Outcomes of Hospital at Home for Older Adults with and without High Levels of Social Support

Importance of early consideration of scaling and sustainability for aging-related care models: Case study of Hospital at Home

For aging-related research, there is a pressing need to attend to the dissemination and implementation of evidence-based interventions. Some aging-related interventions with established effectiveness may be poorly disseminated and implemented due to behavioral, organizational, payment, or other constraints. To provide insight into the beginning to end process of translation and implementation, we present a case history of the three-decade progression of Hospital at Home (HaH) now nearing national dissemination. We summarize research at various phases with particular attention to implementation considerations. Reviewing over three decades of HaH-related research dating from initial discovery to translation and implementation, we found that the content and importance of different constructs (e.g., inner practice vs. outer environmental setting) and the choice of implementation strategies differed depending on implementation context (testing of effectiveness, scaling, or sustainability). Early effectiveness studies mostly examined implementation issues related to the intervention, the practice setting, and the individuals involved. However, explicit and early consideration of scale and sustainment was not the primary focus. For example, HaH program intake is primarily through hospital emergency departments (ED). Initial efforts would have benefited from incorporating strategies (e.g., incorporating ED leadership into program leadership) to address night and weekend admissions. Many regulatory barriers did not surface during initial considerations. Considering implementation issues late may contribute to delay in bringing discoveries to population impact. The experience with HaH suggests that scale and sustainability bear earlier consideration because barriers and facilitators to implementation are likely to be different in content and importance at different phases of implementation.

Assessment of the Impact of Home-Based Hospitalization on Health Outcomes: An Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

In Portugal, evidence of clinical outcomes within home-based hospitalization programs remains limited. Despite the adoption of homebased hospitalization services, it is still unclear whether these services represent an effective way to manage patients compared with inpatient hospital care. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of home-based hospitalization compared with conventional hospitalization in a group of patients with a primary diagnosis of infectious, cardiovascular, oncological, or 'other' diseases.

METHODS

An observational retrospective study using anonymized administrative data to investigate the outcomes of home-based hospitalization (n = 209) and conventional hospitalization (n = 192) for 401 Portuguese patients admitted to CUF hospitals (Tejo, Cascais, Sintra, Descobertas, and the Unidade de Hospitalização Domiciliária CUF Lisboa). Data on demographics and clinical outcomes, including Barthel index, Braden scale, Morse scale, mortality, and length of hospital stay, were collected. The statistical analysis included comparison tests and logistic regression.

RESULTS

The study found no statistically significant differences between patients' admission and discharge for the Barthel index, Braden scale, and Morse scale scores, for both conventional and home-based hospitalizations. In addition, no statistically significant differences were found in the length of stay between conventional and home-based hospitalization, although patients diagnosed with infectious diseases had a longer stay than patients with other conditions. Although the mortality rate was higher in home-based hospitalization compared to conventional hospitalization, the mortality risk index (higher in home-based hospitalization) assessed at admission was a more important predictor of death than the type of hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

The study found that there were no significant differences in outcomes between conventional and home-based hospitalization. Home-based hospitalization was found to be a valuable aspect of patient- and family-centered care. However, it is noteworthy that patients with infectious diseases experienced longer hospital stays.

Inpatient-level care at home delivered by virtual wards and hospital at home: a systematic review and meta-analysis of complex interventions and their components

BACKGROUND

Technology-enabled inpatient-level care at home services, such as virtual wards and hospital at home, are being rapidly implemented. This is the first systematic review to link the components of these service delivery innovations to evidence of effectiveness to explore implications for practice and research.

METHODS

For this review (registered here https://osf.io/je39y ), we searched Cochrane-recommended multiple databases up to 30 November 2022 and additional resources for randomised and non-randomised studies that compared technology-enabled inpatient-level care at home with hospital-based inpatient care. We classified interventions into care model groups using three key components: clinical activities, workforce, and technology. We synthesised evidence by these groups quantitatively or narratively for mortality, hospital readmissions, cost-effectiveness and length of stay.

