1
|
Streck JM, Rigotti NA, Livingstone-Banks J, Tindle HA, Clair C, Munafò MR, Sterling-Maisel C, Hartmann-Boyce J. Interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2024; 5:CD001837. [PMID: 38770804 PMCID: PMC11106804 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd001837.pub4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/22/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In 2020, 32.6% of the world's population used tobacco. Smoking contributes to many illnesses that require hospitalisation. A hospital admission may prompt a quit attempt. Initiating smoking cessation treatment, such as pharmacotherapy and/or counselling, in hospitals may be an effective preventive health strategy. Pharmacotherapies work to reduce withdrawal/craving and counselling provides behavioural skills for quitting smoking. This review updates the evidence on interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients, to understand the most effective smoking cessation treatment methods for hospitalised smokers. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of any type of smoking cessation programme for patients admitted to an acute care hospital. SEARCH METHODS We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 7 September 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised and quasi-randomised studies of behavioural, pharmacological or multicomponent interventions to help patients admitted to hospital quit. Interventions had to start in the hospital (including at discharge), and people had to have smoked within the last month. We excluded studies in psychiatric, substance and rehabilitation centres, as well as studies that did not measure abstinence at six months or longer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was abstinence from smoking assessed at least six months after discharge or the start of the intervention. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence, preferring biochemically-validated rates where reported. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS We included 82 studies (74 RCTs) that included 42,273 participants in the review (71 studies, 37,237 participants included in the meta-analyses); 36 studies are new to this update. We rated 10 studies as being at low risk of bias overall (low risk in all domains assessed), 48 at high risk of bias overall (high risk in at least one domain), and the remaining 24 at unclear risk. Cessation counselling versus no counselling, grouped by intensity of intervention Hospitalised patients who received smoking cessation counselling that began in the hospital and continued for more than a month after discharge had higher quit rates than patients who received no counselling in the hospital or following hospitalisation (risk ratio (RR) 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.24 to 1.49; 28 studies, 8234 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might account for an additional 76 quitters in every 1000 participants (95% CI 51 to 103). The evidence was uncertain (very low-certainty) about the effects of counselling interventions of less intensity or shorter duration (in-hospital only counselling ≤ 15 minutes: RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.89; 2 studies, 1417 participants; and in-hospital contact plus follow-up counselling support for ≤ 1 month: RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.20; 7 studies, 4627 participants) versus no counselling. There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, that smoking cessation counselling for at least 15 minutes in the hospital without post-discharge support led to higher quit rates than no counselling in the hospital (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.58; 12 studies, 4432 participants). Pharmacotherapy versus placebo or no pharmacotherapy Nicotine replacement therapy helped more patients to quit than placebo or no pharmacotherapy (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.67; 8 studies, 3838 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might equate to an additional 62 quitters per 1000 participants (95% CI 9 to 126). There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision (as CI encompassed the possibility of no difference), that varenicline helped more hospitalised patients to quit than placebo or no pharmacotherapy (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.75; 4 studies, 829 participants). Evidence for bupropion was low-certainty; the point estimate indicated a modest benefit at best, but CIs were wide and incorporated clinically significant harm and clinically significant benefit (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.43, 4 studies, 872 participants). Hospital-only intervention versus intervention that continues after hospital discharge Patients offered both smoking cessation counselling and pharmacotherapy after discharge had higher quit rates than patients offered counselling in hospital but not offered post-discharge support (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.38; 7 studies, 5610 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might equate to an additional 34 quitters per 1000 participants (95% CI 13 to 55). Post-discharge interventions offering real-time counselling without pharmacotherapy (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.60, 8 studies, 2299 participants; low certainty-evidence) and those offering unscheduled counselling without pharmacotherapy (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.14; 2 studies, 1598 participants; very low-certainty evidence) may have little to no effect on quit rates compared to control. Telephone quitlines versus control To provide post-discharge support, hospitals may refer patients to community-based telephone quitlines. Both comparisons relating to these interventions had wide CIs encompassing both possible harm and possible benefit, and were judged to be of very low certainty due to imprecision, inconsistency, and risk of bias (post-discharge telephone counselling versus quitline referral: RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.51; 3 studies, 3260 participants; quitline referral versus control: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.96; 2 studies, 1870 participants). