Homeward bound: an analysis of patients discharged home from an oncologic intensive care unit

Discharging patients home from the intensive care unit: A new trend

Discharging patients directly to home from the intensive care unit (ICU) is becoming a new trend. This review examines the feasibility, benefits, challenges, and considerations of directly discharging ICU patients. By analyzing available evidence and healthcare professionals' experiences, the review explores the potential impacts on patient outcomes and healthcare systems. The practice of direct discharge from the ICU presents both opportunities and complexities. While it can potentially reduce costs, enhance patient comfort, and mitigate complications linked to extended hospitalization, it necessitates meticulous patient selection and robust post-discharge support mechanisms. Implementing this strategy successfully mandates the availability of home-based care services and a careful assessment of the patient's readiness for the transition. Through critical evaluation of existing literature, this review underscores the significance of tailored patient selection criteria and comprehensive post-discharge support systems to ensure patient safety and optimal recovery. The insights provided contribute evidence-based recommendations for refining the direct discharge approach, fostering improved patient outcomes, heightened satisfaction, and streamlined healthcare processes. Ultimately, the review seeks to balance patient-centered care and effective resource utilization within ICU discharge strategies.

The impact of a multidisciplinary goals-of-care program on unplanned readmission rates at a comprehensive cancer center

PURPOSE

This study examined the 30-day unplanned readmission rate in the medical oncology population before and after the implementation of an institution-wide multicomponent interdisciplinary goals of care (myGOC) program.

METHODS

This retrospective study compared the 30-day unplanned readmission rates in consecutive medical patients during the pre-implementation period (May 1, 2019, to December 31, 2019) and the post-implementation period (May 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020). Secondary outcomes included 7-day unplanned readmission rates, inpatient do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders, and palliative care consults. We randomly selected a hospitalization encounter for each unique patient during each study period for statistical analysis. A multivariate analysis model was used to examine the association between 30-day unplanned readmission rates and implementation of the myGOC program.

RESULTS

There were 7028 and 5982 unique medical patients during the pre- and post-implementation period, respectively. The overall 30-day unplanned readmission rate decreased from 24.0 to 21.3% after implementation of the myGOC program. After adjusting for covariates, the myGOC program implementation remained significantly associated with a reduction in 30-day unplanned readmission rates (OR [95% CI] 0.85 [0.77, 0.95], p = 0.003). Other factors significantly associated with a decreased likelihood of a 30-day unplanned readmission were an inpatient DNR order, advanced care planning documentation, and an emergent admission type. We also observed a significant decrease in 7-day unplanned readmission rates (OR [95% CI] 0.75 [0.64, 0.89]) after implementation of the myGOC program.

CONCLUSION

The 30-day and 7-day unplanned readmission rates decreased in our hospital after implementation of a system-wide multicomponent GOC intervention.

Patient and Family Experience With Discharge Directly Home From the Pediatric ICU

BACKGROUND

Children are increasingly discharged directly from the PICU. Transitions have been recognized as a period of increased patient and caregiver stress and risk of adverse events. No study has evaluated patient and caregiver outcomes after direct discharge from the PICU. This study aimed to explore the family's experiences with discharge directly home (DDH) from the PICU.

METHODS

This exploratory mixed-methods study was conducted in the PICU of the Institution is Sainte-Justine Hospital from February to July 2021. We included families of children expected to be DDH within 12 hours. Semistructured interviews were conducted at discharge, followed by telephone interviews 7 and 28 days post-PICU discharge. We measured comfort on a 5-point Likert scale and screened for anxiety using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 tool.

RESULTS

Families of 25 patients were interviewed. Thematic analysis of the interviews revealed several themes, such as feeling stress and anxiety, feeling confident, anticipating home care, and needing support. These findings complemented the quantitative findings; the median comfort score was 4 (comfortable) (interquartile range 4-5) and 8 (interquartile range 4-12) for the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 on the day of discharge, with 16 reporting clinically significant anxiety. In the 28-day study period, 2 patients were readmitted and 6 had visited the emergency department.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite feelings of anxiety, many families felt comfortable with DDH from the PICU. Increasing our understanding of the patient and family experiences of discharge from the PICU will help to better support these patients and their families during transition.