RESULTS

We include 69 studies: 38 randomised studies (6413 participants; largely judged as low or unclear risk of bias) and 31 non-randomised studies (31,950 participants; largely judged at serious or critical risk of bias). The 69 studies described 63 interventions which formed eight model groups. Most models, regardless of using low- or high-intensity technology, may have similar or reduced hospital readmission risk compared with hospital-based inpatient care (low-certainty evidence from randomised trials). For mortality, most models had uncertain or unavailable evidence. Two exceptions were low technology-enabled models that involve hospital- and community-based professionals, they may have similar mortality risk compared with hospital-based inpatient care (low- or moderate-certainty evidence from randomised trials). Cost-effectiveness evidence is unavailable for high technology-enabled models, but sparse evidence suggests the low technology-enabled multidisciplinary care delivered by hospital-based teams appears more cost-effective than hospital-based care for those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-certainty evidence suggests that none of technology-enabled care at home models we explored put people at higher risk of readmission compared with hospital-based care. Where limited evidence on mortality is available, there appears to be no additional risk of mortality due to use of technology-enabled at home models. It is unclear whether inpatient-level care at home using higher levels of technology confers additional benefits. Further research should focus on clearly defined interventions in high-priority populations and include comparative cost-effectiveness evaluation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://osf.io/je39y .

Acute care models for older people living with frailty: a systematic review and taxonomy

BACKGROUND

The need to improve the acute care pathway to meet the care needs of older people living with frailty is a strategic priority for many healthcare systems. The optimal care model for this patient group is unclear.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to derive a taxonomy of acute care models for older people with acute medical illness and describe the outcomes used to assess their effectiveness. Care models providing time-limited episodes of care (up to 14 days) within 48 h of presentation to patients over the age of 65 with acute medical illness were included. Care models based in hospital and community settings were eligible. Searches were undertaken in Medline, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane databases. Interventions were described and classified in detail using a modified version of the TIDIeR checklist for complex interventions. Outcomes were described and classified using the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) taxonomy. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB2 and ROBINS-I.

RESULTS

The inclusion criteria were met by 103 articles. Four classes of acute care model were identified, acute-bed based care, hospital at home, emergency department in-reach and care home models. The field is dominated by small single centre randomised and non-randomised studies. Most studies were judged to be at risk of bias. A range of outcome measures were reported with little consistency between studies. Evidence of effectiveness was limited.

CONCLUSION

Acute care models for older people living with frailty are heterogenous. The clinical effectiveness of these models cannot be conclusively established from the available evidence.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration (CRD42021279131).

A national qualitative study of Hospital-at-Home implementation under the CMS Acute Hospital Care at Home waiver

BACKGROUND

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced the Acute Hospital Care at Home (AHCaH) waiver program in November 2020 to help expand hospital capacity to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic. The AHCaH waived the 24/7 on-site nursing requirement and enabled hospitals to obtain full hospital-level diagnosis-related group (DRG) reimbursement for providing Hospital-at-Home (HaH) care. This study sought to describe AHCaH implementation processes and strategies at the national level and identify challenges and facilitators to launching or adapting a HaH to meet waiver requirements.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews to explore barriers and facilitators of HaH implementation. The analysis was informed by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) implementation framework. Interviews were audio recorded for transcription and thematic coding.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We interviewed a sample of clinical leaders (N = 18; clinical/medical directors, operational and program managers) from 14 new and pre-existing U.S. HaH programs diverse by size, urbanicity, and geography. Participants were enthusiastic about the AHCaH waiver. Participants described barriers and facilitators at planning and implementation stages within three overarching themes influencing waiver program implementation: 1) institutional value and assets; 2) program components, such as electronic health records, vendors, pharmacy, and patient monitoring; and 3) patient enrollment, including eligibility and geographic limits.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of AHCaH waiver is a complex process that requires building components in compliance with the requirements to extend the hospital into the home, in coordination with internal and external partners. The study identified barriers that potential adopters and proponents should consider alongside the strategies that some organizations have found useful. Clarity regarding the waiver's future may expedite HaH model dissemination and ensure longevity of this valuable model of care delivery.

Virtual Hospitalization at Home After the Covid-19 Pandemic: Time to Consider Our Future Community Healthcare Options

The concept of acute hospitalization at home has been described for over 3 decades. Its scope, however, was largely limited to small experimental trials and pilot studies. The Covid-19 pandemic changed these circumstances. The convergence of the critical need for acute hospital beds along with the growing sophistication and comfort in virtual monitoring facilitated the rapid deployment of hospitalization at home throughout many communities in the United States. Now in the waning times of the pandemic, community health leaders and health systems are questioning what the future role of home virtual hospitalization might be. Might this concept be relegated to only future times of critical bed shortage, or might it be part of a true change in community healthcare delivery.