with Multimorbidity: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Multimorbidity frequently co-occurs with behavioral health concerns and leads to increased healthcare costs and reduced quality and quantity of life. Unplanned readmissions are a primary driver of high healthcare costs.

OBJECTIVE

We tested the effectiveness of a culturally appropriate care transitions program for Latino adults with multiple cardiometabolic conditions and behavioral health concerns in reducing hospital utilization and improving patient-reported outcomes.

DESIGN

Randomized, controlled, single-blind parallel-groups.

PARTICIPANTS

Hispanic/Latino adults (N=536; 75% of those screened and eligible; M=62.3 years (SD=13.9); 48% women; 73% born in Mexico) with multiple chronic cardiometabolic conditions and at least one behavioral health concern (e.g., depression symptoms, alcohol misuse) hospitalized at a hospital that serves a large, mostly Hispanic/Latino, low-income population.

INTERVENTIONS

Usual care (UC) involved best-practice discharge processes (e.g., discharge instructions, assistance with appointments). Mi Puente ("My Bridge"; MP) was a culturally appropriate program of UC plus inpatient and telephone encounters with a behavioral health nurse and community mentor team who addressed participants' social, medical, and behavioral health needs.

MAIN MEASURES

The primary outcome was 30- and 180-day readmissions (inpatient, emergency, and observation visits). Patient-reported outcomes (quality of life, patient activation) and healthcare use were also examined.

KEY RESULTS

In intention-to-treat models, the MP group evidenced a higher rate of recurrent hospitalization (15.9%) versus UC (9.4%) (OR=1.91 (95% CI 1.09, 3.33)), and a greater number of recurrent hospitalizations (M=0.20 (SD=0.49) MP versus 0.12 (SD=0.45) UC; P=0.02) at 30 days. Similar trends were observed at 180 days. Both groups showed improved patient-reported outcomes, with no advantage in the Mi Puente group. Results were similar in per protocol analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

In this at-risk population, the MP group experienced increased hospital utilization and did not demonstrate an advantage in improved patient-reported outcomes, relative to UC. Possible reasons for these unexpected findings are discussed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02723019. Registered on 30 March 2016.

Hospital Admission and Discharge: Lessons Learned from a Large Programme in Southwest Germany

Introduction

In the context of a GP-based care programme, we implemented an admission, discharge and follow-up programme.

Description

The VESPEERA programme consists of three sets of components: pre-admission interventions, in-hospital interventions and post-discharge interventions. It was aimed at all patients with a hospital stay participating in the GP-based care programme and was implemented in 7 hospitals and 72 general practices in southwest Germany using a range of strategies. Its' effectiveness was evaluated using readmissions within 90 days after discharge as primary outcome. Questionnaires with staff were used to explore the implementation process.

Discussion

A statistically significant effect was not found, but the effect size was similar to other interventions. Intervention fidelity was low and contextual factors affecting the implementation, amongst others, were available resources, external requirements such as legal regulations and networking between care providers. Lessons learned were derived that can aid to inform future political or scientific initiatives.

Conclusion

Structured information transfer at hospital admission and discharge makes sense but the added value in the context of a GP-based programme seems modest. Primary care teams should be involved in pre- and post-hospital care.

Nurses' harm prevention practices during admission of an older person to the hospital: A multi-method qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Nurses' harm prevention practices during the admission of older persons to hospital have important consequences for patient safety, preventable patient harm and length of hospital stay. Novel solutions are needed to assist nurses to balance complexity, high workload burden and patient safety during admission processes.

AIM

Explore the nurses' experiences of harm prevention practices during the admission of an older person to the hospital.

DESIGN

A multi-method qualitative study informed by frameworks of behaviour change and human-centred co-design.

