Randomised controlled trial of GP-led in-hospital management of homeless people ('Pathway')

Where's the Disconnect? Exploring Pathways to Healthcare Coordinated for Youth Experiencing Homelessness in Toronto, Canada, Using Grounded Theory Methodology

About 900 youth experiencing homelessness (YEH) reside at an emergency youth shelter (EYS) in Toronto on any given night. Several EYSs offer access to healthcare based on youths' needs, including access to primary care, and mental health and addictions support. However, youth also require healthcare from the broader health system, which is often challenging to navigate and access. Currently, little is known about healthcare coordination efforts between the EYS and health systems for YEH. Using grounded theory methodology, we interviewed 24 stakeholders and concurrently analyzed and compared data to explore pathways to healthcare coordinated for youth who reside at an EYS in Toronto. We also investigated fundamental parts (i.e., norms, resources, regulations, and operations) within the EYS and health systems that influence these pathways to healthcare using thematic analysis. A significant healthcare coordination gap was found between these two systems, typically when youth experience crises, often resulting in a recurring loop of transition and discharge between EYSs and hospitals. Several parts within each system act interdependently in hindering adequate healthcare coordination between the EYS and health systems. Incorporating training for system staff on how to effectively coordinate healthcare and work with homeless populations who have complex health needs, and rethinking information-sharing policies within circles of care are examples of how system parts can be targeted to improve healthcare coordination for YEH. Establishing multidisciplinary healthcare teams specialized to serve the complex needs of YEH may also improve healthcare coordination between systems, and access and quality of healthcare for this population.

Harm Reduction Principles in a Street Medicine Program: A Qualitative Study

There is ample evidence that homelessness is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Street Medicine seeks to eliminate these disparities by providing healthcare on the streets to people who are unsheltered. While extant research describes health disparities for the unsheltered and programmatic approaches to addressing housing instability, there are few published studies describing how healthcare providers build and maintain relationships with patients on the street. This insight is central to specifying how street medicine differs from traditional forms of care and defining aspects of street medicine that contribute to successful patient engagement. Through a collaboration between Operation Safety Net (OSN), a street medicine provider in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and [name redacted], an exploratory qualitative study was designed and implemented using harm reduction principles as a guiding framework. Qualitative interviews were conducted with eleven OSN street medicine providers and a thematic analysis using a deductive approach was used to analyze the data. Findings identified the ways that relational harm reduction was central to all aspects of patient care provided through this program. Major themes included: (1) individualism, or meeting patients where they are figuratively and literally; (2) humanism, which refers to valuing and holding true regard for patients; and (3) nonjudgmental care, in which providers do not hold negative attitudes toward patients and their decisions. These themes are consistent with relational principles of harm reduction. Challenges that were discussed also aligned with these principles and included frustration with systems providing care that did not meet patients' individualized needs, and pain and trauma experienced by providers upon losing patients for whom they genuinely cared. Understanding these relational principles of harm reduction may help providers operationalize ways to effectively engage and maintain homeless patients in care and subsequently bridge the gap to traditional models of care. This study may provide valuable insights to expand the street medicine field in research and applied clinical and community settings.

Evaluation of a Pathway team for homeless mental health in-patients

AIMS AND METHOD

The Pathway model is an enhanced care coordination model for homeless people in hospital. We aimed to evaluate the first attempt to apply it on psychiatric wards, which started in 2015 in South London. We developed a logic model which expressed how the Pathway approach might work. Two predictions from this model were tested, using propensity scores and regression to estimate the effect of the intervention among people who were eligible for it.

RESULTS

The Pathway team theorised that their interventions would reduce length of stay, improve housing outcomes and optimise the use of primary care - and, more tentatively, reduce readmission and emergency presentations. We were able to estimate effects on length of stay (-20.3 days; 95% CI -32.5 to -8.1; P = 0.0012) and readmission (a non-significant reduction).

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The marked reduction in length of stay, explicable in terms of the logic model, constitutes preliminary support for the Pathway model in mental health services.

Reducing hospital readmissions amongst people experiencing homelessness: a mixed-methods evaluation of a multi-disciplinary hospital in-reach programme

INTRODUCTION

People experiencing homelessness are at increased risk of experiencing ill-health. They are often readmitted to hospital after discharge, usually for the same or similar reasons for initial hospitalisation. One way of addressing this issue is through hospital in-reach initiatives, which have been established to enhance the treatment and discharge pathways that patients identified as homeless receive after hospital admission. Since 2020, the Hospital In-reach programme (which involves targeted clinical interventions and structured discharge support) has been piloted in two large National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in Edinburgh, United Kingdom (UK). This study describes an evaluation of the programme.

METHODS

This evaluation used a mixed method, pre-post design. To assess the effect of the programme on hospital readmission rates from baseline (12 months pre-intervention) and follow-up (12 months post-intervention), aggregate data describing the proportions of homeless-affected individuals admitted to hospital during the evaluation period were analysed using Wilcoxon signed rank test, with level of significance set at p = 0.05. Qualitative interviews were conducted with fifteen programme and hospital staff (nurses, general practitioners, homeless link workers) to assess the processes of the programme.

