Design and rationale of a randomized trial: Using short stay units instead of routine admission to improve patient centered health outcomes for acute heart failure patients (SSU-AHF)

Utilization of a multidisciplinary hospital-based approach to reduce readmission rates

Background

Hospital readmissions remain a significant and pressing issue in our healthcare system. In 2010, the Affordable Care Act helped establish the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program, which incentivized reducing readmission rates by instituting penalties. Hospital readmission, specifically unplanned, refers to a patient returning to the hospital shortly after discharge due to the same or a related medical condition, signaling potential issues in initial care, discharge processes, or post-hospitalization management. For this study, we defined readmission as a return to the hospital within 30 days. In 2018, Staten Island University Hospital started a multidisciplinary and coordinated initiative to reduce patient readmissions. The approach involved the departments of emergency medicine, medicine, cardiology, case management, nursing, pharmacy, and transitional care management. This study aimed to determine if this approach reduced 30-day readmissions.

Methods

This case-control retrospective study reviewed electronic health records between January 2018 and November 2019. Readmission rates within 30 days of index discharge were compared between patients who received transitional care management before and after establishing a multidisciplinary communication of transitional care. Readmission rates were unadjusted and adjusted for patient demographics and predisposed risk for readmission and compared across demographics and select clinical characteristics.

Results

A total of 772 patients were included in the analyses; 323 were in the control group (41.8%), and 449 were in the intervention group (58.2%). After the hospital adopted the workflow for multidisciplinary communication of transitional care, there was 45.2% less adjusted incidence of readmission, or approximately seven fewer overall readmissions per 100 patients (16.4% readmission vs 9.0% readmission; incident rate ratio, 0.55; 95% CI: 0.34-0.88).

Conclusions

Multidisciplinary communication approaches led by emergency medicine can help reduce readmissions significantly. Adopting a structured communication workflow can enhance co-managing patients with a high risk of readmission between the emergency department and hospital medicine teams.

Short-Stay Units vs Routine Admission From the Emergency Department in Patients With Acute Heart Failure: The SSU-AHF Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

More than 80% of patients who present to the emergency department (ED) with acute heart failure (AHF) are hospitalized. With more than 1 million annual hospitalizations for AHF in the US, safe and effective alternatives are needed. Care for AHF in short-stay units (SSUs) may be safe and more efficient than hospitalization, especially for lower-risk patients, but randomized clinical trial data are lacking.

Objective

To compare the effectiveness of SSU care vs hospitalization in lower-risk patients with AHF.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This multicenter randomized clinical trial randomly assigned low-risk patients with AHF 1:1 to SSU or hospital admission from the ED. Patients received follow-up at 30 and 90 days post discharge. The study began December 6, 2017, and was completed on July 22, 2021. The data were analyzed between March 27, 2020, and November 11, 2023.

Intervention

Randomized post-ED disposition to less than 24 hours of SSU care vs hospitalization.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The study was designed to detect at least 1-day superiority for a primary outcome of days alive and out of hospital (DAOOH) at 30-day follow-up for 534 participants, with an allowance of 10% participant attrition. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, enrollment was truncated at 194 participants. Before unmasking, the primary outcome was changed from DAOOH to an outcome with adequate statistical power: quality of life as measured by the 12-item Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ-12). The KCCQ-12 scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better quality of life.

Results

Of the 193 patients enrolled (1 was found ineligible after randomization), the mean (SD) age was 64.8 (14.8) years, 79 (40.9%) were women, and 114 (59.1%) were men. Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms. The mean (SD) KCCQ-12 summary score between the SSU and hospitalization arms at 30 days was 51.3 (25.7) vs 45.8 (23.8) points, respectively (P = .19). Participants in the SSU arm had 1.6 more DAOOH at 30-day follow-up than those in the hospitalization arm (median [IQR], 26.9 [24.4-28.8] vs 25.4 [22.0-27.7] days; P = .02). Adverse events were uncommon and similar in both arms.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings show that the SSU strategy was no different than hospitalization with regard to KCCQ-12 score, superior for more DAOOH, and safe for lower-risk patients with AHF. These findings of lower health care utilization with the SSU strategy need to be definitively tested in an adequately powered study.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03302910.

