-
PloS One 2024To synthesize the impact of improvement interventions related to care coordination, discharge support and care transitions on patient experience measures.
AIM
To synthesize the impact of improvement interventions related to care coordination, discharge support and care transitions on patient experience measures.
METHOD
Systematic review. Searches were completed in six scientific databases, five specialty journals, and through snowballing. Eligibility included studies published in English (2015-2023) focused on improving care coordination, discharge support, or transitional care assessed by standardized patient experience measures as a primary outcome. Two independent reviewers made eligibility decisions and performed quality appraisals.
RESULTS
Of 1240 papers initially screened, 16 were included. Seven studies focused on care coordination activities, including three randomized controlled trials [RCTs]. These studies used enhanced supports such as improvement coaching or tailoring for vulnerable populations within Patient-Centered Medical Homes or other primary care sites. Intervention effectiveness was mixed or neutral relative to standard or models of care or simpler supports (e.g., improvement tool). Eight studies, including three RCTs, focused on enhanced discharge support, including patient education (e.g., teach back) and telephone follow-up; mixed or neutral results on the patient experience were also found and with more substantive risks of bias. One pragmatic trial on a transitional care intervention, using a navigator support, found significant changes only for the subset of uninsured patients and in one patient experience outcome, and had challenges with implementation fidelity.
CONCLUSION
Enhanced supports for improving care coordination, discharge education, and post-discharge follow-up had mixed or neutral effectiveness for improving the patient experience with care, compared to standard care or simpler improvement approaches. There is a need to advance the body of evidence on how to improve the patient experience with discharge support and transitional approaches.
Topics: Humans; Patient Discharge; Transitional Care; Patient-Centered Care; Patient Satisfaction; Continuity of Patient Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38771768
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299176 -
Injury Feb 2022Trauma accounts for nearly one-tenth of the global disability-adjusted life-years, a large proportion of which is seen in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Trauma accounts for nearly one-tenth of the global disability-adjusted life-years, a large proportion of which is seen in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Trauma can affect employment opportunities, reduce social participation, be influenced by social support, and significantly reduce the quality of life (QOL) among survivors. Research typically focuses on specific trauma sub-groups. This dispersed knowledge results in limited understanding of these outcomes in trauma patients as a whole across different populations and settings. We aimed to assess and provide a systematic overview of current knowledge about return-to-work (RTW), participation, social support, and QOL in trauma patients up to one year after discharge.
METHODS
We undertook a systematic review of the literature published since 2010 on RTW, participation, social support, and QOL in adult trauma populations, up to one year from discharge, utilizing the most commonly used measurement tools from three databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. We performed a meta-analysis based on the type of outcome, tool for measurement, and the specific effect measure as well as assessed the methodological quality of the included studies.
RESULTS
A total of 43 articles were included. More than one-third (36%) of patients had not returned to work even a year after discharge. Those who did return to work took more than 3 months to do so. Trauma patients reported receiving moderate social support. There were no studies reporting social participation among trauma patients using the inclusion criteria. The QOL scores of the trauma patients did not reach the population norms or pre-injury levels even a year after discharge. Older adults and females tended to have poorer outcomes. Elderly individuals and females were under-represented in the studies. More than three-quarters of the included studies were from high-income countries (HICs) and had higher methodological quality.
CONCLUSION
RTW and QOL are affected by trauma even a year after discharge and the social support received was moderate, especially among elderly and female patients. Future studies should move towards building more high-quality evidence from LMICs on long-term socioeconomic outcomes including social support, participation and unpaid work.
Topics: Aftercare; Aged; Female; Humans; Income; Patient Discharge; Quality of Life; Return to Work
PubMed: 34706829
DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2021.10.012 -
Clinical Transplantation Oct 2022Several factors associated with prolonged hospital stay have been described. A recent study demonstrated that hospital length of stay (LOS) is directly associated with... (Review)
Review
When is the optimal time to discharge patients after liver transplantation with respect to short-term outcomes? A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.
BACKGROUND
Several factors associated with prolonged hospital stay have been described. A recent study demonstrated that hospital length of stay (LOS) is directly associated with an increased cost for liver transplantation (LT) and may be associated with greater mortality; however, the factors associated with post-LT mortality are also related to a prolonged hospital stay, that is, those factors are confounders. Thus, the actual impact of the length of post-LT hospital stay on both short-term and long-term patient and graft survival remains uncertain.
