Hospital admissions for physical health and psychosocial adversity among people experiencing homelessness in England: a population-based retrospective cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Homeless health care is often characterised by physical health, mental health, and substance use problems, resulting in high use of emergency care, poor outcomes, and extreme social inequities. We assessed health needs as prevention opportunities for hospitalised people experiencing homelessness (PEH) in England.

METHODS

This population-based retrospective cross-sectional study used anonymised national Hospital Episodes Statistics Admitted Patient Care data. PEH were identified as having at least one homeless code ("no fixed abode", "registered with a homeless-exclusive GP practice", "clinical diagnosis of homelessness") from April 1, 2017, to March 31, 2018. We analysed admissions for PEH and for housed people. We estimated the prevalence of demographic and admission characteristics and diagnoses by 10th International Classification of Disease (ICD-10) chapter. We developed novel diagnostic phenotypes for physical health (internal disease processes) and psychosocial adversity (mental health, substance use, violence, and social factors). We compared admissions between PEH and housed people using sex-stratified logistic regression adjusted for age and ethnicity.

FINDINGS

There were 15 566 010 admissions (51 643 PEH and 15 514 367 housed people). Compared with housed people, proportionately more PEH were younger (PEH aged 26-45 years, n=24 224 [46·9%], housed people n=3 323 951 [21·4%]), male (PEH n=37 662 [72·9%], housed people n=6 819 157 [44·0%]), and not White British (PEH n=14 605 [28·3%], housed people n=3 447 183 [22·2%]). Emergency admissions were more common among PEH (PEH male n=30 958 [82·2%], housed people male n=5 321 428 [34·3%], adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 8·76, 95% CI 8·53-9·00). The most common primary diagnoses by ICD-10 chapter for PEH were mental and behavioural conditions (PEH male n=7118 admissions [18·9%], housed people male n=155 144 [1·0%], 12·97, 12·61-13·34). Admissions for the psychosocial adversity phenotype were higher in PEH, particularly for women (PEH female n=3922 [28·1%], housed people female n=155 644 [1·79%], 18·18, 17·50-18·88). Physical health phenotype admissions were less common in PEH (PEH male n=7510 [19·9%], housed people male n=1 821 397 [26·7%], 0·91, 0·89-0·94), but specific infections, cancers, respiratory, and cardiovascular diseases were more common among PEH for both men and women.

INTERPRETATION

These results support targeting of preventative interventions for PEH before, during and after admission to hospital, highlighting psychosocial needs. Future research should aim to produce reliable estimates of the size of the national homeless population to enable calculation of admission rates for psychosocial and physical health diagnoses.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR).

Evaluation of a Pathway team for homeless mental health in-patients

AIMS AND METHOD

The Pathway model is an enhanced care coordination model for homeless people in hospital. We aimed to evaluate the first attempt to apply it on psychiatric wards, which started in 2015 in South London. We developed a logic model which expressed how the Pathway approach might work. Two predictions from this model were tested, using propensity scores and regression to estimate the effect of the intervention among people who were eligible for it.

RESULTS

The Pathway team theorised that their interventions would reduce length of stay, improve housing outcomes and optimise the use of primary care - and, more tentatively, reduce readmission and emergency presentations. We were able to estimate effects on length of stay (-20.3 days; 95% CI -32.5 to -8.1; P = 0.0012) and readmission (a non-significant reduction).

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The marked reduction in length of stay, explicable in terms of the logic model, constitutes preliminary support for the Pathway model in mental health services.

Hospital-based preventative interventions for people experiencing homelessness in high-income countries: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

People experiencing homelessness have significant unmet needs and high rates of unplanned care. We aimed to describe preventative interventions, defined in their broadest sense, for people experiencing homelessness in a hospital context. Secondary aims included mapping outcomes and assessing intervention effectiveness.

METHODS

We searched online databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, HMIC, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library) from 1999-2019 and conducted backward and forward citation searches to 31 December 2020 (PROSPERO CRD42019154036). We included quantitative studies in emergency and inpatient settings measuring health or social outcomes for adults experiencing homelessness in high income countries. We assessed rigour using the "Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies" and summarised findings using descriptive quantitative methods, a binomial test, a Harvest Plot, and narrative synthesis. We used PRISMA and SWiM reporting guidelines.