Emergency department direct discharge compared to short-stay unit admission for selected patients with acute heart failure: analysis of short-term outcomes

Short stay unit (SSU) is an alternative to conventional hospitalization in patients with acute heart failure (AHF), but the prognosis is not known compared to direct discharge from the emergency department (ED). To determine whether direct discharge from the ED of patients diagnosed with AHF is associated with early adverse outcomes versus hospitalization in SSU. Endpoints, defined as 30-day all-cause mortality or post-discharge adverse events, were evaluated in patients diagnosed with AHF in 17 Spanish EDs with an SSU, and compared by ED discharge vs. SSU hospitalization. Endpoint risk was adjusted for baseline and AHF episode characteristics and in patients matched by propensity score (PS) for SSU hospitalization. Overall, 2358 patients were discharged home and 2003 were hospitalized in SSUs. Discharged patients were younger, more frequently men, with fewer comorbidities, had better baseline status, less infection, rapid atrial fibrillation and hypertensive emergency as the AHF trigger, and had a lower severity of AHF episode. While their 30-day mortality rate was lower than in patients hospitalized in SSU (4.4% vs. 8.1%, p < 0.001), 30-day post-discharge adverse events were similar (27.2% vs. 28.4%, p = 0.599). After adjustment, there were no differences in the 30-day risk of mortality of discharged patients (adjusted HR 0.846, 95% CI 0.637-1.107) or adverse events (1.035, 0.914-1.173). In 337 pairs of PS-matched patients, there were no differences in mortality or risk of adverse event between patients directly discharged or admitted to an SSU (0.753, 0.409-1.397; and 0.858, 0.645-1.142; respectively). Direct ED discharge of patients diagnosed with AHF provides similar outcomes compared to patients with similar characteristics and hospitalized in a SSU.

Point-of-care echocardiography of the right heart improves acute heart failure risk stratification for low-risk patients: The REED-AHF prospective study

OBJECTIVES

Validated acute heart failure (AHF) clinical decision instruments (CDI) insufficiently identify low-risk patients meriting consideration of outpatient treatment. While pilot data show that tricuspid annulus plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) is associated with adverse events, no AHF CDI currently incorporates point-of-care echocardiography (POCecho). We evaluated whether TAPSE adds incremental risk stratification value to an existing CDI.

METHODS

Prospectively enrolled patients at two urban-academic EDs had POCechos obtained before or <1 h after first intravenous diuresis, positive pressure ventilation, and/or nitroglycerin. STEMI and cardiogenic shock were excluded. AHF diagnosis was adjudicated by double-blind expert review. TAPSE, with an a priori cutoff of ≥17 mm, was our primary measure. Secondary measures included eight additional right heart and six left heart POCecho parameters. STRATIFY is a validated CDI predicting 30-day death/cardiopulmonary resuscitation, mechanical cardiac support, intubation, new/emergent dialysis, and acute myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization in ED AHF patients. Full (STRATIFY + POCecho variable) and reduced (STRATIFY alone) logistic regression models were fit to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aOR), category-free net reclassification index (NRI_cont ), ΔSensitivity (NRI_events ), and ΔSpecificity (NRI_nonevents ). Random forest assessed variable importance. To benchmark risk prediction to standard of care, ΔSensitivity and ΔSpecificity were evaluated at risk thresholds more conservative/lower than the actual outcome rate in discharged patients.