Safety Outcomes of Direct Discharge Home From ICUs: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (Direct From ICU Sent Home Study)

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of direct discharge home (DDH) from ICUs compared with ward transfer on safety outcomes of readmissions, emergency department (ED) visits, and mortality.

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature from inception until March 28, 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized and nonrandomized studies of DDH patients compared with ward transfer were eligible.

DATA EXTRACTION

We screened and extracted studies independently and in duplicate. We assessed risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. A random-effects meta-analysis model and heterogeneity assessment was performed using pooled data (inverse variance) for propensity-matched and unadjusted cohorts. We assessed the overall certainty of evidence for each outcome using the Grading Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Of 10,228 citations identified, we included six studies. Of these, three high-quality studies, which enrolled 49,376 patients in propensity-matched cohorts, could be pooled using meta-analysis. For DDH from ICU, compared with ward transfers, there was no difference in the risk of ED visits at 30-day (22.4% vs 22.7%; relative risk [RR], 0.99; 95% CI, 0.95-1.02; p = 0.39; low certainty); hospital readmissions at 30-day (9.8% vs 9.6%; RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.91-1.15; p = 0.71; very low-to-low certainty); or 90-day mortality (2.8% vs 2.6%; RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.95-1.18; p = 0.29; very low-to-low certainty). There were no important differences in the unmatched cohorts or across subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Very low-to-low certainty evidence from observational studies suggests that DDH from ICU may have no difference in safety outcomes compared with ward transfer of selected ICU patients. In the future, this research question could be further examined by randomized control trials to provide higher certainty data.

Discharge Directly Home From the PICU: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

Healthcare constraints with decreasing bed availability cause strain in acute care units, and patients are more frequently being discharged directly home. Our objective was to describe the population, predictors, and explore PICU readmission rates of patients discharged directly home from PICU, compared with those discharge to the hospital ward, then home.

DESIGN

An observational cohort study.

SETTING

Children admitted to the PICU of CHU Sainte-Justine, between January 2014 and 2020.

PATIENTS

Patients less than 18 years old, who survived their PICU stay, and were discharged directly home or to an inpatient ward. Patients discharged directly home were compared with patients discharged to the ward using descriptive statistics. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with home discharge. Propensity scores were used to compare PICU readmission rates in patients discharged directly home to those discharged to the ward.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Among the 5,531 admissions included, 594 (10.7%) were discharged directly home from the PICU. Patients who were more severe ill (odds ratio [OR], 0.93; 95% CI, 0.90-0.97), had invasive ventilation (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.53-0.92), or had vasoactive agents (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.53-0.92) were less likely to be discharged directly home. Diagnoses associated with discharge directly home were acute intoxication, postoperative ear-nose-throat care, and shock states. There was no difference in the rate of readmission to PICU at 2 (relative risk [RR], 0.20 [95% CI, 0.02-1.71]) and 28 days (RR, 1.20 [95% CI, 0.61-3.36]) between propensity matched patients discharged to the ward for 2 or less days, compared with those discharged directly home.

CONCLUSION

Discharge directly home from the PICU is increasing locally. The population includes less severely ill patients with rapidly resolving diagnoses. Rates of PICU readmission between patients discharged directly home from the PICU versus to ward are similar, but safety of the practice requires ongoing evaluation.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Patients Discharged Directly Home From a Medical Intensive Care Unit: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety of directly discharging patients home from the medical intensive care unit (MICU).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Single-center retrospective observational study of consecutive MICU direct discharges to home from an urban university hospital between June, 1, 2017, and June 30, 2019.