FINDINGS

Twenty-eight studies identified eight intervention types: care coordination (n=18); advocacy, support, and outreach (n=13); social welfare assistance (n=13); discharge planning (n=12); homelessness identification (n=6); psychological therapy and treatment (n=6); infectious disease prevention (n=5); and screening, treatment, and referrals (n=5). The evidence strength was weak (n=16) to moderate (n=10), with two high quality randomised controlled trials. We identified six outcome categories with potential benefits observed for psychosocial outcomes, including housing (11/13 studies, 95%CI=54.6-98.1%, p=0.023), healthcare use (14/17, 56.6-96.2%, p=0.013), and healthcare costs (8/8, 63.1-100%, p=0.008). Benefits were less likely for health outcomes (4/5, 28.3-99.5%, p=0.375), integration with onward care (2/4, 6.8-93.2%, p=1.000), and feasibility/acceptability (5/6, 35.9-99.6%, p=0.219), but confidence intervals were very wide. We observed no harms. Most studies showing potential benefits were multi-component interventions.

INTERPRETATION

Hospital-based preventative interventions for people experiencing homelessness are potentially beneficial, but more rigorous research is needed. In the context of high needs and extreme inequities, policymakers and healthcare providers may consider implementing multi-component preventative interventions.

FUNDING

SL is supported by an NIHR Clinical Doctoral Research Fellowship (ICA-CDRF-2016-02-042). JD is supported by an NIHR School of Public Health Research Pre-doctoral Fellowship (NU-004252). RWA is supported by a Wellcome Clinical Research Career Development Fellowship (206602).

The economic case for hospital discharge services for people experiencing homelessness in England: An in-depth analysis with different service configurations providing specialist care

There are long-standing concerns that people experiencing homelessness may not recover well if left unsupported after a hospital stay. This study reports on a study investigating the cost-effectiveness of three different 'in patient care coordination and discharge planning' configurations for adults experiencing homelessness who are discharged from hospitals in England. The first configuration provided a clinical and housing in-reach service during acute care and discharge coordination but with no 'step-down' care. The second configuration provided clinical and housing in-reach, discharge coordination and 'step-down' intermediate care. The third configuration consisted of housing support workers providing in-reach and discharge coordination as well as step-down care. These three configurations were each compared with 'standard care' (control, defined as one visit by the homelessness health nurse before discharge during which patients received an information leaflet on local services). Multiple sources of data and multi-outcome measures were adopted to assess the cost utility of hospital discharge service delivery for the NHS and broader public perspective. Details of 354 participants were collated on service delivery costs (salary, on-costs, capital, overheads and 'hotel' costs, advertising and other indirect costs), the economic consequences for different public services (e.g. NHS, social care, criminal justice, housing, etc.) and health utilities (quality-adjusted-life-years, QALYs). Findings were complex across the configurations, but, on the whole, there was promising evidence suggesting that, with delivery costs similar to those reported for bed-based intermediate care, step-down care secured better health outcomes and improved cost-effectiveness (compared with usual care) within NICE cost-effectiveness recommendations.

Barriers and facilitators to accessing health and social care services for people living in homeless hostels: a qualitative study of the experiences of hostel staff and residents in UK hostels

INTRODUCTION

The number of people living in homeless hostels in the UK has steadily increased over the past decade. Despite people experiencing homelessness often having considerable health problems and a range of complex needs frequently in association with addictions, the experiences of hostel staff and residents especially in relation to accessing health and social care support have seldom been explored. The aim of this paper is to identify the barriers and facilitators to accessing health and social care services for people living in homeless hostels.

DESIGN

Exploratory qualitative baseline data were collected as part of an intervention to facilitate palliative care in-reach into hostels.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Interviews were conducted with 33 participants; 18 homeless hostel managers/support staff and 15 people experiencing homelessness, from six homeless hostels in London and Kent.