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Offering hospitalised patients smoking cessation counselling beginning in hospital and continuing for over one month after discharge increases quit rates, compared to no hospital intervention. Counselling provided only in hospital, without post-discharge support, may have a modest impact on quit rates, but evidence is less certain. When all patients receive counselling in the hospital, high-certainty evidence indicates that providing both counselling and pharmacotherapy after discharge increases quit rates compared to no post-discharge intervention. Starting nicotine replacement or varenicline in hospitalised patients helps more patients to quit smoking than a placebo or no medication, though evidence for varenicline is only moderate-certainty due to imprecision. There is less evidence of benefit for bupropion in this setting. Some of our evidence was limited by imprecision (bupropion versus placebo and varenicline versus placebo), risk of bias, and inconsistency related to heterogeneity. Future research is needed to identify effective strategies to implement, disseminate, and sustain interventions, and to ensure cessation counselling and pharmacotherapy initiated in the hospital is sustained after discharge.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joanna M Streck
- Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts (MA), USA
- Tobacco Research and Treatment Center, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital / Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Nancy A Rigotti
- Tobacco Research and Treatment Center, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital / Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | | | - Hilary A Tindle
- Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Carole Clair
- Center for Primary Care and Public Health, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Marcus R Munafò
- School of Experimental Psychology and MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | | | - Jamie Hartmann-Boyce
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- Department of Health Promotion and Policy, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Tyler N, Hodkinson A, Planner C, Angelakis I, Keyworth C, Hall A, Jones PP, Wright OG, Keers R, Blakeman T, Panagioti M. Transitional Care Interventions From Hospital to Community to Reduce Health Care Use and Improve Patient Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis. JAMA Netw Open 2023; 6:e2344825. [PMID: 38032642 PMCID: PMC10690480 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.44825] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2023] [Accepted: 10/03/2023] [Indexed: 12/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Importance Discharge from the hospital to the community has been associated with serious patient risks and excess service costs. Objective To evaluate the comparative effectiveness associated with transitional care interventions with different complexity levels at improving health care utilization and patient outcomes in the transition from the hospital to the community. Data Sources CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO were searched from inception until August 2022. Study Selection Randomized clinical trials evaluating transitional care interventions from hospitals to the community were identified. Data Extraction and Synthesis At least 2 reviewers were involved in all data screening and extraction. Random-effects network meta-analyses and meta-regressions were applied. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcomes were readmission at 30, 90, and 180 days after discharge. Secondary outcomes included emergency department visits, mortality, quality of life, patient satisfaction, medication adherence, length of stay, primary care and outpatient visits, and intervention uptake. Results Overall, 126 trials with 97 408 participants were included, 86 (68%) of which were of low risk of bias. Low-complexity interventions were associated with the most efficacy for reducing hospital readmissions at 30 days (odds ratio [OR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.92) and 180 days (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.66) and emergency department visits (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.96). Medium-complexity interventions were associated with the most efficacy at reducing hospital readmissions at 90 days (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.92), reducing adverse events (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.75), and improving medication adherence (standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.49; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.67) but were associated with less efficacy than low-complexity interventions for reducing readmissions at 30 and 180 days. High-complexity interventions were most effective for reducing length of hospital stay (SMD, -0.20; 95% CI, -0.38 to -0.03) and increasing patient satisfaction (SMD, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.82) but were least effective for reducing readmissions at all time periods. None of the interventions were associated with improved uptake, quality of life (general, mental, or physical), or primary care and outpatient visits. Conclusions and Relevance These findings suggest that low- and medium-complexity transitional care interventions were associated with reducing health care utilization for patients transitioning from hospitals to the community. Comprehensive and consistent outcome measures are needed to capture the patient benefits of transitional care interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natasha Tyler