METHODS

The purposive sample included 44 nurses, 5 clinicians from other disciplines and 3 consumers recruited from five general medicine wards across three hospitals of a large public health service in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. Data were collected over 12 h of naturalistic observations of nurses during eight patient admissions, and during four participatory human-centred co-design workshops between August 2019 and January 2020. Observation, field notes and workshop artefact data were integrated for qualitative content and thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Analysis revealed a 5-step journey map, with a temporal logic, that captured nurses' experiences, as well as the enablers and barriers to harm prevention practices when admitting an older person to the hospital. The consensus was reached on three priority features to assist nurses to implement harm prevention practices when they admit an older person to the hospital: (1) prioritize important care; (2) tailor care to the individual and (3) see the big picture for the patient.

CONCLUSION

The novel research approach identified five steps in nurses' activities and harm prevention practices during admission of an older person to the hospital, and key features for a solution to assist nurses to keep patients safe. The findings provide the foundation for further research to develop interventions to assist nurses to manage high workloads during this complex activity.

How to fall into a new routine: factors influencing the implementation of an admission and discharge programme in hospitals and general practices

INTRODUCTION

The VESPEERA programme is a multifaceted programme to enhance information transfer between general practice and hospital across the process of hospital admission, stay and discharge. It was implemented in 7 hospitals and 72 general practices in Southern Germany. Uptake was heterogeneous and overall low. A process evaluation aimed at identifying factors associated with the implementation of the VESPEERA programme.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews in a purposeful sample of health workers in hospitals and general practices in the VESPEERA programme. Qualitative framework analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was performed and revealed the topic of previous and new routines to be protruding. Inductive content analysis was used for in-depth examination of stages in the process of staying in a previous or falling into a new routines.

RESULTS

Thirty-six interviews were conducted with 17 participants from general practices and 19 participants from hospitals. The interviewees were in different stages of the implementation process at the time of the interviews. Four stages were identified: Stage 1,'Previous routine and tension for change', describes the situation in which VESPEERA was to be implemented and the factors leading to the decision to participate. In stage 2,'Adoption of the VESPEERA programme', factors that influenced whether individuals decided to employ the innovation are relevant. Stage 3 comprises 'Determinants for falling into and staying in the new VESPEERA-routine' relates to actual implementation and finally, in stage 4, the participants reflect on the success of the implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The individuals and organisations participating in the VESPEERA programme were in different stages of a process from the previous to the new routine, which were characterised by different determinants of implementation. In all stages, organisational factors were main determinants of implementation, but different factors emerged in different implementation stages. A low distinction between decision-making power and executive, as well as available resources, were beneficial for the implementation of the innovation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

DRKS00015183 on DRKS / Universal Trial Number (UTN): U1111-1218-0992.

Frequency and patient attributes associated with emergency department visits after discharge: Retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The utilization of emergency department (ED) during the post-discharge period may provide relevant insights to reduce fragmentation of care, particularly in a context of general intense use. We aimed to describe frequency and patient attributes associated with emergency department (ED) visits within 30 days of inpatient discharge in a Portuguese health region-Algarve.

METHODS

Secondary data on inpatient and emergency care, for adult patients discharged in 2016. To analyse the association between outcome-ED visit within 30 days of discharge-and selected variables (admission type and groups of or individual illnesses/conditions), we used age- and sex-adjusted odds ratios (aOR). We included all adult patients (aged ≥18 years) discharged during 2016 from the region's public hospital inpatient departments. The period for ED visits also included January 2017.

RESULTS

For 21,744 adults discharged in 2016 (mean age: 58 years; 60% female), 23 percent visited ED at least once within 30 days of discharge. Seventy-five percent of those visits were triaged with high clinical priority. Patients with more comorbidities or specific groups of illnesses/conditions had a significant increased risk of returning ED (aOR and 95% confidence intervals-endocrine: 1.566; 1.256-1.951; mental illness: 1.421; 1.180-1.713; respiratory: 1.308; 1.136-1.505).

