[A new model for medical care to multi-admitted patients]

Multiple hospitalizations at the Department of Internal Medicine of a tertiary hospital

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Patient who require multiple hospitalizations result in a considerable consumption of healthcare resources. In this study, we analyzed the factors associated with the multiple hospitalizations of a cohort of patients treated at a department of internal medicine.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 613 consecutive hospitalizations were analyzed. A multiple-hospitalization patient was defined as one who at the time of admission had been hospitalized 3 or more times in the past year. We analyzed the relationship between demographic, clinical and societal factors on one hand and having been hospitalized on multiple occasions on the other. We also analyzed readmissions in the 6 months after discharge, as well as mortality during the hospitalization and in the 6 and 12 months after discharge.

RESULTS

When compared with patients who have not been hospitalized on multiple occasions, multiple-hospitalization patients are more likely to be male, younger and to have greater comorbidity, greater consumption of medicines and higher Katz Index scores. The main cause for admission for multiple-hospitalizations patients was chronic disease decompensation (87.3%). The diseases that were most obviously associated with multiple hospitalizations were heart failure, diabetes mellitus and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In the first 6 months after discharge, multiple-hospitalization patients had a greater number of readmissions. During the study period, 40.4% of the multiple-hospitalization patients died, and 28.8% of the nonmultiple-hospitalization patients died.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple-hospitalization patients have a greater clinical complexity than nonmultiple-hospitalization patients, and multiple hospitalizations are associated with chronic diseases, polypharmacy, functional impairment and high mortality rates.

[Evaluation of the satisfaction with a care coordination program between Primary Care and general internists]

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the level of knowledge, participation and satisfaction with a continuity of care program between Primary Care and a group of general internists, and to analyse the most frequent reasons for consulting.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Cross-sectional study including all primary care physicians from 10 Family Practice Care Centres using a questionnaire containing these objectives.

RESULTS

Eighty-three family physicians (92.2%) answered the survey. All physicians knew of the collaboration program and had also participated. The most common clinical problems seen were: patients with multiple health problems(26.5%), cardiovascular risk factors (16.8%) and diagnosis of the asthenia syndrome (141%), with these three problems obtaining the best evaluation in the satisfaction survey. Almost all (98.8%) of the family physicians were satisfied with the program.

CONCLUSIONS

Our continuity care program was very well evaluated in the satisfaction survey by family physicians. The participation index was very high and the clinical problems most frequently consulted and best evaluated were those that traditionally have been seen by the internists.

[Continuity of medical care. Evaluation of a collaborative program between hospital and Primary Care]

The patients being treated in our health care system are becoming increasingly older and have a greater prevalence of chronic diseases. Due to these factors, these patients require greater and easier accessibility to the system as well as continuity of medical care. Collaboration between the different levels of health care has been instrumental in the success of the system and has produced changes in the hospital medical care protocol. Our hospital has developed a care model oriented towards the patient's needs, resulting in a higher grade of satisfaction among the medical professionals. In this paper, we have given a detailed description of part of our medical model, illustrating its different components and indicating several parameters of its evaluation. We have also reviewed the current state of the various models published on this topic. In summary, we believe that this medical care model presents a different approach to management that benefits patients, medical professionals and the health system alike.

Telephone follow-up, initiated by a hospital-based health professional, for postdischarge problems in patients discharged from hospital to home