RESULTS

A total of 768 referrals, including readmissions, were made to the In-reach programme during the study period, of which eighty-eight individuals were followed up as part of the study. In comparison to admissions in the previous 12 months, readmissions were significantly reduced at 12 months follow-up by 68.7% (P = 0.001) for those who received an in-reach intervention of any kind. Qualitative findings showed that the programme was valued by hospital staff and homeless community workers. Housing services and clinical staff attributed improvements in services to their ability to collaborate more effectively in secondary care settings. This ensured treatment regimens were completed and housing was retained during hospital admission, which facilitated earlier discharge planning.

CONCLUSIONS

A multidisciplinary approach to reducing readmissions in people experiencing homelessness was effective at reducing readmissions over a 12-month period. The programme appears to have enhanced the ability for multiple agencies to work more closely and ensure the appropriate care is provided for those at risk of readmission to hospital among people affected by homelessness.

Navigator programme for hospitalised adults experiencing homelessness: protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

People experiencing homelessness suffer from poor outcomes after hospitalisation due to systemic barriers to care, suboptimal transitions of care, and intersecting health and social burdens. Case management programmes have been shown to improve housing stability, but their effects on broad posthospital outcomes in this population have not been rigorously evaluated. The Navigator Programme is a Critical Time Intervention case management programme that was developed to help homeless patients with their postdischarge needs and to link them with community-based health and social services. This randomised controlled trial examines the impact of the Navigator Programme on posthospital outcomes among adults experiencing homelessness.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a pragmatic randomised controlled trial testing the effectiveness of the Navigator Programme at an urban academic teaching hospital and an urban community teaching hospital in Toronto, Canada. Six hundred and forty adults experiencing homelessness who are admitted to the hospital will be randomised to receive support from a Homeless Outreach Counsellor for 90 days after hospital discharge or to usual care. The primary outcome is follow-up with a primary care provider (physician or nurse practitioner) within 14 days of hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes include postdischarge mortality or readmission, number of days in hospital, number of emergency department visits, self-reported care transition quality, and difficulties meeting subsistence needs. Quantitative outcomes are being collected over a 180-day period through linked patient-reported and administrative health data. A parallel mixed-methods process evaluation will be conducted to explore intervention context, implementation and mechanisms of impact.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was obtained from the Unity Health Toronto Research Ethics Board. Participants will be required to provide written informed consent. Results of the main trial and process evaluation will be reported in peer-reviewed journals and shared with hospital leadership, community partners and policy makers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04961762.

Hospital-based preventative interventions for people experiencing homelessness in high-income countries: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

People experiencing homelessness have significant unmet needs and high rates of unplanned care. We aimed to describe preventative interventions, defined in their broadest sense, for people experiencing homelessness in a hospital context. Secondary aims included mapping outcomes and assessing intervention effectiveness.

METHODS

We searched online databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, HMIC, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library) from 1999-2019 and conducted backward and forward citation searches to 31 December 2020 (PROSPERO CRD42019154036). We included quantitative studies in emergency and inpatient settings measuring health or social outcomes for adults experiencing homelessness in high income countries. We assessed rigour using the "Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies" and summarised findings using descriptive quantitative methods, a binomial test, a Harvest Plot, and narrative synthesis. We used PRISMA and SWiM reporting guidelines.

FINDINGS

Twenty-eight studies identified eight intervention types: care coordination (n=18); advocacy, support, and outreach (n=13); social welfare assistance (n=13); discharge planning (n=12); homelessness identification (n=6); psychological therapy and treatment (n=6); infectious disease prevention (n=5); and screening, treatment, and referrals (n=5). The evidence strength was weak (n=16) to moderate (n=10), with two high quality randomised controlled trials. We identified six outcome categories with potential benefits observed for psychosocial outcomes, including housing (11/13 studies, 95%CI=54.6-98.1%, p=0.023), healthcare use (14/17, 56.6-96.2%, p=0.013), and healthcare costs (8/8, 63.1-100%, p=0.008). Benefits were less likely for health outcomes (4/5, 28.3-99.5%, p=0.375), integration with onward care (2/4, 6.8-93.2%, p=1.000), and feasibility/acceptability (5/6, 35.9-99.6%, p=0.219), but confidence intervals were very wide. We observed no harms. Most studies showing potential benefits were multi-component interventions.

INTERPRETATION

Hospital-based preventative interventions for people experiencing homelessness are potentially beneficial, but more rigorous research is needed. In the context of high needs and extreme inequities, policymakers and healthcare providers may consider implementing multi-component preventative interventions.

FUNDING

SL is supported by an NIHR Clinical Doctoral Research Fellowship (ICA-CDRF-2016-02-042). JD is supported by an NIHR School of Public Health Research Pre-doctoral Fellowship (NU-004252). RWA is supported by a Wellcome Clinical Research Career Development Fellowship (206602).

Cardiovascular Disease in Australians Experiencing Homelessness

Australia has one of the highest rates of homelessness in the world, at 498 per 100,000 people, and Australians experiencing homelessness (AEH) are a particularly vulnerable cohort, with a greater prevalence of cardiovascular disease, and poorer health outcomes, when compared to the general population. This narrative review explores how a combination of inadequately managed traditional and non-traditional cardiovascular risk factors, along with several personal, practical and relationship challenges with the health system, have created unique barriers in the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease in AEH. To help address these inequalities, we propose a targeted and collaborative strategy, which includes government proactivity, stable and affordable housing, and involvement of specialist health professionals, community leaders and major homelessness organisations. Furthermore, the delivery of health care needs to be a combination of outreach and opportunistic services, with a focus on flexible and individualised preventative care.