OBJECTIVES
To identify the optimal time to discharge patients after LT with respect to short-term outcomes; readmission rate, 30-90-mortality and morbidity.
METHODS
Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. Initial search keywords for screening were as follows; ((discharge AND (time OR "time point" OR "time-point")) OR "length of hospital stay" OR "length of stay") AND ((liver OR hepatic) AND (transplant OR transplantation)).
PROSPERO ID
CRD42021245598 RESULTS: The strength of recommendation was rated as Weak, and we did not identify the direction of recommendations regarding the optimal timing after LT concerning short-term outcomes, including "Readmission rate," six studies on 30- and/or 90-day mortality, and five studies on "30- and/or 90-day morbidity rate."
CONCLUSIONS
Evidence is scarce to judge the optimal timing to discharge patients after LT with respect to short-term outcomes. In centers with robust outpatient follow-up, discharge can occur safely as early as post-transplant 6-8 days (Quality of Evidence [QOE]; Low | Grade of Recommendation; Weak).
Topics: Humans; Liver Transplantation; Patient Discharge; Length of Stay; Graft Survival
PubMed: 35470472
DOI: 10.1111/ctr.14685 -
Systematic Reviews Apr 2019The majority of children receiving care in the emergency department (ED) are discharged home, making discharge communication a key component of quality emergency care....
BACKGROUND
The majority of children receiving care in the emergency department (ED) are discharged home, making discharge communication a key component of quality emergency care. Parents must have the knowledge and skills to effectively manage their child's ongoing care at home. Parental fatigue and stress, health literacy, and the fragmented nature of communication in the ED setting may contribute to suboptimal parent comprehension of discharge instructions and inappropriate ED return visits. The aim of this study was to examine how and why discharge communication works in a pediatric ED context and develop recommendations for practice, policy, and research.
METHODS
We systematically reviewed the published and gray literature. We searched electronic databases CINAHL, Medline, and Embase up to July 2017. Policies guiding discharge communication were also sought from pediatric emergency networks in Canada, USA, Australia, and the UK. Eligible studies included children less than 19 years of age with a focus on discharge communication in the ED as the primary objective. Included studies were appraised using relevant Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklists. Textual summaries, content analysis, and conceptual mapping assisted with exploring relationships within and between data. We implemented an integrated knowledge translation approach to strengthen the relevancy of our research questions and assist with summarizing our findings.
RESULTS
A total of 5095 studies were identified in the initial search, with 75 articles included in the final review. Included studies focused on a range of illness presentations and employed a variety of strategies to deliver discharge instructions. Education was the most common intervention and the majority of studies targeted parent knowledge or behavior. Few interventions attempted to change healthcare provider knowledge or behavior. Assessing barriers to implementation, identifying relevant ED contextual factors, and understanding provider and patient attitudes and beliefs about discharge communication were identified as important factors for improving discharge communication practice.
CONCLUSION
Existing literature examining discharge communication in pediatric emergency care varies widely. A theory-based approach to intervention design is needed to improve our understanding regarding discharge communication practice. Strengthening discharge communication in a pediatric emergency context presents a significant opportunity for improving parent comprehension and health outcomes for children.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO registration number: CRD42014007106.
Topics: Child; Communication; Emergency Service, Hospital; Humans; Parents; Patient Discharge
PubMed: 30944038
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-019-0995-7 -
International Journal of Community... Oct 2014This review focuses on the impact of liaison nurse in nursing care of patient after ICU discharge on patient's outcomes, compared with patients that are not taken care... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This review focuses on the impact of liaison nurse in nursing care of patient after ICU discharge on patient's outcomes, compared with patients that are not taken care of by liaison nurses. The role of the ICU liaison nurse has transpired to solve the gap between intensive care unit and wards. Therefore, we aimed to review the outcomes of all studies in this field.
METHODS
A systematic review of intervention studies between 2004 and 2013 was undertaken using standard and sensitive keywords such as liaison nurse, intensive care unit, and patient outcomes in the following databases: Science direct, PubMed, Scopus, Ovid, Oxford, Wiley, Scholar, and Mosby. Then, the articles which had the inclusion criteria after quality control were selected for a systematic review.