CONCLUSION

Patients returned ED after inpatient discharge frequently and for severe reasons. Patients with more comorbidities or specific groups of illnesses/conditions (endocrine, mental illness or respiratory) had an increased risk of returning ED, so these groups may be prioritized in further research and health system initiatives to improve care before and after discharge.

The effectiveness of interventions to reduce adverse outcomes among older adults following Emergency Department discharge: umbrella review

BACKGROUND

Population ageing is increasing rapidly worldwide. Older adults are frequent users of health care services including the Emergency Department (ED) and experience a number of adverse outcomes following an ED visit. Adverse outcomes include functional decline, unplanned hospital admission and an ED revisit. Given these adverse outcomes a number of interventions have been examined to improve the outcomes of older adults following presentation to the ED. The aim of this umbrella review was to evaluate the effectiveness of ED interventions in reducing adverse outcomes in older adults discharged from the ED.

METHODS

Systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials investigating ED interventions for older adults presenting to the ED exploring clinical, patient experience and healthcare utilisation outcomes were included. A comprehensive search strategy was employed in eleven databases and the PROSPERO register up until June 2020. Grey literature was also searched. Quality was assessed using the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 tool. Overlap between systematic reviews was assessed using a matrix of evidence table. An algorithm to assign the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation to assess the strength of evidence was applied for all outcomes.

RESULTS

Nine systematic reviews including 29 randomised controlled trials were included. Interventions comprised of solely ED-based or transitional interventions. The specific interventions delivered were highly variable. There was high overlap and low methodological quality of the trials informing the systematic reviews. There is low quality evidence to support ED interventions in reducing functional decline, improving patient experience and improving quality of life. The quality of evidence of the effectiveness of ED interventions to reduce mortality and ED revisits varied from very low to moderate. Results were presented narratively and summary of evidence tables created.

CONCLUSION

Older adults are the most important emerging group in healthcare for several economic, social and political reasons. The existing evidence for the effectiveness of ED interventions for older adults is limited. This umbrella review highlights the challenge of synthesising evidence due to significant heterogeneity in methods, intervention content and reporting of outcomes. Higher quality intervention studies in line with current geriatric medicine research guidelines are recommended, rather than the publication of further systematic reviews.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMBRELLA REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ( CRD42020145315 ).