The economic case for hospital discharge services for people experiencing homelessness in England: An in-depth analysis with different service configurations providing specialist care

There are long-standing concerns that people experiencing homelessness may not recover well if left unsupported after a hospital stay. This study reports on a study investigating the cost-effectiveness of three different 'in patient care coordination and discharge planning' configurations for adults experiencing homelessness who are discharged from hospitals in England. The first configuration provided a clinical and housing in-reach service during acute care and discharge coordination but with no 'step-down' care. The second configuration provided clinical and housing in-reach, discharge coordination and 'step-down' intermediate care. The third configuration consisted of housing support workers providing in-reach and discharge coordination as well as step-down care. These three configurations were each compared with 'standard care' (control, defined as one visit by the homelessness health nurse before discharge during which patients received an information leaflet on local services). Multiple sources of data and multi-outcome measures were adopted to assess the cost utility of hospital discharge service delivery for the NHS and broader public perspective. Details of 354 participants were collated on service delivery costs (salary, on-costs, capital, overheads and 'hotel' costs, advertising and other indirect costs), the economic consequences for different public services (e.g. NHS, social care, criminal justice, housing, etc.) and health utilities (quality-adjusted-life-years, QALYs). Findings were complex across the configurations, but, on the whole, there was promising evidence suggesting that, with delivery costs similar to those reported for bed-based intermediate care, step-down care secured better health outcomes and improved cost-effectiveness (compared with usual care) within NICE cost-effectiveness recommendations.

Interprofessional collaboration and patient-reported outcomes in inpatient care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is seen as the "gold standard" of comprehensive care, but credible evidence concerning the effects on patient-reported outcomes (PRO) is lacking. The aim of this systematic review is to study the effect of IPC on PRO in inpatient care.

METHODS

We systematically searched six electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science/Social Science Citation Index, CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), Current Contents (LIVIVO), CINAHL, and Embase) for studies published between 1997 and 2021. Additional studies were identified through citation tracking, manually searching the Internet and Google Scholar, and consultation of experts. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the RoB 2 tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and ROBINS-I for non-randomized studies (NRS). The included controlled before-and-after study (CBA) was assessed using both the ROBINS-I and the Effective Practice and Organization of Care (EPOC) quality criteria. Results were synthesized through narrative description, grouping, and thematic analysis of extracted data.

RESULTS

The search yielded 10,213 records, from which 22 studies (16 RCTs, five NRS, and one CBA) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. In all but five studies, RoB was assessed as being high (RoB 2) resp. critical or serious (ROBINS-I). Within these 22 studies, nine inductively derived outcomes were assessed: (i) quality of life, (ii) coping, (iii) functional ability and health status, (iv) psychiatric morbidity, (v) pain, (vi) managing one's own health care, (vii) treatment success, (viii) satisfaction, and (ix) therapeutic relationship. While some studies do not report effect estimates, and some of the reported effects appear to be imprecisely estimated, the overall results indicate that IPC may affect PRO positively across all outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to high clinical heterogeneity and high RoB, the question whether IPC affects PRO cannot be answered conclusively. Methodically rigorous studies are needed in order to answer the question of effectiveness of IPC.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42017073900.

Factors That Influence Quality of Life in People Experiencing Homelessness: A Systematic Mixed Studies Review

BACKGROUND

An emerging category of morbidity in research among people experiencing homelessness (PEH) is quality of life (QoL). The Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH) framework was used to explain the relationship between the resulting factors and their impact on QoL among PEH.

AIMS

The purpose of this systematic mixed studies review was to explore the factors that are associated with QoL among homeless individuals.

METHOD

A systematic mixed studies review was conducted using CINAHL, Medline, PubMed, and SocIndex databases. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies were included and synthesized employing results-based convergent synthesis design.

RESULTS

The initial search resulted in 757 studies with 55 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Thematic analysis revealed themes influencing QoL among PEH categorized by the CSDH determinants of structural, social cohesion and social capital, and intermediary determinants. Among these themes, higher social status, strong relationships, better reported physical and mental health, and a positive life outlook were associated with increased QoL. Social isolation, substance use, poorer life outlook, increased years spent homeless, and perceived quality of housing were associated with decreased QoL. Age, sex, and housing programs revealed inconsistent results on QoL.

CONCLUSIONS

While the factors presented in this review indicate some consistent relationships with QoL in PEH, this review has shown QoL among this population is complex and multifactorial. Future research should focus on relationships between the CSDH determinants, particularly the psychosocial factors and the QoL priorities defined by PEH, and how they may influence QoL among PEH.

Assessing the feasibility, acceptability and accessibility of a peer-delivered intervention to reduce harm and improve the well-being of people who experience homelessness with problem substance use: the SHARPS study

BACKGROUND

For people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use, access to appropriate services can be challenging. There is evidence that the development of trusting relationships with non-judgemental staff can facilitate service engagement. Peer-delivered approaches show particular promise, but the evidence base is still developing.

METHODS

The study used mixed methods to assess the feasibility, acceptability and accessibility of a peer-delivered, relational intervention to reduce harms and improve health/well-being, quality of life and social functioning, for people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use. Four Peer Navigators were employed to support individuals (n = 68 total, intervention participants). They were based in outreach services and hostels in Scotland and England. Qualitative interviews were conducted with intervention participants, Peer Navigators and staff in services, and observations were conducted in all settings. Quantitative outcomes relating to participants' substance use, physical and mental health, and quality of the Peer Navigator relationship, were measured via a 'holistic health check' with six questionnaires completed at two time-points.