RESULTS

Three themes were identified (1) internal and external service barriers to health and social care access due to stigma, lack of communication and information sharing from services and assumptions around capacity and the role of the hostel, (2) the impact of lack of health and social care support on hostel staff leading to burnout, staff going beyond their job role and continuous support given to residents, (3) potential facilitators to health and social care access such in-reach and support from those who understand this population and hostel staff training.

DISCUSSION

Residents have multiple complex needs yet both hostel staff and residents face stigma and barriers accessing support from external services. Positive relationships were described between hostel residents and staff, which can be an essential step in engaging with other services. People experiencing homelessness urgently need better access to person-centred, trauma-informed support ideally via in-reach from people who understand the needs of the population.

Improving care transfers for homeless patients after hospital discharge: a realist evaluation

Background

In 2013, 70% of people who were homeless on admission to hospital were discharged back to the street without having their care and support needs addressed. In response, the UK government provided funding for 52 new specialist homeless hospital discharge schemes. This study employed RAMESES II (Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards) guidelines between September 2015 and 2019 to undertake a realist evaluation to establish what worked, for whom, under what circumstances and why. It was hypothesised that delivering outcomes linked to consistently safe, timely care transfers for homeless patients would depend on hospital discharge schemes implementing a series of high-impact changes (resource mechanisms). These changes encompassed multidisciplinary discharge co-ordination (delivered through clinically led homeless teams) and ‘step-down’ intermediate care. These facilitated time-limited care and support and alternative pathways out of hospital for people who could not go straight home.

Methods

The realist hypothesis was tested empirically and refined through three work packages. Work package 1 generated seven qualitative case studies, comparing sites with different types of specialist homeless hospital discharge schemes (n = 5) and those with no specialist discharge scheme (standard care) (n = 2). Methods of data collection included interviews with 77 practitioners and stakeholders and 70 people who were homeless on admission to hospital. A ‘data linkage’ process (work package 2) and an economic evaluation (work package 3) were also undertaken. The data linkage process resulted in data being collected on > 3882 patients from 17 discharge schemes across England. The study involved people with lived experience of homelessness in all stages.

Results

There was strong evidence to support our realist hypothesis. Specialist homeless hospital discharge schemes employing multidisciplinary discharge co-ordination and ‘step-down’ intermediate care were more effective and cost-effective than standard care. Specialist care was shown to reduce delayed transfers of care. Accident and emergency visits were also 18% lower among homeless patients discharged at a site with a step-down service than at those without. However, there was an impact on the effectiveness of the schemes when they were underfunded or when there was a shortage of permanent supportive housing and longer-term care and support. In these contexts, it remained (tacitly) accepted practice (across both standard and specialist care sites) to discharge homeless patients to the streets, rather than delay their transfer. We found little evidence that discharge schemes fired a change in reasoning with regard to the cultural distance that positions ‘homeless patients’ as somehow less vulnerable than other groups of patients. We refined our hypothesis to reflect that high-impact changes need to be underpinned by robust adult safeguarding.

Strengths and limitations

To our knowledge, this is the largest study of the outcomes of homeless patients discharged from hospital in the UK. Owing to issues with the comparator group, the effectiveness analysis undertaken for the data linkage was limited to comparisons of different types of specialist discharge scheme (rather than specialist vs. standard care).

Future work

There is a need to consider approaches that align with those for value or alliance-based commissioning where the evaluative gaze is shifted from discrete interventions to understanding how the system is working as a whole to deliver outcomes for a defined patient population.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 9, No. 17. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Hospital readmission among people experiencing homelessness in England: a cohort study of 2772 matched homeless and housed inpatients

BACKGROUND

Inpatients experiencing homelessness are often discharged to unstable accommodation or the street, which may increase the risk of readmission.

METHODS

We conducted a cohort study of 2772 homeless patients discharged after an emergency admission at 78 hospitals across England between November 2013 and November 2016. For each individual, we selected a housed patient who lived in a socioeconomically deprived area, matched on age, sex, hospital, and year of discharge. Counts of emergency readmissions, planned readmissions, and Accident and Emergency (A&E) visits post-discharge were derived from national hospital databases, with a median of 2.8 years of follow-up. We estimated the cumulative incidence of readmission over 12 months, and used negative binomial regression to estimate rate ratios.