- National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Alexander Hodkinson
- National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Claire Planner
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Ioannis Angelakis
- National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- Institute of Population Health, Department of Primary Care & Mental Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
| | | | - Alex Hall
- Division of Nursing, Midwifery & Social Work, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | | | | | - Richard Keers
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- Pharmacy Department, Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust, Aston-Under-Lyne, United Kingdom
- Centre for Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, Division of Pharmacy and Optometry, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Tom Blakeman
- National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Maria Panagioti
- National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
A Case Manager-Led Pneumonia Care Bundle in a Subacute Rehabilitation Facility. Prof Case Manag 2023; 28:55-59. [PMID: 36662658 DOI: 10.1097/ncm.0000000000000589] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY To evaluate the relationship between a case manager-led pneumonia care bundle at skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) and 30-day hospital readmissions for pneumonia. PRIMARY PRACTICE SETTINGS The primary practice settings included patients hospitalized with pneumonia at 2 community hospitals between October 2018 and June 2019 and who were subsequently transferred to an SNF. METHODOLOGY AND SAMPLE A retrospective cohort study was completed comparing patients in the preintervention cohort who received pneumonia standard of care versus patients in the postintervention cohort who received a case manager-led evidence-based pneumonia care bundle at an SNF. From October 2018 to June 2019, patients admitted with pneumonia to 2 community hospitals in Northwest New Jersey were enrolled in the preintervention cohort. Patients admitted with pneumonia from January 2020 to June 2021 were enrolled in the postintervention group. The primary outcome was to reduce 30-day readmission rates for all patients discharged from the hospital to an SNF with pneumonia. RESULTS Ninety-nine patients were enrolled in the preintervention cohort and 34 patients were enrolled in the postinterventions cohort. Thirty-day readmission rates were lower in the postintervention cohort (24.2% vs. 17.7%). This reduction in readmission rates was clinically significant, demonstrating a 27% reduction for all patients discharged from the hospital to an SNF with pneumonia. IMPLICATIONS FOR CASE MANAGEMENT PRACTICE Individualized pneumonia self-management education can be easily implemented in SNFs to improve quality-of-care outcomes for patients. Our health care system collaborates with several SNFs to decrease 30-day hospital readmission. The pneumonia care bundle includes specific measures to improve the transition of care for patients with pneumonia by decreasing the variability of patient care after discharge from the hospital to an SNF. It was hypothesized that to decrease readmissions from the SNFs, we needed to address the quality of care provided by the SNFs by using a 2-prong approach; education of SNF staff on the pneumonia care bundle, and in-person weekly follow-up visits in the SNF until discharge from the SNF to the patient's home.
Collapse
|
4
|
Kim J, Jang J, Kim B, Lee KH. Effect of the PRECEDE-PROCEED model on health programs: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev 2022; 11:213. [PMID: 36210473 PMCID: PMC9549687 DOI: 10.1186/s13643-022-02092-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/30/2021] [Accepted: 09/29/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The predisposing, reinforcing, and enabling constructs in educational diagnosis and evaluation policy, regulatory, and organizational constructs in educational and environmental development (PRECEDE-PROCEED) model has been used as a theoretical framework to guide health promotion strategies to prevent chronic diseases and improve the quality of life. However, there is a lack of evidence as to whether applying the PRECEDE-PROCEED model effectively improves health outcomes. This study aimed to systematically review intervention studies that applied the PRECEDE-PROCEED model and examine its effectiveness. METHODS: In December 2020, seven databases were systematically searched. The quality of studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The outcome of interest for the meta-analysis was knowledge. RESULTS In total, 26 studies were systematically reviewed. Most studies provided educational programs as the main intervention for various population groups. Symptom or disease management and health-related behavior promotion were the most common topics, and education was the most frequently used intervention method. The PRECEDE-PROCEED model was applied in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of the intervention programs. Eleven studies were included in the meta-analysis, which showed that interventions using the PRECEDE-PROCEED model significantly improved knowledge. CONCLUSIONS This study indicated that individuals are more likely to engage in health-related behaviors with better knowledge. Thus, the PRECEDE-PROCEED model can be used as the theoretical framework for health promotion interventions across population groups, and these interventions are particularly effective with regard to knowledge improvement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Junghee Kim