RESULTS

The intervention was found to be acceptable to, and feasible and accessible for, participants, Peer Navigators, and service staff. Participants reported improvements to service engagement, and feeling more equipped to access services independently. The lived experience of the Peer Navigators was highlighted as particularly helpful, enabling trusting, authentic, and meaningful relationships to be developed. Some challenges were experienced in relation to the 'fit' of the intervention within some settings. Among participants there were reductions in drug use and risky injecting practices. There were increases in the number of participants receiving opioid substitution therapy. Overall, the intervention was positively received, with collective recognition that the intervention was unique and highly valuable. While most of the measures chosen for the holistic health check were found to be suitable for this population, they should be streamlined to avoid duplication and participant burden.

CONCLUSIONS

The study established that a peer-delivered, relational harm reduction intervention is acceptable to, and feasible and accessible for, people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use. While the study was not outcomes-focused, participants did experience a range of positive outcomes. A full randomised controlled trial is now required to assess intervention effectiveness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Study registered with ISRCTN: 15900054.

Improving care transfers for homeless patients after hospital discharge: a realist evaluation

Background

In 2013, 70% of people who were homeless on admission to hospital were discharged back to the street without having their care and support needs addressed. In response, the UK government provided funding for 52 new specialist homeless hospital discharge schemes. This study employed RAMESES II (Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards) guidelines between September 2015 and 2019 to undertake a realist evaluation to establish what worked, for whom, under what circumstances and why. It was hypothesised that delivering outcomes linked to consistently safe, timely care transfers for homeless patients would depend on hospital discharge schemes implementing a series of high-impact changes (resource mechanisms). These changes encompassed multidisciplinary discharge co-ordination (delivered through clinically led homeless teams) and ‘step-down’ intermediate care. These facilitated time-limited care and support and alternative pathways out of hospital for people who could not go straight home.

Methods

The realist hypothesis was tested empirically and refined through three work packages. Work package 1 generated seven qualitative case studies, comparing sites with different types of specialist homeless hospital discharge schemes (n = 5) and those with no specialist discharge scheme (standard care) (n = 2). Methods of data collection included interviews with 77 practitioners and stakeholders and 70 people who were homeless on admission to hospital. A ‘data linkage’ process (work package 2) and an economic evaluation (work package 3) were also undertaken. The data linkage process resulted in data being collected on > 3882 patients from 17 discharge schemes across England. The study involved people with lived experience of homelessness in all stages.

Results

There was strong evidence to support our realist hypothesis. Specialist homeless hospital discharge schemes employing multidisciplinary discharge co-ordination and ‘step-down’ intermediate care were more effective and cost-effective than standard care. Specialist care was shown to reduce delayed transfers of care. Accident and emergency visits were also 18% lower among homeless patients discharged at a site with a step-down service than at those without. However, there was an impact on the effectiveness of the schemes when they were underfunded or when there was a shortage of permanent supportive housing and longer-term care and support. In these contexts, it remained (tacitly) accepted practice (across both standard and specialist care sites) to discharge homeless patients to the streets, rather than delay their transfer. We found little evidence that discharge schemes fired a change in reasoning with regard to the cultural distance that positions ‘homeless patients’ as somehow less vulnerable than other groups of patients. We refined our hypothesis to reflect that high-impact changes need to be underpinned by robust adult safeguarding.

Strengths and limitations

To our knowledge, this is the largest study of the outcomes of homeless patients discharged from hospital in the UK. Owing to issues with the comparator group, the effectiveness analysis undertaken for the data linkage was limited to comparisons of different types of specialist discharge scheme (rather than specialist vs. standard care).

Future work

There is a need to consider approaches that align with those for value or alliance-based commissioning where the evaluative gaze is shifted from discrete interventions to understanding how the system is working as a whole to deliver outcomes for a defined patient population.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 9, No. 17. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Hospital readmission among people experiencing homelessness in England: a cohort study of 2772 matched homeless and housed inpatients

BACKGROUND

Inpatients experiencing homelessness are often discharged to unstable accommodation or the street, which may increase the risk of readmission.

METHODS

We conducted a cohort study of 2772 homeless patients discharged after an emergency admission at 78 hospitals across England between November 2013 and November 2016. For each individual, we selected a housed patient who lived in a socioeconomically deprived area, matched on age, sex, hospital, and year of discharge. Counts of emergency readmissions, planned readmissions, and Accident and Emergency (A&E) visits post-discharge were derived from national hospital databases, with a median of 2.8 years of follow-up. We estimated the cumulative incidence of readmission over 12 months, and used negative binomial regression to estimate rate ratios.