RESULTS

After adjusting for health measured at the index admission, homeless patients had 2.49 (95% CI 2.29 to 2.70) times the rate of emergency readmission, 0.60 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.68) times the rate of planned readmission and 2.57 (95% CI 2.41 to 2.73) times the rate of A&E visits compared with housed patients. The 12-month risk of emergency readmission was higher for homeless patients (61%, 95% CI 59% to 64%) than housed patients (33%, 95% CI 30% to 36%); and the risk of planned readmission was lower for homeless patients (17%, 95% CI 14% to 19%) than for housed patients (30%, 95% CI 28% to 32%). While the risk of emergency readmission varied with the reason for admission for housed patients, for example being higher for admissions due to cancers than for those due to accidents, the risk was high across all causes for homeless patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital patients experiencing homelessness have high rates of emergency readmission that are not explained by health. This highlights the need for discharge arrangements that address their health, housing and social care needs.

Homelessness and integrated care: an application of integrated care knowledge to understanding services for wicked issues

Purpose

People experiencing homelessness often have complex needs requiring a range of support. These may include health problems (physical illness, mental health and/or substance misuse) as well as social, financial and housing needs. Addressing these issues requires a high degree of coordination amongst services. It is, thus, an example of a wicked policy issue. The purpose of this paper is to examine the challenge of integrating care in this context using evidence from an evaluation of English hospital discharge services for people experiencing homelessness.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper undertakes secondary analysis of qualitative data from a mixed methods evaluation of hospital discharge schemes and uses an established framework for understanding integrated care, the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care (RMIC), to help examine the complexities of integration in this area.

Findings

Supporting people experiencing homelessness to have a good discharge from hospital was confirmed as a wicked policy issue. The RMIC provided a strong framework for exploring the concept of integration, demonstrating how intertwined the elements of the framework are and, hence, that solutions need to be holistically organised across the RMIC. Limitations to integration were also highlighted, such as shortages of suitable accommodation and the impacts of policies in aligned areas of the welfare state.

Research limitations/implications

The data for this secondary analysis were not specifically focussed on integration which meant the themes in the RMIC could not be explored directly nor in as much depth. However, important issues raised in the data directly related to integration of support, and the RMIC emerged as a helpful organising framework for understanding integration in this wicked policy context.

Practical implications

Integration is happening in services directly concerned with the discharge from hospital of people experiencing homelessness. Key challenges to this integration are reported in terms of the RMIC, which would be a helpful framework for planning better integrated care for this area of practice.

Social implications

Addressing homelessness not only requires careful planning of integration of services at specific pathway points, such as hospital discharge, but also integration across wider systems. A complex set of challenges are discussed to help with planning the better integration desired, and the RMIC was seen as a helpful framework for thinking about key issues and their interactions.

Originality/value

This paper examines an application of integrated care knowledge to a key complex, or wicked policy issue.

The benefits and challenges of embedding specialist palliative care teams within homeless hostels to enhance support and learning: Perspectives from palliative care teams and hostel staff

BACKGROUND

People residing in UK homeless hostels experience extremely high rates of multi-morbidity, frailty and age-related conditions at a young age. However, they seldom receive palliative care with the burden of support falling to hostel staff.

AIM

To evaluate a model embedding palliative specialists, trained as 'homelessness champions', into hostels for two half-days a month to provide support to staff and residents and facilitate a multidisciplinary approach to care.

DESIGN

An exploratory qualitative design.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Four homeless hostels in London, UK, including nine hostel managers/support staff and seven palliative care specialists (five nurses and two social workers).

RESULTS

Benefits to introducing the model included: developing partnership working between hostel staff and palliative care specialists, developing a holistic palliative ethos within the hostels and improving how hostel staff seek support and connect with local external services. Challenges to implementation included limited time and resources, and barriers related to primary care.