RESULTS

A total of 84/120 enrolled patients met inclusion and diagnostic adjudication criteria. Nineteen percent experiencing the primary outcome had higher STRATIFY scores compared to those event free (233 vs. 212, p = 0.009). Five right heart (TAPSE, TAPSE/PASP, TAPSE/RVDD, RV-FAC, fwRVLS) and no left heart measures improved prediction (p < 0.05) adjusted for STRATIFY. Right heart measures also had higher variable importance. TAPSE ≥ 17 mm plus STRATIFY improved prediction versus STRATIFY alone (aOR 0.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.06-0.91; NRI_cont  0.71, 95% CI 0.22-1.19), and specificity improved by 6%-32% (p < 0.05) at risk thresholds more conservative than the standard-of-care benchmark without missing any additional events.

CONCLUSIONS

TAPSE increased detection of low-risk AHF patients, after use of a validated CDI, at risk thresholds more conservative than standard of care.

Incidence of Timely Outpatient Follow-Up Care After Emergency Department Encounters for Acute Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Patients who are discharged from the emergency department (ED) after an encounter for acute heart failure are at high risk for return hospitalization. These patients may benefit from timely outpatient follow-up care to reassess volume status, adjust medications, and reinforce self-care strategies. This study examines the incidence of outpatient follow-up care after ED encounters for acute heart failure and describes patient characteristics associated with obtaining timely follow-up care.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using an administrative claims database for a large US commercial insurer, from January 1, 2012 to June 30, 2019. Participants included adult patients discharged from the ED with principal diagnosis of acute heart failure. The primary outcome was obtaining an in-person outpatient clinic visit for heart failure within 30 days. We also examined the competing risk of all-cause hospitalization within 30 days and without an intervening outpatient clinic visit. We estimated competing risk regression models to identify patient characteristics associated with obtaining outpatient follow-up and report cause-specific hazard ratios.

RESULTS

The cohort included 52 732 patients, with mean age of 73.9 years (95% CI, 73.8-74.0) and 27 395 (52.0% [95% CI, 51.5-52.4]) female patients. Within 30 days of the ED encounter, 12 279 (23.2%) patients attended an outpatient clinic visit for heart failure, with 8382 (15.9%) patients hospitalized before they could obtain an outpatient clinic visit. In the adjusted analysis, patients that were younger, women, reporting non-Hispanic Black race, and had fewer previous clinic visits were less likely to obtain outpatient follow-up care.

CONCLUSIONS

Few patients obtain timely outpatient follow-up after ED visits for heart failure, although nearly 20% require hospitalization within 30 days. Improved transitions following discharge from the ED may represent an opportunity to improve outcomes for patients with acute heart failure.

Impact of emergency short-stay unit opening on in-hospital global and cardiology indicators

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Emergency short-stay unit (SSU) alleviates emergency department (ED) overcrowding, but may affect in-hospital indicators. Cardiology patients comprise a substantial part of patients admitted at SSU. This study evaluated whether SSU opening differentially modified in-hospital indicators at a whole general hospital and at its cardiology division (CARD).

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed indicators based on 859 686 ED visits, and 171 547 hospital admissions, including 12 110 CARD admissions, from 2007 to 2018 at a general tertiary hospital, and compared global ED indicators and in-hospital indicators at the hospital and CARD before (2007-2011) and after (2011-2018) SSU opening.

RESULTS

After SSU opening, monthly ED bed occupancy rate decreased (mean ± SD 200 ± 18% vs 187 ± 22%; P < .001) and in-hospital admissions from ED increased at the hospital (median [interquartile range] 460 [81] vs 524 [41], P < .001) and CARD (50 [12] vs 54 [12], P = .004). In parallel, monthly in-hospital elective admissions decreased at CARD (34 [18] vs 28 [17], P = .019), but not at the hospital (712 [73] vs 700 [104], P = .54). Average length of stay (LOS) increased at both hospital (8.5 ± 0.3 vs 8.7 ± 0.4 days, P < .001) and CARD (9.2 ± 1.5 vs 10.3 ± 2.3 days, P = .002) after SSU opening, but percent admissions at SSU showed a direct relationship with LOS solely at CARD. Furthermore, cardiology patients admitted at SSU had greater LOS, prevalence of coronary heart disease and age than those admitted at the conventional cardiology ward.