RESULTS

After adjusting for health measured at the index admission, homeless patients had 2.49 (95% CI 2.29 to 2.70) times the rate of emergency readmission, 0.60 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.68) times the rate of planned readmission and 2.57 (95% CI 2.41 to 2.73) times the rate of A&E visits compared with housed patients. The 12-month risk of emergency readmission was higher for homeless patients (61%, 95% CI 59% to 64%) than housed patients (33%, 95% CI 30% to 36%); and the risk of planned readmission was lower for homeless patients (17%, 95% CI 14% to 19%) than for housed patients (30%, 95% CI 28% to 32%). While the risk of emergency readmission varied with the reason for admission for housed patients, for example being higher for admissions due to cancers than for those due to accidents, the risk was high across all causes for homeless patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital patients experiencing homelessness have high rates of emergency readmission that are not explained by health. This highlights the need for discharge arrangements that address their health, housing and social care needs.

Pharmacist led homeless outreach engagement and non-medical independent prescribing (Rx) (PHOENIx) intervention for people experiencing homelessness: a non- randomised feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Homelessness and associated mortality and multimorbidity rates are increasing. Systematic reviews have demonstrated a lack of complex interventions that decrease unscheduled emergency health services utilisation or increase scheduled care. Better evidence is needed to inform policy responses. We examined the feasibility of a complex intervention (PHOENIx: Pharmacist led Homeless Outreach Engagement Nonmedical Independent prescribing (Rx)) to inform a subsequent pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT).

METHODS

Non-randomised trial with Usual Care (UC) comparator group set in Greater Glasgow and Clyde Health Board, Scotland. Participants were adult inpatients experiencing homelessness in a city centre Glasgow hospital, referred to the PHOENIx team at the point of hospital discharge, from 19th March 2018 until 6th April 2019. The follow up period for each patient started on the day the patient was first seen (Intervention group) or first referred (UC), until 24th August 2019, the censor date for all patients. All patients were offered and agreed to receive serial consultations with the PHOENIx team (NHS Pharmacist prescriber working with Simon Community Scotland (third sector homeless charity worker)). Patients who could not be reached by the PHOENIx team were allocated to the UC group. The PHOENIx intervention included assessment of physical/mental health, addictions, housing, benefits and social activities followed by pharmacist prescribing with referral to other health service specialities as necessary. All participants received primary (including specialist homelessness health service based general practitioner care, mental health and addictions services) and secondary care. Main outcome measures were rates of: recruitment; retention; uptake of the intervention; and completeness of collected data, from recruitment to censor date.

RESULTS

Twenty four patients were offered and agreed to participate; 12 were reached and received the intervention as planned with a median 7.5 consultations (IQR3.0-14.2) per patient. The pharmacist prescribed a median of 2 new (IQR0.3-3.8) and 2 repeat (1.3-7.0) prescriptions per patient; 10(83%) received support for benefits, housing or advocacy. Twelve patients were not subsequently contactable after leaving hospital, despite agreeing to participate, and were assigned to UC. Two patients in the UC group died of drug/alcohol overdose during follow up; no patients in the Intervention group died. All 24 patients were retained in the intervention or UC group until death or censor date and all patient records were accessible at follow up: 11(92%) visited ED in both groups, with 11(92%) hospitalisations in intervention group, 9(75%) UC. Eight (67%) intervention group patients and 3(25%) UC patients attended scheduled out patient appointments.

CONCLUSIONS

Feasibility testing of the PHOENIx intervention suggests merit in a subsequent pilot RCT.

Meeting the needs of homeless people attending the emergency department

Homelessness is on the rise in the UK and, over the past few years, there has been a significant increase in the number of emergency department (ED) attendances and admissions by homeless people. Those attending the ED will often have multiple unmet health, housing and social care needs. While it is not possible to meet all these needs in the ED, emergency nurses should be equipped with the knowledge and skills required to communicate with, refer and signpost patients who are homeless. Under the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017, ED staff have a duty to refer homeless people, with their consent, to local authorities for assistance. This article details the barriers that homeless people may experience when accessing healthcare services and explains how these can be addressed. It also outlines the actions that emergency nurses can take to improve the care of homeless people in the ED at an individual and a systems level.

Impact on the use and cost of other services following intervention by an inpatient pathway homelessness team in an acute mental health hospital

Background: Mental illness in people experiencing homelessness is common and a key reason for attendance at emergency departments and admission to hospital.Aims: This paper describes how the KHP Pathway homeless team impacted use and cost of health and wider services. The Pathway model had never been adopted by a mental health hospital, and there had never been an economic analysis to evaluate service use before and after intervention.Method: Service use was measured using an adapted version of the Client Service Receipt Inventory (CSRI) with a simple before and after design at admission, 3 months and 6 months after discharge from hospital.Results: During the first 3-month follow-up, over half the participants saw a GP, with an increase in the proportion seeing a psychiatrist, social worker and a mental health nurse. Attendance at emergency departments was substantially lower than at baseline. The mean total service cost was £818 at base line and £414 at 3 months.Conclusions: The adapted version of the CSRI demonstrates that patients seen by the Pathway Homelessness Team were supported to use community and scheduled health and care services. The service overcomes barriers, frequently experienced by people experiencing homelessness, in accessing support and community healthcare in the UK.