CONCLUSION

This is the first evaluation of embedding palliative care specialists within homeless hostels. Inequity in health and social care access was highlighted with evidence of benefit of this additional support for both hostel staff and residents. Considering COVID-19, future research should explore remote ways of working including providing in-reach support to homelessness services from a range of services and organisations.

Secondary care usage and characteristics of hospital inpatients referred to a UK homeless health team: a retrospective service evaluation

Background

UK “Pathway” teams offer specialist hospital care coordination for people experiencing homelessness. Emergency healthcare use is high among homeless people, yet “homelessness” is not routinely coded in National Health Service (NHS) data. Pathway team records provide an opportunity to assess patterns in admissions and outcomes for inpatients identified as homeless.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of patients referred to “Pathway” homelessness teams in seven UK hospitals to explore the patterns of hospital admission, morbidity, secondary healthcare utilisation and housing status. Each patient was individually identified as experiencing homelessness. Within a six-month period, demographic data, reason for admission, morbidity, mortality and secondary care hospital usage 120-days before and 120-days after the index admission was collected.

Results

A total of 1009 patients were referred, resulting in 1135 admissions. Most admissions had an acute physical health need (94.9%). Co-morbid mental illness and/or substance misuse was common (55.7%). Reasons for admission included mental and behavioral disorders (overdose, alcohol withdrawal or depression, 28.3%), external causes of morbidity and mortality (assault or trauma, 18.7%), and injury, poisoning and external causes (head injury, falls and fractures, 12.4%). Unplanned Emergency Department attendances reduced after index admission and unplanned hospital admissions increased slightly. Planned admissions doubled and total bed days increased. Housing status was maintained or improved for over 60% of inpatients upon discharge. Within 12 months of index admission, 50 patients (5%) died, 15 deaths (30%) occurred during the index admission.

Conclusions

Disengagement with health services is common among homeless people. Many deaths are due to treatable medical conditions (heart disease, pneumonia, cancer). Observed increases in planned admissions suggests intervention from Pathway teams facilitates necessary investigations and treatment for homeless people. Equity, parity of care, and value should be inbuilt interventions for inclusion health groups and evaluations need to move beyond simply seeking cost reductions.

Causes of death among homeless people: a population-based cross-sectional study of linked hospitalisation and mortality data in England

Background: Homelessness has increased by 165% since 2010 in England, with evidence from many settings that those affected experience high levels of mortality. In this paper we examine the contribution of different causes of death to overall mortality in homeless people recently admitted to hospitals in England with specialist integrated homeless health and care (SIHHC) schemes.  Methods: We undertook an analysis of linked hospital admission records and mortality data for people attending any one of 17 SIHHC schemes between 1st November 2013 and 30th November 2016. Our primary outcome was death, which we analysed in subgroups of 10th version international classification of disease (ICD-10) specific deaths; and deaths from amenable causes. We compared our results to a sample of people living in areas of high social deprivation (IMD5 group). Results: We collected data on 3,882 individual homeless hospital admissions that were linked to 600 deaths. The median age of death was 51.6 years (interquartile range 42.7-60.2) for SIHHC and 71.5 for the IMD5 (60.67-79.0).  The top three underlying causes of death by ICD-10 chapter in the SIHHC group were external causes of death (21.7%; 130/600), cancer (19.0%; 114/600) and digestive disease (19.0%; 114/600).  The percentage of deaths due to an amenable cause after age and sex weighting was 30.2% in the homeless SIHHC group (181/600) compared to 23.0% in the IMD5 group (578/2,512). Conclusion: Nearly one in three homeless deaths were due to causes amenable to timely and effective health care. The high burden of amenable deaths highlights the extreme health harms of homelessness and the need for greater emphasis on prevention of homelessness and early healthcare interventions.