BACKGROUND

It is known that many patients encounter a variety of problems in the first weeks after they have been discharged from hospital to home. In recent years many projects have addressed discharge planning, with the aim of reducing problems after discharge. Telephone follow-up (TFU) is seen as a good means of exchanging information, providing health education and advice, managing symptoms, recognising complications early, giving reassurance and providing quality aftercare service. Some research has shown that telephone follow-up is feasible, and that patients appreciate such calls. However, at present it is not clear whether TFU is also effective in reducing postdischarge problems.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of follow-up telephone calls in the first month post discharge, initiated by hospital-based health professionals, to patients discharged from hospital to home.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the following databases from their start date to July 2003, without limits as to date of publication or language: the Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group's Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library), PubMed, EMBASE (OVID), BiomedCentral, CINAHL, ERIC (OVID), INVERT (Dutch nursing literature index), LILACS, Picarta (Dutch library system), PsycINFO/PsycLIT (OVID), the Combined Social and Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-E), SOCIOFILE. We searched for ongoing research in the following databases: National Research Register (http://www.update-software.com/nrr/); Controlled Clinical Trials (http://www.controlled-trials.com/); and Clinical Trials (http://clinicaltrials.gov/). We searched the reference lists of included studies and contacted researchers active in this area.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of TFU initiated by a hospital-based health professional, for patients discharged home from an acute hospital setting. The intervention was delivered within the first month after discharge; outcomes were measured within 3 months after discharge, and either the TFU was the only intervention, or its effect could be analysed separately.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and for methodological quality. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the criteria from the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Review Group. The data-extraction form was based on the template developed by the Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group. Data was extracted by one review author and checked by a second author. For as far it was considered that there was enough clinical homogeneity with regard to patient groups and measured outcomes, statistical pooling was planned using a random effects model and standardised mean differences for continuous scales and relative risks for dichotomous data, and tests for statistical heterogeneity were performed.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 33 studies involving 5110 patients. Predominantly, the studies were of low methodological quality. TFU has been applied in many patient groups. There is a large variety in the ways the TFU was performed (the health professionals who undertook the TFU, frequency, structure, duration, etc.). Many different outcomes have been measured, but only a few were measured across more than one study. Effects are not constant across studies, nor within patient groups. Due to methodological and clinical diversity, quantitative pooling could only be performed for a few outcomes. Of the eight meta-analyses in this review, five showed considerable statistical heterogeneity. Overall, there was inconclusive evidence about the effects of TFU.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The low methodological quality of the included studies means that results must be considered with caution. No adverse effects were reported. Nevertheless, although some studies find that the intervention had favourable effects for some outcomes, overall the studies show clinically-equivalent results between TFU and control groups. In summary, we cannot conclude that TFU is an effective intervention.

Incidencia y características clínicas de los pacientes con pluripatología ingresados en una unidad de medicina interna

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to assess the incidence and clinical features of patients with numerous disorders--comorbidity patients (CP)--and to clinically validate the CP criteria defined by a panel of experts (patients with 2 or more chronic diseases, distributed into seven categories).

PATIENTS AND METHOD

Prospective observational study of all patients, attended in internal medicine areas of a tertiary teaching hospital, during June 2003. Patients were stratified in 3 cohorts: CP, palliative, and general (GE). Incidence of CP, functional evaluation (at baseline, at admission, and at discharge), and burden of hospital care (by means of urgent and programmed visits, as well as episodes of hospitalization) in the last 12 months were analyzed. A multivariate analysis of predictors of survival and functional deterioration (fall in Barthel's scale > or = 10 points between baseline-discharge values) was performed in the CP cohort.

RESULTS

339 patients (CP cohort: 132; palliative: 52; GE: 155) were included. The overall incidence was 38.9/100 admissions/month. CP were older (75 [11] vs 67 [16]); had higher mortality (19.3% vs 6.1%; relative risk [RR]: 3.66 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.65-8.13]; lower functional ability at baseline (45 vs 95), at admission (20 vs 75), and at discharge (20 vs 95); higher rates of significant functional deterioration (16% vs 7%; RR = 2.47 [95% CI, 1.15-5.35]); and required more burden of hospital care by means of urgent care (3.6 [3.4] episodes vs 2.4 [1.9]), and hospitalizations (1.9 [1.3] vs 1.5 [1]) than GE patients. Chronic digestive/hepatic diseases (odds ratio [OR] = 48.3 [2.4-980.9], peripheric vascular disease/diabetes with visceral involvement (OR = 5.6 [CI 95%, 1.1-28.6]), and better functional ability at admission were associated with survival. Female gender (OR ) 46.6 [CI 95%, 4.5-486.9]), chronic lung disease (OR = 8.9 [CI 95%, 1.2-64]), and neurologic disease with disability (OR = 8 [CI 95%, 1.1-58.9]), were associated with significant functional deterioration during hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

The defined CP criteria were highly accurate in detecting a population of patients with high attention in Internal Medicine areas, high mortality rates, clinical frailty (more need of hospital care), and significant functional deterioration. Barthel's scale identified correctly this group of patients, and was independently associated with survival.