The St Thomas' Hospital Emergency Department Homeless Health Initiative: improving the quality, safety and equity of healthcare provided for homeless patients attending the ED

We carried out a quality improvement (QI) project (QIP), aiming to improve the quality, safety and equity of healthcare provided for homeless patients attending the emergency department (ED). We used QI methodology to identify areas for improvement, and introduced and modified interventions over four Plan, Do, Study, Act cycles. We launched a departmental ‘Homeless Health Initiative’ (HHI), the chief intervention being the provision of ‘Homeless Health Boxes’ in the ED, which contained a ‘Safe Discharge Checklist for Homeless Patients’, maps to specialist homeless general practitioner surgeries and homeless day centres, information on other inclusion health services, copies of a local rough sleepers’ magazine and oral hygiene supplies. Voluntary Homeless Link Nurses and a number of informal ‘Homeless Health Champions’ were appointed. The HHI was embedded in departmental awareness through regular presentations to staff and incorporation into the induction programme for new doctors. Staff satisfaction, in terms of how satisfied staff members were with the care they were able to provide for homeless patients in the ED on a 0–10 scale, improved modestly over the course of the QIP from median 6/10 to median 7/10. The number of staff who were severely dissatisfied with the care they were able to provide for homeless patients improved more markedly: first quartile staff satisfaction improved from 3.875/10 to 6.125/10. Staff compliance with the checklist was poor, with full compliance observed in only 15% of cases by the end of the QIP. An HHI is a cheap and worthwhile QI project, with the potential to significantly improve the quality, safety and equity of healthcare provided for homeless patients, while improving staff satisfaction concurrently. Similar initiatives should be considered in any ED which sees a significant number of homeless patients.

Secondary care usage and characteristics of hospital inpatients referred to a UK homeless health team: a retrospective service evaluation

Background

UK “Pathway” teams offer specialist hospital care coordination for people experiencing homelessness. Emergency healthcare use is high among homeless people, yet “homelessness” is not routinely coded in National Health Service (NHS) data. Pathway team records provide an opportunity to assess patterns in admissions and outcomes for inpatients identified as homeless.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of patients referred to “Pathway” homelessness teams in seven UK hospitals to explore the patterns of hospital admission, morbidity, secondary healthcare utilisation and housing status. Each patient was individually identified as experiencing homelessness. Within a six-month period, demographic data, reason for admission, morbidity, mortality and secondary care hospital usage 120-days before and 120-days after the index admission was collected.

Results

A total of 1009 patients were referred, resulting in 1135 admissions. Most admissions had an acute physical health need (94.9%). Co-morbid mental illness and/or substance misuse was common (55.7%). Reasons for admission included mental and behavioral disorders (overdose, alcohol withdrawal or depression, 28.3%), external causes of morbidity and mortality (assault or trauma, 18.7%), and injury, poisoning and external causes (head injury, falls and fractures, 12.4%). Unplanned Emergency Department attendances reduced after index admission and unplanned hospital admissions increased slightly. Planned admissions doubled and total bed days increased. Housing status was maintained or improved for over 60% of inpatients upon discharge. Within 12 months of index admission, 50 patients (5%) died, 15 deaths (30%) occurred during the index admission.

Conclusions

Disengagement with health services is common among homeless people. Many deaths are due to treatable medical conditions (heart disease, pneumonia, cancer). Observed increases in planned admissions suggests intervention from Pathway teams facilitates necessary investigations and treatment for homeless people. Equity, parity of care, and value should be inbuilt interventions for inclusion health groups and evaluations need to move beyond simply seeking cost reductions.

Homeless health care: meeting the challenges of providing primary care

People experiencing homelessness have multiple complex health conditions yet are typically disengaged from primary health care services and place a significant burden on the acute health system. Barriers preventing people who are homeless from accessing primary care can be both personal and practical and include competing needs and priorities, illness and poor health, physical access to health services, difficulty in contacting services, medication security, and the affordability of health care. Differences in social status and perceptions of being judged can lead to relationship barriers to accessing primary care. Key solutions include prioritising access to stable housing, continuity of health care, specialised homeless general practice, hospital inreach, discharge planning and coordinated care, general practice outreach, and medical recovery centres.

Causes of death among homeless people: a population-based cross-sectional study of linked hospitalisation and mortality data in England

Background: Homelessness has increased by 165% since 2010 in England, with evidence from many settings that those affected experience high levels of mortality. In this paper we examine the contribution of different causes of death to overall mortality in homeless people recently admitted to hospitals in England with specialist integrated homeless health and care (SIHHC) schemes.  Methods: We undertook an analysis of linked hospital admission records and mortality data for people attending any one of 17 SIHHC schemes between 1st November 2013 and 30th November 2016. Our primary outcome was death, which we analysed in subgroups of 10th version international classification of disease (ICD-10) specific deaths; and deaths from amenable causes. We compared our results to a sample of people living in areas of high social deprivation (IMD5 group). Results: We collected data on 3,882 individual homeless hospital admissions that were linked to 600 deaths. The median age of death was 51.6 years (interquartile range 42.7-60.2) for SIHHC and 71.5 for the IMD5 (60.67-79.0).  The top three underlying causes of death by ICD-10 chapter in the SIHHC group were external causes of death (21.7%; 130/600), cancer (19.0%; 114/600) and digestive disease (19.0%; 114/600).  The percentage of deaths due to an amenable cause after age and sex weighting was 30.2% in the homeless SIHHC group (181/600) compared to 23.0% in the IMD5 group (578/2,512). Conclusion: Nearly one in three homeless deaths were due to causes amenable to timely and effective health care. The high burden of amenable deaths highlights the extreme health harms of homelessness and the need for greater emphasis on prevention of homelessness and early healthcare interventions.