RESULTS

Of 1061 MICU discharges, 331 (31.2%) patients were eligible for analysis. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on duration of wait-time (< or ≥24 hours) between ward transfer order and ultimate hospital discharge. Most patients (68.2%) were discharged in <24 hours. Patients who waited for a floor bed for ≥24 hours prior to discharge had longer hospital length-of-stay (LOS, median 3.83 versus 2.00 days) and ICU LOS (median 3.51 versus 1.74 days). Overall, 44 (13.3%) direct MICU discharges were readmitted to the hospital within 30-days, but there was no difference in this outcome or in 30-day mortality when comparing the 2 wait-time groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The practice of directly discharging MICU patients home does not negatively influence patient outcomes. Patients who overstay in the ICU after being deemed transfer-ready are unlikely to be benefiting from critical care, but impact hospital throughput and resource utilization. Prospective investigation into this practice may provide further confirmation of its feasibility and safety.

Factors Affecting Discharge to Home of Medical Patients Treated in an Intensive Care Unit

The purpose of this study was to examine the factors affecting the discharge to home of medical patients treated in an intensive care unit, including elements of in-hospital rehabilitation and prehospital movement ability. The participants of this retrospective cohort study were medical patients treated in an intensive care unit (ICU) and who began rehabilitation in ICU. We assessed the participants in the ICU and analyzed data on patient background, hospitalization, and rehabilitation status. There were 155 ICU patients available for analysis. A multivariable logistic regression model identified the four variables of age (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02–1.09), APACHE II score (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.04–1.24), independence in home life before admission (OR 7.10, 95% CI 1.65–30.44), and standing within 5 days of admission (OR 6.58, 95% CI 2.60–16.61) as factors significantly related to discharge from hospital to home. Independence of home life before admission and early start of standing were identified as factors strongly related to discharge to home. The degree of independence in living before hospital admission and progress toward early mobilization are helpful when considering an ICU patient’s discharge destination.

Survival and Safety Outcomes of ICU Patients Discharged Directly Home-A Direct From ICU Sent Home Study

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate outcomes (mortality, morbidity, unplanned return visits) of patients who are discharged directly to home from the ICU.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Two tertiary care medical-surgical-trauma ICUs at Canadian hospitals over 1 year (February 2016-2017).

SUBJECTS

All adult patients who were either discharged directly to home (Recruited and Nonrecruited cohorts) from ICU or discharged home within 24 hours after ward transfer (Ward Transfer cohort).

INTERVENTIONS

Direct discharge home from ICU or discharge home within 24 hours of ward transfer from ICU.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

One-hundred ninety-eight patients were in the study, 100 patients in the discharged directly to home Recruited arm, 37 patients in the discharged directly to home Nonrecruited arm, and 61 patients in the Ward cohort. All three patient cohorts had 0% mortality at 8 weeks post discharge. The unplanned return visit rate for the Recruited cohort was 24% (emergency department 18%, Ward 4%, ICU 1%), whereas the rate for the Nonrecruited cohort was 52% (emergency department 34%, Ward 14%, ICU 3%) and the Ward Transfer cohort was 46% (emergency department 17%, Ward 26%, ICU 3%) (p = 0.005). No home support was available for 7% of the discharged directly to home Recruited cohort. Twenty-four percent of patients had funded home care nursing, but the majority of patients (81%) relied on help from friends/family.

CONCLUSIONS

Recruited discharged directly to home patients experienced very good 8-week postdischarge outcomes with 0% mortality and a low rate of ICU readmission (1%) or ward readmission (4%), but not an insignificant rate of emergency department visits (18%). Recruited discharged directly to home patients had better outcomes compared with nonrecruited discharged directly to home patients and patients transferred briefly to the ward prior to discharge home. Future work should include derivation of a clinical prediction tool to identify patient characteristics that make discharged directly to home safe and a randomized control trial to compare discharged directly to home with short stay ward transfers.