- Department of Nursing, Yonsei University Wonju College of Nursing, Wonju, 26426, South Korea
| | - Jaeun Jang
- Yonsei University College of Nursing, Seoul, 03722, South Korea
| | - Bora Kim
- College of Nursing and Brain Korea 21 FOUR Project, Yonsei University, Seoul, 03722, South Korea
| | - Kyung Hee Lee
- Yonsei University College of Nursing and Mo-Im Kim Nursing Research Institute, 50-1 Yonsei-Ro, Seodaemun-Gu, Seoul, 03722, South Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Effects of fluid and drinking on pneumonia mortality in older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Nutr ESPEN 2022; 47:96-105. [PMID: 35063249 PMCID: PMC8631606 DOI: 10.1016/j.clnesp.2021.11.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2021] [Revised: 10/12/2021] [Accepted: 11/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
Background and aims Methods Results Conclusions
Collapse
|
6
|
Becker C, Zumbrunn S, Beck K, Vincent A, Loretz N, Müller J, Amacher SA, Schaefert R, Hunziker S. Interventions to Improve Communication at Hospital Discharge and Rates of Readmission: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open 2021; 4:e2119346. [PMID: 34448868 PMCID: PMC8397933 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.19346] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Shortcomings in the education of patients at hospital discharge are associated with higher risks for treatment failure and hospital readmission. Whether improving communication at discharge through specific interventions has an association with patient-relevant outcomes remains unclear. OBJECTIVE To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the association of communication interventions at hospital discharge with readmission rates and other patient-relevant outcomes. DATA SOURCES PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were systematically searched from the inception of each database to February 28, 2021. STUDY SELECTION Randomized clinical trials that randomized patients to receiving a discharge communication intervention or a control group were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Two independent reviewers extracted data on outcomes and trial and patient characteristics. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Data were pooled using a random-effects model, and risk ratios (RRs) with corresponding 95% CIs are reported. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was hospital readmission, and secondary outcomes included adherence to treatment regimen, patient satisfaction, mortality, and emergency department reattendance 30 days after hospital discharge. RESULTS We included 60 randomized clinical trials with a total of 16 070 patients for the qualitative synthesis and 19 trials with a total of 3953 patients for the quantitative synthesis of the primary outcome. Of these, 11 trials had low risk of bias, 6 trials had high risk of bias, and 2 trials had unclear risk of bias. Communication interventions at discharge were significantly associated with lower readmission rates (179 of 1959 patients [9.1%] in intervention groups vs 270 of 1994 patients [13.5%] in control groups; RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56-0.84), higher adherence to treatment regimen (1729 of 2009 patients [86.1%] in intervention groups vs 1599 of 2024 patients [79.0%] in control groups; RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.13-1.37), and higher patient satisfaction (1187 of 1949 patients [60.9%] in intervention groups vs 991 of 2002 patients [49.5%] in control groups; RR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.20-1.66). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE These findings suggest that communication interventions at discharge are significantly associated with fewer hospital readmissions, higher treatment adherence, and higher patient satisfaction and thus are important to facilitate the transition of care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christoph Becker
- Medical Communication, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
- Emergency Department, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Samuel Zumbrunn
- Medical Communication, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Katharina Beck
- Medical Communication, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Alessia Vincent
- Medical Communication, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Nina Loretz
- Medical Communication, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Jonas Müller
- Medical Communication, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Simon A Amacher
- Medical Communication, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Rainer Schaefert
- Medical Communication, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Sabina Hunziker
- Medical Communication, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Ewig S, Kolditz M, Pletz M, Altiner A, Albrich W, Drömann D, Flick H, Gatermann S, Krüger S, Nehls W, Panning M, Rademacher J, Rohde G, Rupp J, Schaaf B, Heppner HJ, Krause R, Ott S, Welte T, Witzenrath M. [Management of Adult Community-Acquired Pneumonia and Prevention - Update 2021 - Guideline of the German Respiratory Society (DGP), the Paul-Ehrlich-Society for Chemotherapy (PEG), the German Society for Infectious Diseases (DGI), the German Society of Medical Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine (DGIIN), the German Viological Society (DGV), the Competence Network CAPNETZ, the German College of General Practitioneers and Family Physicians (DEGAM), the German Society for Geriatric Medicine (DGG), the German Palliative Society (DGP), the Austrian Society of Pneumology Society (ÖGP), the Austrian Society for Infectious and Tropical Diseases (ÖGIT), the Swiss Respiratory Society (SGP) and the Swiss Society for Infectious Diseases Society (SSI)]. Pneumologie 2021; 75:665-729. [PMID: 34198346 DOI: 10.1055/a-1497-0693] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