CONCLUSIONS

SSU opening improved ED crowding, but was associated with changes in in-hospital indicators, particularly at CARD, and in the characteristics of hospitalized cardiology patients. These findings suggest that in-hospital cardiology services may need re-evaluation following SSU opening at a general hospital.

Non-pharmacological interventions for preventing delirium in hospitalised non-ICU patients

BACKGROUND

Delirium is an acute neuropsychological disorder that is common in hospitalised patients. It can be distressing to patients and carers and it is associated with serious adverse outcomes. Treatment options for established delirium are limited and so prevention of delirium is desirable. Non-pharmacological interventions are thought to be important in delirium prevention.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions designed to prevent delirium in hospitalised patients outside intensive care units (ICU).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched ALOIS, the specialised register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group, with additional searches conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS, Web of Science Core Collection, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization Portal/ICTRP to 16 September 2020. There were no language or date restrictions applied to the electronic searches, and no methodological filters were used to restrict the search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of single and multicomponent non-pharmacological interventions for preventing delirium in hospitalised adults cared for outside intensive care or high dependency settings. We only included non-pharmacological interventions which were designed and implemented to prevent delirium.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently examined titles and abstracts identified by the search for eligibility and extracted data from full-text articles. Any disagreements on eligibility and inclusion were resolved by consensus. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. The primary outcomes were: incidence of delirium; inpatient and later mortality; and new diagnosis of dementia. We included secondary and adverse outcomes as pre-specified in the review protocol. We used risk ratios (RRs) as measures of treatment effect for dichotomous outcomes and between-group mean differences for continuous outcomes. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE. A complementary exploratory analysis was undertaker using a Bayesian component network meta-analysis fixed-effect model to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of the individual components of multicomponent interventions and describe which components were most strongly associated with reducing the incidence of delirium.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 22 RCTs that recruited a total of 5718 adult participants. Fourteen trials compared a multicomponent delirium prevention intervention with usual care. Two trials compared liberal and restrictive blood transfusion thresholds. The remaining six trials each investigated a different non-pharmacological intervention. Incidence of delirium was reported in all studies.  Using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, we identified risks of bias in all included trials. All were at high risk of performance bias as participants and personnel were not blinded to the interventions. Nine trials were at high risk of detection bias due to lack of blinding of outcome assessors and three more were at unclear risk in this domain.  Pooled data showed that multi-component non-pharmacological interventions probably reduce the incidence of delirium compared to usual care (10.5% incidence in the intervention group, compared to 18.4% in the control group, risk ratio (RR) 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 0.71, I² = 39%; 14 studies; 3693 participants; moderate-certainty evidence, downgraded due to risk of bias).  There may be little or no effect of multicomponent interventions on inpatient mortality compared to usual care (5.2% in the intervention group, compared to 4.5% in the control group, RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.74, I² = 15%; 10 studies; 2640 participants; low-certainty evidence downgraded due to inconsistency and imprecision).  No studies of multicomponent interventions reported data on new diagnoses of dementia.  Multicomponent interventions may result in a small reduction of around a day in the duration of a delirium episode (mean difference (MD) -0.93, 95% CI -2.01 to 0.14 days, I² = 65%; 351 participants; low-certainty evidence downgraded due to risk of bias and imprecision). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of multicomponent interventions on delirium severity (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.49, 95% CI -1.13 to 0.14, I²=64%; 147 participants; very low-certainty evidence downgraded due to risk of bias and serious imprecision). Multicomponent interventions may result in a reduction in hospital length of stay compared to usual care (MD -1.30 days, 95% CI -2.56 to -0.04 days, I²=91%; 3351 participants; low-certainty evidence downgraded due to risk of bias and inconsistency), but little to no difference in new care home admission at the time of hospital discharge (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.07; 536 participants; low-certainty evidence downgraded due to risk of bias and imprecision). Reporting of other adverse outcomes was limited.  Our exploratory component network meta-analysis found that re-orientation (including use of familiar objects), cognitive stimulation and sleep hygiene were associated with reduced risk of incident delirium. Attention to nutrition and hydration, oxygenation, medication review, assessment of mood and bowel and bladder care were probably associated with a reduction in incident delirium but estimates included the possibility of no benefit or harm.  Reducing sensory deprivation, identification of infection, mobilisation and pain control all had summary estimates that suggested potential increases in delirium incidence, but the uncertainty in the estimates was substantial.  Evidence from two trials suggests that use of a liberal transfusion threshold over a restrictive transfusion threshold probably results in little to no difference in incident delirium (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.36; I² = 9%; 294 participants; moderate-certainty evidence downgraded due to risk of bias).  Six other interventions were examined, but evidence for each was limited to single studies and we identified no evidence of delirium prevention.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate-certainty evidence regarding the benefit of multicomponent non-pharmacological interventions for the prevention of delirium in hospitalised adults, estimated to reduce incidence by 43% compared to usual care. We found no evidence of an effect on mortality. There is emerging evidence that these interventions may reduce hospital length of stay, with a trend towards reduced delirium duration, although the effect on delirium severity remains uncertain. Further research should focus on implementation and detailed analysis of the components of the interventions to support more effective, tailored practice recommendations.