RESULTS
From 662 retrieved articles, six articles were analyzed in a case study and four articles showed a statistically significant effect of the liaison nurse on the patient's outcomes such as reducing delays in patient discharge, effective discharge planning, improvement in survival for patients at the risk for readmission.
CONCLUSION
Liaison nurses have a positive role on the outcomes of patients who are discharged from the ICU and more research should be done to examine the exact function of liaison nurses and other factors that influence outcomes in patients discharged from ICU.
PubMed: 25349863
DOI: No ID Found -
The Lancet. HIV Mar 2022The identification and appropriate management of people with advanced HIV disease is a key component in the HIV response. People with HIV who are hospitalised are at a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The identification and appropriate management of people with advanced HIV disease is a key component in the HIV response. People with HIV who are hospitalised are at a higher risk of death, a risk that might persist after discharge. The aims of this study were to estimate the frequency of negative post-discharge outcomes, and to determine risk factors for such outcomes in people with HIV.
METHODS
Using a broad search strategy combining terms for hospital discharge and HIV infection, we searched MEDLINE via PubMed and Embase from Jan 1, 2003 to Nov 30, 2021 to identify studies reporting outcomes among people with HIV following discharge from hospital. We estimated pooled proportions of readmissions and deaths after hospital discharge using random-effects models. We also did subgroup analyses by setting, region, duration of follow-up, and advanced HIV status at admission, and sensitivity analyses to assess heterogeneity.
FINDINGS
We obtained data from 29 cohorts, which reported outcomes of people living with HIV after hospital discharge in 92 781 patients. The pooled proportion of patients readmitted to hospital after discharge was 18·8% (95% CI 15·3-22·3) and 14·1% (10·8-17·3) died post-discharge. In sensitivity analyses, no differences were identified in the proportion of patients who were readmitted or died when comparing studies published before 2016 with those published after 2016. Post-discharge mortality was higher in studies from Africa (23·1% [16·5-29·7]) compared with the USA (7·5% [4·4-10·6]). For studies that reported both post-discharge mortality and readmission, the pooled proportion of patients who had this composite adverse outcome was 31·7% (23·9-39·5). Heterogeneity was moderate, and largely explained by patient status and linkage to care. Reported risk factors for readmission included low CD4 cell count at admission, longer length of stay, discharge against medical advice, and not linking to care following discharge; inpatient treatment with antiretroviral therapy (ART) during hospitalisation was protective of post-discharge mortality.
INTERPRETATION
More than a quarter of patients with HIV had an adverse outcome after hospital discharge with no evidence of improvement in the past 15 years. This systematic review highlights the importance of ensuring post-discharge referral and appropriate management, including ART, to reduce mortality and readmission to hospital among this group of high-risk patients.
FUNDING
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
TRANSLATIONS
For the French and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.
Topics: Aftercare; HIV Infections; Hospitalization; Hospitals; Humans; Patient Discharge
PubMed: 35245507
DOI: 10.1016/S2352-3018(21)00329-5 -
Danish Medical Journal Mar 2017Incisional hernia is a common long-term complication to abdominal surgery, occurring in more than 20% of all patients. Some of these hernias become giant and affect... (Review)
Review
Incisional hernia is a common long-term complication to abdominal surgery, occurring in more than 20% of all patients. Some of these hernias become giant and affect patients in several ways. This patient group often experiences pain, decreased perceived body image, and loss of physical function, which results in a need for surgical repair of the giant hernia, known as abdominal wall reconstruction. In the current thesis, patients with a giant hernia were examined to achieve a better understanding of their physical and psychological function before and after abdominal wall reconstruction. Study I was a systematic review of the existing standardized methods for assessing quality of life after incisional hernia repair. After a systematic search in the electronic databases Embase and PubMed, a total of 26 studies using standardized measures for assessment of quality of life after incisional hernia repair were found. The most commonly used questionnaire was the generic Short-Form 36, which assesses overall health-related quality of life, addressing both physical and mental health. The second-most common questionnaire was the Carolinas Comfort Scale, which is a disease specific questionnaire addressing pain, movement limitation and mesh sensation in relation to a current or previous hernia. In total, eight different questionnaires were used at varying time points in the 26 studies. In conclusion, standardization of timing and method of quality of life assessment after incisional hernia repair was lacking. Study