Clinical Predictors for Unsafe Direct Discharge Home Patients From Intensive Care Units

PURPOSE

To describe factors (demographics and clinical characteristics) that predict patients who are at an increased risk of adverse events or unplanned return visits to a health-care facility following discharge direct to home (DDH) from intensive care units (ICUs).

METHODS

Prospective cohort study of all adult patients who survived their stay in our medical-surgical-trauma ICU between February 2016 and 2017 and were discharged directly home. Patients were followed for 8 weeks postdischarge. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with adverse events or unplanned return visits to a health-care facility following DDH from ICU.

RESULTS

A total of 129 DDH patients were enrolled and completed the 8-week follow-up. We identified 39 unplanned return visits (URVs). There was 0% mortality at 8 weeks postdischarge. Eight potential predictors of hospital URVs (P < .2) were identified in the univariable analysis: prior substance abuse (odds ratio [OR] of URV of 2.50 [95% confidence interval: 1.08-5.80], hepatitis (OR: 6.92 [1.68-28.48]), sepsis (OR: 11.03 [1.19-102.29]), admission nine equivalents of nursing manpower score (NEMS) <24 (OR: 2.28 [1.03-5.04], no fixed address (OR: 22.9 [1.2-437.3]), ICU length of stay (LOS) <2 days (OR: 2.95 [1.28-6.78]), home discharge within London, Ontario (OR: 2.44 [1.00-5.92]), and left against medical advice (AMA; OR: 6.06 [2.04-17.98]).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study identified 8 covariates that were potential predictors of URV: prior substance abuse, hepatitis, sepsis, admission NEMS <24, no fixed address, ICU LOS <2 days, home discharge within London, Ontario, and left AMA. The practice of direct discharges home from the ICU would benefit from adequately powered multicenter study in order to construct a clinical prediction model (that would require further testing and validation).

Assessment of the Safety of Discharging Select Patients Directly Home From the Intensive Care Unit: A Multicenter Population-Based Cohort Study

IMPORTANCE

The safety of discharging adult patients recovering from critical illness directly home from the intensive care unit (ICU) is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the health care utilization and clinical outcomes for ICU patients discharged directly home from the ICU with those of patients discharged home via the hospital ward.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Retrospective population-based cohort study of adult patients admitted to the ICU of 9 medical-surgical hospitals from January 1, 2014, to January 1, 2016, with 1-year follow-up after hospital discharge. All adult ICU patients were discharged home alive from hospital, and the propensity score matched cohort (1:1) was based on patient characteristics, therapies received in the ICU, and hospital characteristics.

EXPOSURES

Patient disposition on discharge from the ICU: directly home vs home via the hospital ward.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was readmission to the hospital within 30 days of hospital discharge. The secondary outcomes were emergency department visit within 30 days and death within 1 year.

RESULTS

Among the 6732 patients included in the study, 2826 (42%) were female; median age, 56 years (interquartile range, 41-67 years); 922 (14%) were discharged directly home, with significant variation found between hospitals (range, 4.4%-44.0%). Compared with patients discharged home via the hospital ward, patients discharged directly home were younger (median age 47 vs 57 years; P < .001), more likely to be admitted with a diagnosis of overdose, substance withdrawal, seizures, or metabolic coma (32% [295] vs 10% [594]; P < .001), to have a lower severity of acute illness on ICU admission (median APACHE II score 15 vs 18; P < .001), and receive less than 48 hours of invasive mechanical ventilation (42% [389] vs 34% [1984]; P < .001). In the propensity score matched cohort (n = 1632), patients discharged directly home had similar length of ICU stay (median, 3.1 days vs 3.0 days; P = .42) but significantly shorter length of hospital stay (median, 3.3 days vs 9.2 days; P < .001) compared with patients discharged home via the hospital ward. There were no significant differences between patients discharged directly home or home via the hospital ward for readmission to the hospital (10% [n = 81] vs 11% [n = 92]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.64-1.20) or emergency department visit (25% [n = 200] vs 26% [n = 212]; HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.81-1.09) within 30 days of hospital discharge. Four percent of patients in both groups died within 1 year of hospital discharge (n = 31 and n = 34 in the discharged directly home and discharged home via the hospital ward groups, respectively) (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.60-1.35).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The discharge of select adult patients directly home from the ICU is common, and it is not associated with increased health care utilization or increased mortality.