How effects on health equity are assessed in systematic reviews of interventions

BACKGROUND

Enhancing health equity is endorsed in the Sustainable Development Goals. The failure of systematic reviews to consider potential differences in effects across equity factors is cited by decision-makers as a limitation to their ability to inform policy and program decisions.  OBJECTIVES: To explore what methods systematic reviewers use to consider health equity in systematic reviews of effectiveness.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to 26 February 2021: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Methodology Register, CINAHL, Education Resources Information Center, Education Abstracts, Criminal Justice Abstracts, Hein Index to Foreign Legal Periodicals, PAIS International, Social Services Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, Digital Dissertations and the Health Technology Assessment Database. We searched SCOPUS to identify articles that cited any of the included studies on 10 June 10 2021. We contacted authors and searched the reference lists of included studies to identify additional potentially relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included empirical studies of cohorts of systematic reviews that assessed methods for measuring effects on health inequalities. We define health inequalities as unfair and avoidable differences across socially stratifying factors that limit opportunities for health. We operationalised this by assessing studies which evaluated differences in health across any component of the PROGRESS-Plus acronym, which stands for Place of residence, Race/ethnicity/culture/language, Occupation, Gender or sex, Religion, Education, Socioeconomic status, Social capital. "Plus" stands for other factors associated with discrimination, exclusion, marginalisation or vulnerability such as personal characteristics (e.g. age, disability), relationships that limit opportunities for health (e.g. children in a household with parents who smoke) or environmental situations which provide limited control of opportunities for health (e.g. school food environment).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data using a pre-tested form. Risk of bias was appraised for included studies according to the potential for bias in selection and detection of systematic reviews.  MAIN RESULTS: In total, 48,814 studies were identified and the titles and abstracts were screened in duplicate. In this updated review, we identified an additional 124 methodological studies published in the 10 years since the first version of this review, which included 34 studies. Thus, 158 methodological studies met our criteria for inclusion. The methods used by these studies focused on evidence relevant to populations experiencing health inequity (108 out of 158 studies), assess subgroup analysis across PROGRESS-Plus (26 out of 158 studies), assess analysis of a gradient in effect across PROGRESS-Plus (2 out of 158 studies) or use a combination of subgroup analysis and focused approaches (20 out of 158 studies). The most common PROGRESS-Plus factors assessed were age (43 studies), socioeconomic status in 35 studies, low- and middle-income countries in 24 studies, gender or sex in 22 studies, race or ethnicity in 17 studies, and four studies assessed multiple factors across which health inequity may exist. Only 16 studies provided a definition of health inequity. Five methodological approaches to consider health equity in systematic reviews of effectiveness were identified: 1) descriptive assessment of reporting and analysis in systematic reviews (140 of 158 studies used a type of descriptive method); 2) descriptive assessment of reporting and analysis in original trials (50 studies); 3) analytic approaches which assessed differential effects across one or more PROGRESS-Plus factors (16 studies); 4) applicability assessment (25 studies) and 5) stakeholder engagement (28 studies), which is a new finding in this update and examines the appraisal of whether relevant stakeholders with lived experience of health inequity were included in the design of systematic reviews or design and delivery of interventions. Reporting for both approaches (analytic and applicability) lacked transparency and was insufficiently detailed to enable the assessment of credibility.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a need for improvement in conceptual clarity about the definition of health equity, describing sufficient detail about analytic approaches (including subgroup analyses) and transparent reporting of judgments required for applicability assessments in order to consider health equity in systematic reviews of effectiveness.

A qualitative study of the adoption of Value Stream Mapping in breast cancer centers

PURPOSE

In order to design a patient-centered discharge process, the entire process is visualized in Value Stream Mapping. The duration of the process steps and waiting times are measured and presented. As a team, health professionals discuss problems and agree on suitable solutions.

METHODS

After applying Value Stream Mapping, we conducted eight interviews in 2018, four with physicians and four with breast care nurses. We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to develop the interview guide and to identify categories for content analysis. To identify the differences in attitude and experience between the occupational groups, we conducted a framework analysis.

RESULTS

Each team of health professionals developed action steps to optimize the discharge process. Obstacles became apparent in the implementation of these action steps. The lack of adequate staff and complex structures were identified as the main factors. These hierarchical structures also prevented a patient-centered discharge process independent of patient-centered care by health professionals. Self-efficacy varied more among breast care nurses than physicians. The group of physicians perceives standardization in the discharge process critically and therefore assumes limitations in transferring Value Stream Mapping to hospitals. The breast care nurses were open in their attitude. Financial incentives contribute to the acceptance of the method.

CONCLUSION

Value Stream Mapping is a simple way to uncover waste and develop applicable action steps. Since the implementation of the action steps was hindered by hierarchical problems and a lack of resources, management involvement and a hospital-wide approach could be beneficial.

The role of personalised professional relations across care sectors in achieving high continuity of care

Background

High continuity of care has a positive impact on health outcomes, but insight into the mechanisms underlying this impact is limited. Information continuity, on which our study focuses, is especially important when relational continuity is not given, which is often the case at hospital admission or hospital discharge. The aim of this study is to provide insight into the information flows between general practices and hospitals in Germany, and to identify factors associated with these flows of information.

Methods

This is a qualitative interview study in a purposeful sample of staff from hospitals and general practices (general practitioners, care assistants in general practice, hospital management, hospital physicians, and nursing staff). Interviews were conducted via telephone or face-to-face using a self-developed semi-structured interview guide. Stepwise systematic content analysis was used to structure collected material into themes and sub-themes that related to the study aim. Data was analysed by two researchers in several cycles, alternating between inductive and deductive approaches.