Improving hospital discharge arrangements for people who are homeless: A realist synthesis of the intermediate care literature

This review presents a realist synthesis of "what works and why" in intermediate care for people who are homeless. The overall aim was to update an earlier synthesis of intermediate care by capturing new evidence from a recent UK government funding initiative (the "Homeless Hospital Discharge Fund"). The initiative made resources available to the charitable sector to enable partnership working with the National Health Service (NHS) in order to improve hospital discharge arrangements for people who are homeless. The synthesis adopted the RAMESES guidelines and reporting standards. Electronic searches were carried out for peer-reviewed articles published in English from 2000 to 2016. Local evaluations and the grey literature were also included. The inclusion criteria was that articles and reports should describe "interventions" that encompassed most of the key characteristics of intermediate care as previously defined in the academic literature. Searches yielded 47 articles and reports. Most of these originated in the UK or the USA and fell within the realist quality rating of "thick description". The synthesis involved using this new evidence to interrogate the utility of earlier programme theories. Overall, the results confirmed the importance of (i) collaborative care planning, (ii) reablement and (iii) integrated working as key to effective intermediate care delivery. However, the additional evidence drawn from the field of homelessness highlighted the potential for some theory refinements. First, that "psychologically informed" approaches to relationship building may be necessary to ensure that service users are meaningfully engaged in collaborative care planning and second, that integrated working could be managed differently so that people are not "handed over" at the point at which the intermediate care episode ends. This was theorised as key to ensuring that ongoing care arrangements do not break down and that gains are not lost to the person or the system vis-à-vis the prevention of readmission to hospital.

What works in inclusion health: overview of effective interventions for marginalised and excluded populations

Inclusion health is a service, research, and policy agenda that aims to prevent and redress health and social inequities among the most vulnerable and excluded populations. We did an evidence synthesis of health and social interventions for inclusion health target populations, including people with experiences of homelessness, drug use, imprisonment, and sex work. These populations often have multiple overlapping risk factors and extreme levels of morbidity and mortality. We identified numerous interventions to improve physical and mental health, and substance use; however, evidence is scarce for structural interventions, including housing, employment, and legal support that can prevent exclusion and promote recovery. Dedicated resources and better collaboration with the affected populations are needed to realise the benefits of existing interventions. Research must inform the benefits of early intervention and implementation of policies to address the upstream causes of exclusion, such as adverse childhood experiences and poverty.

End-of-life care for homeless people: A qualitative analysis exploring the challenges to access and provision of palliative care

BACKGROUND

Being homeless or vulnerably housed is associated with death at a young age, frequently related to medical problems complicated by drug or alcohol dependence. Homeless people experience high symptom burden at the end of life, yet palliative care service use is limited.

AIM

To explore the views and experiences of current and formerly homeless people, frontline homelessness staff (from hostels, day centres and outreach teams) and health- and social-care providers, regarding challenges to supporting homeless people with advanced ill health, and to make suggestions for improving care.

DESIGN

Thematic analysis of data collected using focus groups and interviews.

PARTICIPANTS

Single homeless people ( n = 28), formerly homeless people ( n = 10), health- and social-care providers ( n = 48), hostel staff ( n = 30) and outreach staff ( n = 10).

RESULTS

This research documents growing concern that many homeless people are dying in unsupported, unacceptable situations. It highlights the complexities of identifying who is palliative and lack of appropriate places of care for people who are homeless with high support needs, particularly in combination with substance misuse issues.

CONCLUSION

Due to the lack of alternatives, homeless people with advanced ill health often remain in hostels. Conflict between the recovery-focused nature of many services and the realities of health and illness for often young homeless people result in a lack of person-centred care. Greater multidisciplinary working, extended in-reach into hostels from health and social services and training for all professional groups along with more access to appropriate supported accommodation are required to improve care for homeless people with advanced ill health.

Outcomes of specialist discharge coordination and intermediate care schemes for patients who are homeless: analysis protocol for a population-based historical cohort