Lessons learned and new directions regarding Discharge Direct from Adult Intensive Care Units Sent Home (DISH): A narrative review

Purpose

To perform a narrative review of the literature regarding the discharge of patients directly to home (DDH) from the intensive care unit, and to identify patient characteristics and clinical outcomes associated with this practice.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from 1946 to present. We also manually searched the references of relevant articles. A two-step review process with three independent reviewers was used to identify relevant articles based on predetermined inclusion/exclusion criteria.

Results

Four studies were included in the final review. Two studies were retrospective and two studies were prospective that shared data from the same patient cohort. All were single center studies. Two of the four studies outlined clinical outcomes associated with DDH.

Conclusions

This study highlights the relative dearth in the literature regarding the increasingly common practice of DDH, underscores the importance of further studies in this area, and identifies future important foci of research.

Compassionate Discharges From the PICU

OBJECTIVES

This article focuses on compassionate discharge from an ICU setting for pediatric patients.

DATA SOURCES

Not Applicable.

STUDY SELECTION

Not Applicable.

DATA EXTRACTION

Not Applicable.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The rationale for compassionate discharge is described, along with suggestions for assessing feasibility. A patient case highlights the potential benefits of and provides specific examples of steps involved in the process. A general framework for consideration of compassionate discharge, along with a checklist, is provided to highlight the importance of detailed planning and communication.

CONCLUSIONS

Although many children die in an ICU setting, some families desire end-of-life care in a nonhospital setting, often at home. For children dependent on technology, there are considerable logistical challenges to overcome, and it may not always be possible. However, with meticulous planning and close collaboration between intensive care staff, palliative care staff, and other community services, compassionate discharge can be done successfully and provide the child and family the opportunity for end-of-life care in the place most meaningful to them.

Patient, Family, and Physician Satisfaction With Planning for Direct Discharge to Home From Intensive Care Units: Direct From ICU Sent Home Study

Background:

In the new era of decreasing hospital bed availability, there is an increasing rate of direct discharge to home (DDH) from intensive care units (ICUs), despite sparse literature informing this practice.

Objectives:

To evaluate patient, family, and ICU attending physician satisfaction with planning for DDH from the ICU and intensivists’ current DDH practices and perceptions.

Methods:

Prospective cohort study, using convenience sampling, of adult patients undergoing DDH from an ICU between February 2016 and February 2017 using a modified FS-ICU 24 satisfaction survey completed by patients, family members, and attending physicians at the time of patient discharge to home from the ICU.

Results:

Seventy-two percent of patients, 37% of family members, and 100% of ICU physicians recruited completed the survey. A majority of patients (89%) and families (78%) were satisfied or very satisfied with DDH. Only 6% of patients and 8% of families were dissatisfied to very dissatisfied with DDH. Conversely, ICU physician satisfaction varied, with only 5% being very comfortable with DDH and the majority (50%) only somewhat comfortable. Twenty percent of staff consultants were uncomfortable to very uncomfortable with the practice of DDH. Thirty-one percent of staff physician respondents felt that patient and family discomfort would be barriers to DDH. Compared to physicians and other allied health professionals, nurses were identified as the most helpful members of the health-care team in preparation for DDH by 98% of patients and 92% of family members. The DDH rates have increased for the past 12 years in our ICUs but declined during the study period (February 2016 to February 2017).