II was a case-control study of the effects of an enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for patients undergoing abdominal wall reconstruction for a giant hernia. Sixteen consecutive patients were included prospectively after the implementation of a new enhanced recovery after surgery pathway at the Digestive Disease Center, Bispebjerg Hospital, and compared to a control group of 16 patients included retrospectively in the period immediately prior to the implementation of the pathway. The enhanced recovery after surgery pathway included preoperative high-dose steroid, daily assessment of revised discharge criteria and an aggressive approach to restore bowel function (chewing gum and enema on postoperative day two). Patients who followed the enhanced recovery after surgery pathway reported low scores of pain, nausea and fatigue, and were discharged significantly faster than patients in the control group. A non-significant increase in postoperative readmissions and reoperations was observed after the introduction of the enhanced recovery after surgery pathway. Study III and IV were prospective studies of patients undergoing abdominal wall reconstruction for giant incisional hernia, who were compared to a control group of patients with an intact abdominal wall undergoing colorectal resection for benign or low-grade malignant disease. Patients were examined within a week preoperatively and again one year postoperatively. In study III, the respiratory function and respiratory quality of life were assessed, and the results showed that patients with a giant incisional hernia had a decreased expiratory lung function (peak expiratory flow and maximal expiratory pressure) compared to the predicted values and also compared to patients in the control group. Both parameters increased significantly after abdominal wall reconstruction, while no other significant changes were found in objective or subjective measures at one-year follow-up in both groups of patients. Lastly, study IV examined the abdominal wall- and extremity function, as well as overall and disease specific quality of life. We found that patients with a giant hernia had a significantly decreased relative function of the abdominal wall compared to patients with an intact abdominal wall, and that this deficit was offset at one-year follow-up. Patients in the control group showed a postoperative decrease in abdominal wall function, while no changes were found in extremity function in either group. Patients reported improved quality of life after abdominal wall reconstruction. In summary, the studies in this thesis concluded that; standardization of patient-reported outcomes after incisional hernia repair is lacking; enhanced recovery after surgery is feasible: after abdominal wall reconstruction and seems to lower the time to discharge; patients with giant incisional hernia have compromised expiratory lung function and abdominal wall function, both of which are restored one year after abdominal wall reconstruction.
Topics: Abdominal Wall; Age Factors; Clinical Studies as Topic; Hernia, Ventral; Herniorrhaphy; Humans; Incisional Hernia; Length of Stay; Postoperative Care; Postoperative Period; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Quality of Life; Recurrence; Surveys and Questionnaires; Tomography, X-Ray Computed
PubMed: 28260602
DOI: No ID Found -
Revista Panamericana de Salud Publica =... 2022To characterize the frequency, causes, and predictors of readmissions of COVID-19 patients after discharge from heath facilities or emergency departments, interventions... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To characterize the frequency, causes, and predictors of readmissions of COVID-19 patients after discharge from heath facilities or emergency departments, interventions used to reduce readmissions, and outcomes of COVID-19 patients discharged from such settings.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review for case series and observational studies published between January 2020 and April 2021 in PubMed, Embase, LILACS, and MedRxiv, reporting the frequency, causes, or risk factors for readmission of COVID-19 survivors/patients. We conducted a narrative synthesis and assessed the methodological quality using the JBI critical appraisal checklist.
RESULTS
We identified 44 studies including data from 10 countries. The overall 30-day median readmission rate was 7.1%. Readmissions varied with the length of follow-up, occurring <10.5%, <14.5%, <21.5%, and <30%, respectively, for 10, 30, 60, and 253 days following discharge. Among those followed up for 30 and 60 days, the median time from discharge to readmission was 3 days and 8-11 days, respectively. The significant risk factor associated with readmission was having shorter length of stay, and the important causes included respiratory or thromboembolic events and chronic illnesses. Emergency department re-presentation was >20% in four studies. Risk factors associated with mortality were male gender, advanced age, and comorbidities.
CONCLUSIONS
Readmission of COVID-19 survivors is frequent, and post-discharge mortality is significant in specific populations. There is an urgent need to further examine underlying reasons for early readmission and to prevent additional readmissions and adverse outcomes in COVID-19 survivors.