The present guideline provides a new and updated concept of the management of adult patients with community-acquired pneumonia. It replaces the previous guideline dating from 2016.The guideline was worked out and agreed on following the standards of methodology of a S3-guideline. This includes a systematic literature search and grading, a structured discussion of recommendations supported by the literature as well as the declaration and assessment of potential conflicts of interests.The guideline has a focus on specific clinical circumstances, an update on severity assessment, and includes recommendations for an individualized selection of antimicrobial treatment.The recommendations aim at the same time at a structured assessment of risk for adverse outcome as well as an early determination of treatment goals in order to reduce mortality in patients with curative treatment goal and to provide palliation for patients with treatment restrictions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Ewig
- Thoraxzentrum Ruhrgebiet, Kliniken für Pneumologie und Infektiologie, EVK Herne und Augusta-Kranken-Anstalt Bochum
| | - M Kolditz
- Universitätsklinikum Carl-Gustav Carus, Klinik für Innere Medizin 1, Bereich Pneumologie, Dresden
| | - M Pletz
- Universitätsklinikum Jena, Institut für Infektionsmedizin und Krankenhaushygiene, Jena
| | - A Altiner
- Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Institut für Allgemeinmedizin, Rostock
| | - W Albrich
- Kantonsspital St. Gallen, Klinik für Infektiologie/Spitalhygiene
| | - D Drömann
- Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Medizinische Klinik III - Pulmologie, Lübeck
| | - H Flick
- Medizinische Universität Graz, Universitätsklinik für Innere Medizin, Klinische Abteilung für Lungenkrankheiten, Graz
| | - S Gatermann
- Ruhr Universität Bochum, Abteilung für Medizinische Mikrobiologie, Bochum
| | - S Krüger
- Kaiserswerther Diakonie, Florence Nightingale Krankenhaus, Klinik für Pneumologie, Kardiologie und internistische Intensivmedizin, Düsseldorf
| | - W Nehls
- Helios Klinikum Erich von Behring, Klinik für Palliativmedizin und Geriatrie, Berlin
| | - M Panning
- Universitätsklinikum Freiburg, Department für Medizinische Mikrobiologie und Hygiene, Freiburg
| | - J Rademacher
- Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Klinik für Pneumologie, Hannover
| | - G Rohde
- Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Medizinische Klinik I, Pneumologie und Allergologie, Frankfurt/Main
| | - J Rupp
- Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Klinik für Infektiologie und Mikrobiologie, Lübeck
| | - B Schaaf
- Klinikum Dortmund, Klinik für Pneumologie, Infektiologie und internistische Intensivmedizin, Dortmund
| | - H-J Heppner
- Lehrstuhl Geriatrie Universität Witten/Herdecke, Helios Klinikum Schwelm, Klinik für Geriatrie, Schwelm
| | - R Krause
- Medizinische Universität Graz, Universitätsklinik für Innere Medizin, Klinische Abteilung für Infektiologie, Graz
| | - S Ott
- St. Claraspital Basel, Pneumologie, Basel, und Universitätsklinik für Pneumologie, Universitätsspital Bern (Inselspital) und Universität Bern
| | - T Welte
- Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Klinik für Pneumologie, Hannover
| | - M Witzenrath
- Charité, Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Medizinische Klinik mit Schwerpunkt Infektiologie und Pneumologie, Berlin
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Primary care consultations after hospitalisation for pneumonia: a large population-based cohort study. Br J Gen Pract 2021; 71:e250-e257. [PMID: 33753348 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp.2020.0890] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/27/2020] [Accepted: 11/30/2020] [Indexed: 10/31/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Up to 70% of patients report ongoing symptoms 4 weeks after hospitalisation for pneumonia; the impact on primary care is poorly understood. AIM To investigate the frequency of primary care consultations after hospitalisation for pneumonia, and the reasons for consultation. DESIGN AND SETTING A population-based cohort study in England using a UK primary care database of anonymised medical records (Clinical Practice Research Datalink [CPRD]) linked to Hospital Episode Statistics (HES). METHOD Adults with the first International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) code for pneumonia (J12-J18) recorded in HES between July 2002 and June 2017 were included. Primary care consultation within 30 days of discharge was identified as the recording of any medical Read code (excluding administration-related codes) in CPRD. Competing-risks regression analyses were conducted to determine the predictors of consultation and antibiotic use at consultation; death and readmission were competing events. Reasons for consultation were examined. RESULTS Of 56 396 adults, 55.9% (n = 31 542) consulted primary care within 30 days of hospital discharge. The rate of consultation was highest within 7 days (4.7 per 100 person-days). The strongest predictor for consultation was a higher number of primary care consultations in the year before index admission (adjusted subhazard ratio [sHR] 8.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 6.42 to 12.55). The most common reason for consultation was for a respiratory disorder (40.7%, n = 12 840), 11.8% for pneumonia specifically. At consultation, 31.1% (n = 9823) received further antibiotics. Penicillins (41.6%, n = 5753/13 829) and macrolides (21.9%, n = 3029/13 829) were the most common antibiotics prescribed. CONCLUSION Following hospitalisation for pneumonia, a significant proportion of patients consulted primary care within 30 days, highlighting the morbidity experienced by patients during recovery from pneumonia.