Conclusions:

Patients and family members are satisfied with the practice of DDH from ICU, although ICU physician satisfaction is more variable. Physician comfort may be improved by data informing which patients may be safely DDH from the ICU.

Healthcare Provider Perceptions of Causes and Consequences of ICU Capacity Strain in a Large Publicly Funded Integrated Health Region: A Qualitative Study

OBJECTIVES

Discrepancy in the supply-demand relationship for critical care services precipitates a strain on ICU capacity. Strain can lead to suboptimal quality of care and burnout among providers and contribute to inefficient health resource utilization. We engaged interprofessional healthcare providers to explore their perceptions of the sources, impact, and strategies to manage capacity strain.

DESIGN

Qualitative study using a conventional thematic analysis.

SETTING

Nine ICUs across Alberta, Canada.

SUBJECTS

Nineteen focus groups (n = 122 participants).

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Participants' perspectives on strain on ICU capacity and its perceived impact on providers, families, and patient care were explored. Participants defined "capacity strain" as a discrepancy between the availability of ICU beds, providers, and ICU resources (supply) and the need to admit and provide care for critically ill patients (demand). Four interrelated themes of contributors to strain were characterized (each with subthemes): patient/family related, provider related, resource related, and health system related. Patient/family-related subthemes were "increasing patient complexity/acuity," along with patient-provider communication issues ("paucity of advance care planning and goals-of-care designation," "mismatches between patient/family and provider expectations," and "timeliness of end-of-life care planning"). Provider-related factor subthemes were nursing workforce related ("nurse attrition," "inexperienced workforce," "limited mentoring opportunities," and "high patient-to-nurse ratios") and physician related ("frequent turnover/handover" and "variations in care plan"). Resource-related subthemes were "reduced service capability after hours" and "physical bed shortages." Health system-related subthemes were "variable ICU utilization," "preferential "bed" priority for other services," and "high ward bed occupancy." Participants perceived that strain had negative implications for patients ("reduced quality and safety of care" and "disrupted opportunities for patient- and family-centered care"), providers ("increased workload," "moral distress," and "burnout"), and the health system ("unnecessary, excessive, and inefficient resource utilization").

CONCLUSIONS

Engagement with frontline critical care providers is essential for understanding their experiences and perspectives regarding strained capacity and for the development of sustainable strategies for improvement.

Factors Associated With the Increasing Rates of Discharges Directly Home From Intensive Care Units-A Direct From ICU Sent Home Study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the relationship between rates of discharge directly to home (DDH) from the intensive care unit (ICU) and bed availability (ward and ICU). Also to identify patient characteristics that make them candidates for safe DDH and describe transfer delay impact on length of stay (LOS).

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of all adult patients who survived their stay in our medical-surgical-trauma ICU between April 2003 and March 2015.

RESULTS

Median age was 49 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 33.5-60.4), and the majority of the patients were males (54.8%). Median number of preexisting comorbidities was 5 (IQR: 2-7) diagnoses. Discharge directly to home increased from 28 (3.1% of all survivors) patients in 2003 to 120 (12.5%) patients in 2014. The mean annual rate of DDH was between 11% and 12% over the last 6 years. Approximately 62% (n = 397) of patients waited longer than 4 hours for a ward bed, with a median delay of 2.0 days (IQR: 0.5-4.7) before being DDH. There was an inverse correlation between ICU occupancy and DDH rates ( r_P = -.55, P < .0001, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.36 to -0.69, R² = .29). There was no correlation with ward occupancy and DDH rates ( r_s = -.055, P = .64, 95% CI = -0.25 to 0.21).

CONCLUSIONS

The DDH rates have been increasing over time at our institution and were inversely correlated with ICU bed occupancy but were not associated with ward occupancy. The DDH patients are young, have few comorbidities on admission, and few discharge diagnoses, which are usually reversible single system problems with low disease burden. Transfers to the ward are delayed in a majority of cases, leading to increased ICU LOS and likely increased overall hospital LOS as well.