Improving hospital discharge arrangements for people who are homeless: A realist synthesis of the intermediate care literature

This review presents a realist synthesis of "what works and why" in intermediate care for people who are homeless. The overall aim was to update an earlier synthesis of intermediate care by capturing new evidence from a recent UK government funding initiative (the "Homeless Hospital Discharge Fund"). The initiative made resources available to the charitable sector to enable partnership working with the National Health Service (NHS) in order to improve hospital discharge arrangements for people who are homeless. The synthesis adopted the RAMESES guidelines and reporting standards. Electronic searches were carried out for peer-reviewed articles published in English from 2000 to 2016. Local evaluations and the grey literature were also included. The inclusion criteria was that articles and reports should describe "interventions" that encompassed most of the key characteristics of intermediate care as previously defined in the academic literature. Searches yielded 47 articles and reports. Most of these originated in the UK or the USA and fell within the realist quality rating of "thick description". The synthesis involved using this new evidence to interrogate the utility of earlier programme theories. Overall, the results confirmed the importance of (i) collaborative care planning, (ii) reablement and (iii) integrated working as key to effective intermediate care delivery. However, the additional evidence drawn from the field of homelessness highlighted the potential for some theory refinements. First, that "psychologically informed" approaches to relationship building may be necessary to ensure that service users are meaningfully engaged in collaborative care planning and second, that integrated working could be managed differently so that people are not "handed over" at the point at which the intermediate care episode ends. This was theorised as key to ensuring that ongoing care arrangements do not break down and that gains are not lost to the person or the system vis-à-vis the prevention of readmission to hospital.

A systematic review of interventions by healthcare professionals to improve management of non-communicable diseases and communicable diseases requiring long-term care in adults who are homeless

OBJECTIVE

Identify, describe and appraise trials of interventions delivered by healthcare professionals to manage non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and communicable diseases that require long-term care or treatment (LT-CDs), excluding mental health and substance use disorders, in homeless adults.

DESIGN

Systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs and controlled before-after studies. Interventions characterised using Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) taxonomy. Quality assessed using EPOC risk of bias criteria.

DATA SOURCES

Database searches (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), hand searching reference lists, citation searches, grey literature and contact with study authors.

SETTING

Community.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults (≥18 years) fulfilling European Typology of Homelessness criteria.

INTERVENTION

Delivered by healthcare professionals managing NCD and LT-CDs.

OUTCOMES

Primary outcome: unscheduled healthcare utilisation.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

mortality, biological markers of disease control, adherence to treatment, engagement in care, patient satisfaction, knowledge, self-efficacy, quality of life and cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

11 studies were included (8 RCTs, 2 quasi-experimental and 1 feasibility) involving 9-520 participants (67%-94% male, median age 37-49 years). Ten from USA and one from UK. Studies included various NCDs (n=3); or focused on latent tuberculosis (n=4); HIV (n=2); hepatitis C (n=1) or type 2 diabetes (n=1). All interventions were complex with multiple components. Four described theories underpinning intervention. Three assessed unscheduled healthcare utilisation: none showed consistent reduction in hospitalisation or emergency department attendance. Six assessed adherence to specific treatments, of which four showed improved adherence to latent tuberculosis therapy. Three concerned education case management, all of which improved disease-specific knowledge. No improvements in biological markers of disease (two studies) and none assessed mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence for management of NCD and LT-CDs in homeless adults is sparse. Educational case-management interventions may improve knowledge and medication adherence. Large trials of theory-based interventions are needed, assessing healthcare utilisation and outcomes as well as assessment of biological outcomes and cost-effectiveness.

Improving Health Care Management in Primary Care for Homeless People: A Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Homeless people have poorer health status than the general population. They need complex care management, because of associated medical troubles (somatic and psychiatric) and social difficulties. We aimed to describe the main characteristics of the primary care programs that take care of homeless people, and to identify which could be most relevant.

METHODS

We performed a literature review that included articles which described and evaluated primary care programs for homeless people.

RESULTS

Most of the programs presented a team-based approach, multidisciplinary and/or integrated care. They often proposed co-located services between somatic health services, mental health services and social support services. They also tried to answer to the specific needs of homeless people. Some characteristics of these programs were associated with significant positive outcomes: tailored primary care organizations, clinic orientation, multidisciplinary team-based models which included primary care physicians and clinic nurses, integration of social support, and engagement in the community's health.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary health care programs that aimed at taking care of the homeless people should emphasize a multidisciplinary approach and should consider an integrated (mental, somatic and social) care model.

What works in inclusion health: overview of effective interventions for marginalised and excluded populations

Inclusion health is a service, research, and policy agenda that aims to prevent and redress health and social inequities among the most vulnerable and excluded populations. We did an evidence synthesis of health and social interventions for inclusion health target populations, including people with experiences of homelessness, drug use, imprisonment, and sex work. These populations often have multiple overlapping risk factors and extreme levels of morbidity and mortality. We identified numerous interventions to improve physical and mental health, and substance use; however, evidence is scarce for structural interventions, including housing, employment, and legal support that can prevent exclusion and promote recovery. Dedicated resources and better collaboration with the affected populations are needed to realise the benefits of existing interventions. Research must inform the benefits of early intervention and implementation of policies to address the upstream causes of exclusion, such as adverse childhood experiences and poverty.