Results

A total of 49 interviews were conducted. Duration of the interviews varies between 21 and 78 min (mean duration 43 min). Across all groups, more than two thirds of participants were female (n = 34, 69%). The analysis highlighted six interdependent main themes regarding factors that affect information flows between hospitals and general practices: organisational, legal, financial, patient factors, individual characteristics, and emotional & social factors. The latter theme emerged as particularly rich and was therefore divided into four subthemes: appreciation and understanding of the respective other, (intrinsic) motivation, socialisation, and relationships. Organised meetings and events were mentioned as strategies to address emotional and social factors.

Conclusions

Digitalisation can facilitate information flows between care providers. However, knowing each other and good personal relations remain important for effective collaboration. Cooperation between all stakeholders is needed to aim to achieve continuity of care.

Trial registration: DRKS00015183 on DRKS/ Universal Trial Number (UTN): U1111-1218–0992. Date of registration 23/08/2018.

LACE Score-Based Risk Management Tool for Long-Term Home Care Patients: A Proof-of-Concept Study in Taiwan

Background: Effectively predicting and reducing readmission in long-term home care (LTHC) is challenging. We proposed, validated, and evaluated a risk management tool that stratifies LTHC patients by LACE predictive score for readmission risk, which can further help home care providers intervene with individualized preventive plans. Method: A before-and-after study was conducted by a LTHC unit in Taiwan. Patients with acute hospitalization within 30 days after discharge in the unit were enrolled as two cohorts (Pre-Implement cohort in 2017 and Post-Implement cohort in 2019). LACE score performance was evaluated by calibration and discrimination (AUC, area under receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve). The clinical utility was evaluated by negative predictive value (NPV). Results: There were 48 patients with 87 acute hospitalizations in Pre-Implement cohort, and 132 patients with 179 hospitalizations in Post-Implement cohort. These LTHC patients were of older age, mostly intubated, and had more comorbidities. There was a significant reduction in readmission rate by 44.7% (readmission rate 25.3% vs. 14.0% in both cohorts). Although LACE score predictive model still has room for improvement (AUC = 0.598), it showed the potential as a useful screening tool (NPV, 87.9%; 95% C.I., 74.2–94.8). The reduction effect is more pronounced in infection-related readmission. Conclusion: As real-world evidence, LACE score-based risk management tool significantly reduced readmission by 44.7% in this LTHC unit. Larger scale studies involving multiple homecare units are needed to assess the generalizability of this study.

Continuity in general practice and hospitalization patterns: an observational study

BACKGROUND

High continuity of care is a key feature of strong general practice. This study aimed to assess the effect of a programme for enhancing strong general practice care on the continuity of care in Germany. The second aim was to assess the effect of continuity of care on hospitalization patterns.

METHODS

We performed an observational study in Germany, involving patients who received a strong general practice care programme (n=1.037.075) and patients who did not receive this programme (n=723.127) in the year 2017. We extracted data from a health insurance database. The cohorts were compared with respect to three measures of continuity of care (Usual Provider Index, Herfindahl Index, and the Sequential Continuity Index), adjusted for patient characteristics. The effects of continuity in general practice on the rates of hospitalization, rehospitalization, and avoidable hospitalization were examined in multiple regression analyses.

RESULTS

Compared to the control cohort, continuity in general practice was higher in patients who received the programme (continuity measures were 12.47 to 23.76% higher, P< 0.0001). Higher continuity of care was independently associated with lowered risk of hospitalization, rehospitalization, and avoidable hospitalization (relative risk reductions between 2.45 and 9.74%, P< 0.0001). Higher age, female sex, higher morbidity (Charlson-index), and home-dwelling status (not nursing home) were associated with higher rates of hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

Higher continuity of care may be one of the mechanisms underlying lower hospitalization rates in patients who received strong general practice care, but further research is needed to examine the causality underlying the associations.