Collapse
|
9
|
Shiri T, Khan K, Keaney K, Mukherjee G, McCarthy ND, Petrou S. Pneumococcal Disease: A Systematic Review of Health Utilities, Resource Use, Costs, and Economic Evaluations of Interventions. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2019; 22:1329-1344. [PMID: 31708071 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.06.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2018] [Revised: 06/20/2019] [Accepted: 06/27/2019] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pneumococcal diseases cause substantial mortality, morbidity, and economic burden. Evidence on data inputs for economic evaluations of interventions targeting pneumococcal disease is critical. OBJECTIVES To summarize evidence on resource use, costs, health utilities, and cost-effectiveness for pneumococcal disease and associated interventions to inform future economic analyses. METHODS We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EconLit, and Cochrane databases for peer-reviewed studies in English on pneumococcal disease that reported health utilities using direct or indirect valuation methods, resource use, costs, or cost-effectiveness of intervention programs, and summarized the evidence descriptively. RESULTS We included 383 studies: 9 reporting health utilities, 131 resource use, 160 economic costs of pneumococcal disease, 95 both resource use and costs, and 178 economic evaluations of pneumococcal intervention programs. Health state utility values ranged from 0 to 1 for both meningitis and otitis media and from 0.3 to 0.7 for both pneumonia and sepsis. Hospitalization was shortest for otitis media (range: 0.1-5 days) and longest for sepsis/septicemia (6-48). The main categories of costs reported were drugs, hospitalization, and household or employer costs. Resource use was reported in hospital length of stay and number of contacts with general practitioners. Costs and resource use significantly varied among population ages, disease conditions, and settings. Current vaccination programs for both adults and children, antibiotic use and outreach programs to promote vaccination, early disease detection, and educational programs are cost-effective in most countries. CONCLUSION This study has generated a comprehensive repository of health economic evidence on pneumococcal disease that can be used to inform future economic evaluations of pneumococcal disease intervention programs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tinevimbo Shiri
- Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, England, UK; Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, England, UK.
| | - Kamran Khan
- Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, England, UK
| | - Katherine Keaney
- Population Evidence and Technologies, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, England, UK
| | - Geetanjali Mukherjee
- Population Evidence and Technologies, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, England, UK
| | - Noel D McCarthy
- Population Evidence and Technologies, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, England, UK
| | - Stavros Petrou
- Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, England, UK; Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Pick HJ, Bolton CE, Lim WS, McKeever TM. Patient-reported outcome measures in the recovery of adults hospitalised with community-acquired pneumonia: a systematic review. Eur Respir J 2019; 53:13993003.02165-2018. [PMID: 30635298 DOI: 10.1183/13993003.02165-2018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2018] [Accepted: 12/19/2018] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
Symptomatic and functional recovery are important patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) that are increasingly used as trial end-points. This systematic review summarises the literature on PROMs in CAP.Comprehensive searches in accordance with the PRISMA statement were conducted to March 2017. Eligible studies included adults discharged from hospital following confirmed CAP and reporting PROMs.15 studies (n=5644 patients) were included; most were of moderate quality. Studies used a wide range of PROMs and assessment tools. At 4-6 weeks post-discharge, the commonest symptom reported was fatigue (45.0-72.6% of patients, three studies), followed by cough (35.3-69.7%) and dyspnoea (34.2-67.1%); corresponding values from studies restricted by age <65 years (two studies) were lower: fatigue 12.1-25.7%, cough 19.9-31.9% and dyspnoea 16.8-27.5%. Functional impairment 4 weeks post-discharge was reported in 18-51% of patients (two studies), while median time to return to normal activities was between 15 and 28 days (three studies).Substantial morbidity is reported by patients up to 6 weeks post-discharge. There is weak methodological consistency across existing studies. A core set of PROMs for use in future studies is suggested.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harry J Pick
- Dept of Respiratory Medicine, Nottingham University Hospital NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
| | - Charlotte E Bolton
- NIHR Nottingham BRC Respiratory Theme, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Wei Shen Lim
- Dept of Respiratory Medicine, Nottingham University Hospital NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK.,NIHR Nottingham BRC Respiratory Theme, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Tricia M McKeever
- Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|