Outcomes of specialist discharge coordination and intermediate care schemes for patients who are homeless: analysis protocol for a population-based historical cohort

INTRODUCTION

People who are homeless often experience poor hospital discharge arrangements, reflecting ongoing care and housing needs. Specialist integrated homeless health and care provision (SIHHC) schemes have been developed and implemented to facilitate the safe and timely discharge of homeless patients from hospital. Our study aims to investigate the health outcomes of patients who were homeless and seen by a selection of SIHHC services.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Our study will employ a historical population-based cohort in England. We will examine health outcomes among three groups of adults: (1) homeless patients seen by specialist discharge schemes during their hospital admission; (2) homeless patients not seen by a specialist scheme and (3) admitted patients who live in deprived neighbourhoods and were not recorded as being homeless. Primary outcomes will be: time from discharge to next hospital inpatient admission; time from discharge to next accident and emergency attendance and 28-day emergency readmission. Outcome data will be generated through linkage to hospital admissions data (Hospital Episode Statistics) and mortality data for November 2013 to November 2016. Multivariable regression will be used to model the relationship between the study comparison groups and each of the outcomes.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Approval has been obtained from the National Health Service (NHS) Confidentiality Advisory Group (reference 16/CAG/0021) to undertake this work using unconsented identifiable data. Health Research Authority Research Ethics approval (REC 16/EE/0018) has been obtained in addition to local research and development approvals for data collection at NHS sites. We will feedback the results of our study to our advisory group of people who have lived experience of homelessness and seek their suggestions on ways to improve or take this work further for their benefit. We will disseminate our findings to SIHHC schemes through a series of regional workshops.

Interventions by healthcare professionals to improve management of physical long-term conditions in adults who are homeless: a systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

People experiencing homelessness are at increased risk of, and have poorer outcomes from, a range of physical long-term conditions (LTCs). It is increasingly recognised that interventions targeting people who are homeless should be tailored to the specific needs of this population. This systematic review aims to identify, describe and appraise trials of interventions that aim to manage physical LTCs in homeless adults and are delivered by healthcare professionals.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Seven electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Assia, Scopus, PsycINFO and CINAHL) will be searched from 1960 (or inception) to October 2016 and supplemented by forward citation searching, handsearching of reference lists and searching grey literature. Two reviewers will independently review titles, abstract and full-texts using DistillerSR software. Inclusion criteria include (1) homeless adults with any physical LTC, (2) interventions delivered by a healthcare professional (any professional trained to provide any form of healthcare, but excluding social workers and professionals without health-related training), (3) comparison with usual care or an alternative intervention, (4) report outcomes such as healthcare usage, physical and psychological health or well-being or cost-effectiveness, (5) randomised controlled trials, non-randomised controlled trials, controlled before-after studies. Quality will be assessed using the Cochrane EPOC Risk of Bias Tool. A meta-analysis will be performed if sufficient data are identified; however, we anticipate a narrative synthesis will be performed.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This review will synthesise existing evidence for interventions delivered by healthcare professionals to manage physical LTCs in adults who are homeless. The findings will inform the development of future interventions and research aiming to improve the management of LTCs for people experiencing homelessness. Ethical approval will not be required for this systematic review as it does not contain individual patient data. We will disseminate the results of this systematic review via conference presentations, healthcare professional networks, social media and peer-reviewed publication.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42016046183.

The Chief Primary Care Medical Officer: Restoring Continuity

The year 2016 marked the 20th anniversary of the hospitalist profession, with more than 50,000 physicians identifying as hospitalists. The Achilles heel of hospitalist medicine, however, is discontinuity. Despite many current payment and delivery systems rewarding this discontinuity and severing long-term relationships between patient and primary care teams at the hospital door, primary care does not stop being important when a person is admitted to the hospital. The notion of a broken primary care continuum is not an academic construct, it causes real harm to patients. As a step toward fixing the discontinuity in our health care systems, we propose that every hospital needs a Chief Primary Care Medical Officer (CPCMO), an expert in practice across the spectrum of care. The CPCMO can lead hospital efforts to create systems that ensure primary care's continuum is complete, while strengthening physician collaboration across specialties, and moving toward achieving the Quadruple Aim of enhancing patient experience, improving population health, reducing costs, and improving the work life of health care providers. For hospitals operating on value-based payment structures, anticipated improvement in measurable outcomes such as decreased length of stay, decreased readmission rates, improved transitions of care, improved patient satisfaction, improved access to primary care, and improved patient health, will enhance the rate of return on the hospital's investment. The speciality of family medicine should reevaluate our purpose, and reembrace our mission as personal physicians by championing the creation of Chief Primary Care Medical Officers.

Hospital care and costs for homeless people

The national picture of the comparative costs and diagnoses of hospitalised homeless patients are examined using the 'no fixed abode' flag in English hospital statistics. Comparable studies sample patients in single cities, eg New York and Toronto. The most common diagnosis is substance misuse; the share of homeless NHS patients with this diagnosis is rising, and now equals that found in North American cities. About half of the cost of homeless patients relates to diagnoses of mental illness, although these comprise a much smaller share of homeless patients than in North America. Hospital costs for homeless patients - both total and per admission - have fallen significantly in recent years, primarily because of fewer admissions and shorter lengths of stay for mentally ill patients. Aims to reduce NHS costs at the level of individual institutions have often shaped policy. Broader policy to prevent and reduce homelessness offers substantial long-term reductions in the cost of chronic care.