Non-pharmacological interventions for preventing delirium in hospitalised non-ICU patients

BACKGROUND

Delirium is an acute neuropsychological disorder that is common in hospitalised patients. It can be distressing to patients and carers and it is associated with serious adverse outcomes. Treatment options for established delirium are limited and so prevention of delirium is desirable. Non-pharmacological interventions are thought to be important in delirium prevention.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions designed to prevent delirium in hospitalised patients outside intensive care units (ICU).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched ALOIS, the specialised register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group, with additional searches conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS, Web of Science Core Collection, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization Portal/ICTRP to 16 September 2020. There were no language or date restrictions applied to the electronic searches, and no methodological filters were used to restrict the search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of single and multicomponent non-pharmacological interventions for preventing delirium in hospitalised adults cared for outside intensive care or high dependency settings. We only included non-pharmacological interventions which were designed and implemented to prevent delirium.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently examined titles and abstracts identified by the search for eligibility and extracted data from full-text articles. Any disagreements on eligibility and inclusion were resolved by consensus. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. The primary outcomes were: incidence of delirium; inpatient and later mortality; and new diagnosis of dementia. We included secondary and adverse outcomes as pre-specified in the review protocol. We used risk ratios (RRs) as measures of treatment effect for dichotomous outcomes and between-group mean differences for continuous outcomes. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE. A complementary exploratory analysis was undertaker using a Bayesian component network meta-analysis fixed-effect model to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of the individual components of multicomponent interventions and describe which components were most strongly associated with reducing the incidence of delirium.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 22 RCTs that recruited a total of 5718 adult participants. Fourteen trials compared a multicomponent delirium prevention intervention with usual care. Two trials compared liberal and restrictive blood transfusion thresholds. The remaining six trials each investigated a different non-pharmacological intervention. Incidence of delirium was reported in all studies.  Using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, we identified risks of bias in all included trials. All were at high risk of performance bias as participants and personnel were not blinded to the interventions. Nine trials were at high risk of detection bias due to lack of blinding of outcome assessors and three more were at unclear risk in this domain.  Pooled data showed that multi-component non-pharmacological interventions probably reduce the incidence of delirium compared to usual care (10.5% incidence in the intervention group, compared to 18.4% in the control group, risk ratio (RR) 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 0.71, I2 = 39%; 14 studies; 3693 participants; moderate-certainty evidence, downgraded due to risk of bias).  There may be little or no effect of multicomponent interventions on inpatient mortality compared to usual care (5.2% in the intervention group, compared to 4.5% in the control group, RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.74, I2 = 15%; 10 studies; 2640 participants; low-certainty evidence downgraded due to inconsistency and imprecision).  No studies of multicomponent interventions reported data on new diagnoses of dementia.  Multicomponent interventions may result in a small reduction of around a day in the duration of a delirium episode (mean difference (MD) -0.93, 95% CI -2.01 to 0.14 days, I2 = 65%; 351 participants; low-certainty evidence downgraded due to risk of bias and imprecision). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of multicomponent interventions on delirium severity (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.49, 95% CI -1.13 to 0.14, I2=64%; 147 participants; very low-certainty evidence downgraded due to risk of bias and serious imprecision). Multicomponent interventions may result in a reduction in hospital length of stay compared to usual care (MD -1.30 days, 95% CI -2.56 to -0.04 days, I2=91%; 3351 participants; low-certainty evidence downgraded due to risk of bias and inconsistency), but little to no difference in new care home admission at the time of hospital discharge (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.07; 536 participants; low-certainty evidence downgraded due to risk of bias and imprecision). Reporting of other adverse outcomes was limited.  Our exploratory component network meta-analysis found that re-orientation (including use of familiar objects), cognitive stimulation and sleep hygiene were associated with reduced risk of incident delirium. Attention to nutrition and hydration, oxygenation, medication review, assessment of mood and bowel and bladder care were probably associated with a reduction in incident delirium but estimates included the possibility of no benefit or harm.  Reducing sensory deprivation, identification of infection, mobilisation and pain control all had summary estimates that suggested potential increases in delirium incidence, but the uncertainty in the estimates was substantial.  Evidence from two trials suggests that use of a liberal transfusion threshold over a restrictive transfusion threshold probably results in little to no difference in incident delirium (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.36; I2 = 9%; 294 participants; moderate-certainty evidence downgraded due to risk of bias).  Six other interventions were examined, but evidence for each was limited to single studies and we identified no evidence of delirium prevention.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate-certainty evidence regarding the benefit of multicomponent non-pharmacological interventions for the prevention of delirium in hospitalised adults, estimated to reduce incidence by 43% compared to usual care. We found no evidence of an effect on mortality. There is emerging evidence that these interventions may reduce hospital length of stay, with a trend towards reduced delirium duration, although the effect on delirium severity remains uncertain. Further research should focus on implementation and detailed analysis of the components of the interventions to support more effective, tailored practice recommendations.