INTRODUCTION

People who are homeless often experience poor hospital discharge arrangements, reflecting ongoing care and housing needs. Specialist integrated homeless health and care provision (SIHHC) schemes have been developed and implemented to facilitate the safe and timely discharge of homeless patients from hospital. Our study aims to investigate the health outcomes of patients who were homeless and seen by a selection of SIHHC services.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Our study will employ a historical population-based cohort in England. We will examine health outcomes among three groups of adults: (1) homeless patients seen by specialist discharge schemes during their hospital admission; (2) homeless patients not seen by a specialist scheme and (3) admitted patients who live in deprived neighbourhoods and were not recorded as being homeless. Primary outcomes will be: time from discharge to next hospital inpatient admission; time from discharge to next accident and emergency attendance and 28-day emergency readmission. Outcome data will be generated through linkage to hospital admissions data (Hospital Episode Statistics) and mortality data for November 2013 to November 2016. Multivariable regression will be used to model the relationship between the study comparison groups and each of the outcomes.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Approval has been obtained from the National Health Service (NHS) Confidentiality Advisory Group (reference 16/CAG/0021) to undertake this work using unconsented identifiable data. Health Research Authority Research Ethics approval (REC 16/EE/0018) has been obtained in addition to local research and development approvals for data collection at NHS sites. We will feedback the results of our study to our advisory group of people who have lived experience of homelessness and seek their suggestions on ways to improve or take this work further for their benefit. We will disseminate our findings to SIHHC schemes through a series of regional workshops.

Challenges to discussing palliative care with people experiencing homelessness: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

To explore the views and experiences of people who are homeless and those supporting them regarding conversations and approaches to palliative care SETTING: Data were collected between October 2015 and October 2016 in homeless hostels and day centres and with staff from primary and secondary healthcare providers and social care services from three London boroughs.

PARTICIPANTS

People experiencing homelessness (n=28), formerly homeless people (n=10), health and social care providers (n=48), hostel staff (n=30) and outreach staff (n=10). METHODS: In this qualitative descriptive study, participants were recruited to interviews and focus groups across three London boroughs. Views and experiences of end-of-life care were explored with people with personal experience of homelessness, health and social care professionals and hostel and outreach staff. Saturation was reached when no new themes emerged from discussions.

RESULTS

28 focus groups and 10 individual interviews were conducted. Participants highlighted that conversations exploring future care preferences and palliative care with people experiencing homelessness are rare. Themes identified as challenges to such conversations included attitudes to death; the recovery focused nature of services for people experiencing homelessness; uncertainty regarding prognosis and place of care; and fear of negative impact.

CONCLUSIONS

This research highlights the need for a different approach to supporting people who are homeless and are experiencing advanced ill health, one that incorporates uncertainty and promotes well-being, dignity and choice. We propose parallel planning and mapping as a way of working with uncertainty. We acknowledge that these approaches will not always be straightforward, nor will they be suitable for everyone, yet moving the focus of conversations about the future away from death and dying, towards the present and the future may facilitate conversations and enable the wishes of people who are homeless to be known and explored.

Randomised controlled trial of GP-led in-hospital management of homeless people ('Pathway')

Homeless people have complex problems. GP enhanced care (Pathway) has shown benefits. We performed a randomised, -parallel arm trial at two large inner city hospitals. Inpatient homeless adults were randomly allocated to either standard care (all management by the hospital-based clinical team) or enhanced care with input from a homeless care team. The hospital data system provided healthcare usage information, and we used questionnaires to assess quality of life. 206 patients were allocated to enhanced care and 204 to usual care. Length of stay (up to 90 days after admission) did not differ between groups (standard care 14.0 days, enhanced care 13.3 days). Average reattendance at the emergency department within a year was 5.8 visits in the standard care group and 4.8 visits with enhanced care, but this decrease was not significant. -Quality of life scores after discharge (in 108 patients) improved with enhanced care (EQ-5D-5L score increased by 0.12 [95% CI 0.032 to 0.22] compared wtih 0.03 [-0.1 to 0.15; p=0.076] with standard care). The proportion of people sleeping on the streets after discharge was 14.6% in the standard care arm and 3.8% in the enhanced care arm (p=0.034). The quality-of-life cost per quality-adjusted life-year was £26,000. The Pathway approach doesn't alter length of stay but improves quality of life and reduces street -homelessness.

Homelessness. In from the cold

A multidisciplinary team formed in January to help rough sleepers in Leicester has found accommodation for half the clients considered. The average age of clients is 35, and three-quarters are male. The initiative has built on existing joint working partnerships in Leicester.