PubMed: 36245904
DOI: 10.26633/RPSP.2022.142 -
Respiratory Care Nov 2021Results of recent studies suggest that the incidence and mortality of ARDS may be higher than previously thought in pediatric trauma patients. We conducted a systematic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Results of recent studies suggest that the incidence and mortality of ARDS may be higher than previously thought in pediatric trauma patients. We conducted a systematic review of the literature on incidence, risk factors, prognostic factors, and outcomes of ARDS after pediatric trauma in the ICU.
METHODS
Medical literature databases were searched up to April 2020. Guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses were followed. Articles that reported quantitative data with regard to the incidence, risk factors, prognostic factors, mortality, or other outcomes for ARDS in subjects with pediatric trauma admitted to the ICU were included. Two authors independently screened and assessed eligibility of all identified studies, collected data, and assessed the methodological quality of selected studies. Data extraction was performed by using a standardized data extraction sheet. Quality assessment was performed by using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for cohort studies. A meta-analysis was not performed because the studies used overlapping cohorts or different ARDS criteria.
RESULTS
Nine studies were included. The incidence was reported in 4 studies, risk factors in 1, mortality in 7, and other outcomes in 2. The largest cohort included 148,749 subjects from a national trauma database. The ARDS incidence was 1.8%-7.6% when using adult ARDS criteria, with 1.8% in the largest cohort, and 4.2% when using pediatric ARDS criteria. Mortality was 7.6%-22.9% when using adult ARDS criteria and 11.1%-34.0% when using the pediatric ARDS criteria. Identified risk factors included mechanism of injury, higher injury severity scores, abnormal breathing frequencies, and lower Glasgow coma scale scores at hospital presentation. ARDS was associated with a longer duration of mechanical ventilation, longer ICU and hospital length of stay, and a higher likelihood of requiring post-discharge care.
CONCLUSIONS
The ARDS incidence of 4.2% in the subjects with pediatric trauma in the ICU was comparable with 3.2% in the general pediatric ICU population; however, mortality associated with trauma-associated ARDS was higher and more commonly due to multi-system organ failure rather than hypoxemia.
Topics: Adult; Aftercare; Child; Humans; Injury Severity Score; Intensive Care Units; Length of Stay; Patient Discharge; Respiration, Artificial; Respiratory Distress Syndrome
PubMed: 34548409
DOI: 10.4187/respcare.09091 -
Anaesthesia Apr 2022Survivors of critical illness frequently require increased healthcare resources after hospital discharge. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Survivors of critical illness frequently require increased healthcare resources after hospital discharge. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess hospital re-admission rates following critical care admission and to explore potential re-admission risk factors. We searched the MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases on 05 March 2020. Our search strategy incorporated controlled vocabulary and text words for hospital re-admission and critical illness, limited to the English language. Two reviewers independently applied eligibility criteria and assessed quality using the Newcastle Ottawa Score checklist and extracted data. The primary outcome was acute hospital re-admission in the year after critical care discharge. Of the 8851 studies screened, 87 met inclusion criteria and 41 were used within the meta-analysis. The analysis incorporated data from 3,897,597 patients and 741,664 re-admission episodes. Pooled estimates for hospital re-admission after critical illness were 16.9% (95%CI: 13.3-21.2%) at 30 days; 31.0% (95%CI: 24.3-38.6%) at 90 days; 29.6% (95%CI: 24.5-35.2%) at six months; and 53.3% (95%CI: 44.4-62.0%) at 12 months. Significant heterogeneity was observed across included studies. Three risk factors were associated with excess acute care rehospitalisation one year after discharge: the presence of comorbidities; events during initial hospitalisation (e.g. the presence of delirium and duration of mechanical ventilation); and subsequent infection after hospital discharge. Hospital re-admission is common in survivors of critical illness. Careful attention to the management of pre-existing comorbidities during transitions of care may help reduce healthcare utilisation after critical care discharge. Future research should determine if targeted interventions for at-risk critical care survivors can reduce the risk of subsequent rehospitalisation.
Topics: Critical Care; Critical Illness; Hospitalization; Hospitals; Humans; Patient Readmission
PubMed: 34967011
DOI: 10.1111/anae.15644