Outpatient Interventions for Managing Acute Complications of Chronic Diseases: A Scoping Review and Implications for Patients With CKD

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have high rates of emergency department (ED) use and hospitalization. Outpatient care may provide an alternative to ED and inpatient care in this population. We aimed to explore the scope of outpatient interventions used to manage acute complications of chronic diseases and highlight opportunities to adapt and test interventions in the CKD population.

STUDY DESIGN

Scoping review of quantitative and qualitative studies.

SETTING & POPULATION

Outpatient interventions for adults experiencing acute complications related to 1 of 5 eligible chronic diseases (ie, CKD, chronic respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease, cancer, and diabetes).

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, grey literature, and conference abstracts were searched to December 2019.

DATA EXTRACTION

Intervention and study characteristics were extracted using standardized tools.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Quantitative data were summarized descriptively; qualitative data were summarized thematically. Our approach observed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews.

RESULTS

77 studies (25 randomized controlled trials, 29 observational, 12 uncontrolled before-after, 5 quasi-experimental, 4 qualitative, and 2 mixed method) describing 57 unique interventions were included. Of identified intervention types (hospital at home [n = 16], observation unit [n = 9], ED-based specialist service [n = 4], ambulatory program [n = 18], and telemonitoring [n = 10]), most were studied in chronic respiratory and cardiovascular disease populations. None targeted the CKD population. Interventions were delivered in the home, ED, hospital, and ambulatory setting by a variety of health care providers. Cost savings were demonstrated for most interventions, although improvements in other outcome domains were not consistently observed.

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity of included studies; lack of data for outpatient interventions for acute complications related to CKD.

CONCLUSIONS

Several interventions for outpatient management of acute complications of chronic disease were identified. Although none was specific to the CKD population, features could be adapted and tested to address the complex acute-care needs of patients with CKD.