Hospital-at-home: buyer beware

Providing effective and preferred care closer to home: a realist review of intermediate care

Intermediate care is one of the number of service delivery models intended to integrate care and provide enhanced health and social care services closer to home, especially to reduce reliance on acute care hospital beds. In order for health and social care practitioners, service managers and commissioners to make informed decisions, it is vital to understand how to implement the admission avoidance and early supported discharge components of intermediate care within the context of local care systems. This paper reports the findings of a theory-driven (realist) review conducted in 2011-2012. A broad range of evidence contained in 193 sources was used to construct a conceptual framework for intermediate care. This framework forms the basis for exploring factors at service user, professional and organisational levels that should be considered when designing and delivering intermediate care services within a particular local context. Our synthesis found that involving service users and their carers in collaborative decision-making about the objectives of care and the place of care is central to achieving the aims of intermediate care. This pivotal involvement of the service user relies on practitioners, service managers and commissioners being aware of the impact that organisational structures at the local level can have on enabling or inhibiting collaborative decision-making and care co-ordination. Through all interactions with service users and their care networks, health and social care professionals should establish the meaning which alternative care environments have for different service users. Doing so means decisions about the best place of care will be better informed and gives service users choice. This in turn is likely to support psychological and social stability, and the attainment of functional goals. At an organisational level, integrated working can facilitate the delivery of intermediate care, but there is not a straightforward relationship between integrated organisational processes and integrated professional practice.

A mixed method study to compare use and experience of hospital care and a nurse-led acute respiratory assessment service offering home care to people with an acute exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

BACKGROUND

Over the past 10 years hospital at home schemes for the treatment of an acute exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease have proliferated throughout developed countries. For selected patients treatment at home is no less advantageous in terms of readmission rates and length of stay than treatment in hospital. Although care at home might seem to be a more desirable option than admission to hospital, little is known about care preferences and how people exercise service choice.

OBJECTIVES

1. to determine patients' recent use of and satisfaction with health care services during exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. 2. To determine and compare patients' and families' perceived future care preferences. 3. To complete an in-depth exploration of care experiences and preferences with a subset of respondents and their families.

DESIGN

A mixed method design was used consisting of a postal survey and in-depth qualitative interviews with a subset of questionnaire respondents.

SETTING

An outreach service provided by a large university hospital within Scotland, UK.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred and four out-patients registered with the Acute Respiratory Assessment Service and who had experienced hospital inpatient care during the past year, and their families. A subset of respondents was invited to take part in qualitative interviews.

RESULTS

The majority of respondents indicated a preference for the home care service, and this was positively associated with high coping skills. There was a strong relationship between personal and family preferences. There was no linear relationship between a clinical measure of severity of lung disease and service use or care preferences. Results from the qualitative interviews endorsed and explained these findings.

CONCLUSIONS

A range of factors combined to influence service use at a particular point in time, implying a need for increased self-management support from nurses and increased service provision.

Randomized controlled trial of an early discharge rehabilitation service: the Belfast Community Stroke Trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To compare a community-based multidisciplinary stroke team (CST) approach with hospital-based rehabilitation in terms of hospital stay, functioning, quality of life, and service use and costs.

METHODS

Stroke patients who met pre-agreed criteria were allocated randomly to the CST service (n=59) or to usual inpatient rehabilitation and follow-up care (n=54). Assessments were completed at randomization and 12 months later. Caregiver strain and satisfaction (n=55) were also assessed. Cost data were collected for a subsample of 38 patients.

RESULTS

Almost 80% of surviving patients (n=691) were discharged home and a small number (n=55) were readmitted. Approximately 17% (113/649) were randomized. There were no statistically significant differences in hospital duration, costs, or outcome measures at baseline and 12 months except for higher satisfaction reported by CST patients. Overall, both groups recorded improvement in most domains over time. Carers reported a high level of satisfaction although the level of strain among carers is cause for concern. The community group (n=18) cost less than the hospital group (n=20).

CONCLUSIONS

A mixed model of hospital-based and community-based rehabilitation services is likely to lead to increased patient choice and satisfaction and a potential reduction in bed pressures for less severe stroke patients.

Hospital in the home is cost saving for appropriately selected patients: a comparison with in-hospital care

BACKGROUND

As the cost of acute care in hospitals increases, there is an increasing need to find alternative means of providing acute care. Hospital in the home (HITH) has developed in response to this challenge. Current evidence is conflicting as to whether HITH provides cost savings compared with in-hospital care (IHC). The heterogeneous nature of HITH and the clinical complexity of patients is the greatest obstacle to making valid comparisons between the two modes of care.

OBJECTIVE

To compare costs and outcomes of HITH to IHC in hospitals in Victoria, Australia.

DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING

Hospital morbidity data and medical records from Victoria, Australia.

STUDY DESIGN

A costing study of 924 randomly selected episodes of HITH care, individually matched to 924 comparable IHC episodes.

METHODS

Unadjusted total episode costs (TEC) and averaged daily costs for HITH and IHC were calculated. Mortality and length of stay (LOS) were compared for HITH and IHC episodes. Simple linear and multiple regression were used to analyse costing data, while logistic regression was used to compare in-hospital mortality and LOS in HITH versus IHC episodes.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

The 1848 episodes of care in the sample represented a heterogeneous range of acute conditions in 31 Victoria hospitals. HITH consisted of two distinct subgroups: pure-HITH (total episode substitution) and mixed-HITH (partial episode substitution). The cost of episodes of acute care containing a HITH component were overall 9% less expensive than IHC (P = 0.04), while pure-HITH was 38% cheaper than matched IHC (P < 0.001). The variable HITH, along with LOS and chemotherapy, explained the 60% variation in TEC. The mean cost of pure-HITH episodes was 22% lower compared to mixed-HITH (P = 0.004). The in-hospital mortality rate in HITH (3.8%) and IHC (5.2%) was not significantly different. Pure-HITH was associated with shorter LOS, while mixed HITH was strongly associated with longer LOS.

CONCLUSION

In our study the adjusted cost of HITH was significantly cheaper than IHC, particularly as total episode substitution. The cost needs to be adjusted because many factors other than HITH or IHC can influence crude costs. There may be potential for wider use of HITH for appropriately selected patients.

Randomised controlled trial comparing hospital at home care with inpatient hospital care. I: three month follow up of health outcomes

OBJECTIVES

To compare hospital at home care with inpatient hospital care in terms of patient outcomes.

DESIGN

Randomised controlled trial with three month follow up.

SETTING

District general hospital and catchment area of neighbouring community trust.

SUBJECTS

Patients recovering from hip replacement (n=86), knee replacement (n=86), and hysterectomy (n=238); elderly medical patients (n=96); and patients with chronic obstructive airways disease (n=32).

INTERVENTIONS

Hospital at home care or inpatient hospital care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Dartmouth COOP chart to measure patients' general health status; SF-36 to measure possible limitations in physical functioning of patients with hysterectomy; disease specific measures-chronic respiratory disease questionnaire, Barthel index for elderly medical patients, Oxford hip score, and Bristol knee score; hospital readmission and mortality data; carer strain index to measure burden on carers; patients' and carers' preferred form of care.

RESULTS

At follow up, there were no major differences in outcome between hospital at home care and hospital care for any of the patient groups except that those recovering from hip replacement reported a significantly greater improvement in quality of life with hospital at home care (difference in change from baseline value 0.50, 95% confidence interval 0.13 to 0.88). Hospital at home did not seem suitable for patients recovering from a knee replacement, as 14 (30%) of patients allocated to hospital at home remained in hospital. Patients in all groups preferred hospital at home care except those with chronic obstructive airways disease. No differences were detected for carer burden. Carers of patients recovering from knee replacement preferred hospital at home care, while carers of patients recovering from a hysterectomy preferred hospital care.

CONCLUSIONS

Few differences in outcome were detected. Thus, the cost of hospital at home compared with hospital care becomes a primary concern.