BACKGROUND: Multiple hospital admissions, especially those related to chronic disease, represent a particular challenge to the acute health care sector in Australia.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a nurse-led chronic disease management model of transitional care reduced readmissions to acute care.
DESIGN: A quasi-experimental controlled trial.
SETTING: A large tertiary metropolitan teaching hospital. Participants: 166 general medical patients aged > or = 65 years with either a history of readmissions to acute care or multiple medical comorbidities.
INTERVENTION: Implementation of a chronic disease management model of transitional care aimed at improving patient management and reducing readmissions to acute care.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Readmission rates and emergency department presentation rates at 3-and 6-month follow up. Secondary outcome measures include quality of life, discharge destination, and primary health care service utilisation.
RESULTS: There was no difference in readmission rates, emergency department presentation rates, quality of life, discharge destination or primary health care service utilisation. The difficulties inherent in evaluating this type of multifactorial intervention are discussed and consideration is given to patient factors, the difficulty of influencing readmission rates, and local system issues.
CONCLUSION: The outcomes of this study reflect the tension that exists between implementing multifaceted integrated health service programs and attempting to evaluate them within complex and changing environments using robust research methodologies.
BACKGROUND: Both randomized and nonrandomized controlled studies have linked congestive heart failure (CHF) case management (CM) to decreased readmissions and improved outcomes in mostly homogeneous settings. The objective of this randomized controlled trial was to test the effect of CHF CM on the 90-day readmission rate in a more heterogeneous setting. METHODS: A total of 287 patients admitted to the hospital with the primary or secondary diagnosis of CHF, left ventricular dysfunction of less than 40%, or radiologic evidence of pulmonary edema for which they underwent diuresis were randomized. The intervention consisted of 4 major components: early discharge planning, patient and family CHF education, 12 weeks of telephone follow-up, and promotion of optimal CHF medications. RESULTS: The 90-day readmission rates were equal for the CM and usual care groups (37%). Total inpatient and outpatient median costs and readmission median cost were reduced 14% and 26%, respectively, for the intervention group. Patients in the CM group were more likely to be taking CHF medication at target doses, but dosages did not increase significantly throughout 12 weeks. Although both groups took their medications as prescribed equally well, the rest of the adherence to treatment plan was significantly better in the CM group. Subgroup analysis of patients who lived locally and saw a cardiologist showed a significant decrease in CHF readmissions for the intervention group (P =.03). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest several limitations to the generalizability of the CHF CM-improved outcome link in a heterogeneous setting. One explanation is that the lack of coordinated system supports and varied accessibility to care in an extended, nonnetworked physician setting limits the effectiveness of the CM.
CONTEXT: Changes in the healthcare system have resulted in shortened hospital stays, moving the focus of care from the hospital to the home. Patients are discharged post-operatively with ongoing needs, and whether they receive nursing care post-hospitalization can influence their recovery and survival. Little information is available about the factors that influence outcomes, including the survival of older cancer patients after cancer surgery.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the length of survival of older post-surgical cancer patients who received a specialized home care intervention provided by advanced practice nurses (APNs) with that of patients who received usual follow-up care in an ambulatory setting. We also assessed potential predictors of survival in terms of depressive symptoms, symptom distress, functional status, comorbidities, length of hospital stay, age of patient, and stage of disease.
DESIGN: A randomized controlled intervention study.
SETTING: Discharged older cancer patients after surgery at a Comprehensive Cancer Center in southeastern Pennsylvania.
PATIENTS: Three hundred seventy-five patients aged 60 to 92, newly diagnosed with solid cancers, were treated surgically between February 1993 and December 1995. One hundred ninety patients were randomized to the intervention groups and 185 to the usual care group.
INTERVENTION: The intervention was a standardized protocol that consisted of standard assessment and management post-surgical guidelines, doses of instructional content, and schedules of contacts. The intervention lasted 4 weeks and consisted of three home visits and five telephone contacts provided by APNs. Both the patients and their family caregivers received comprehensive clinical assessments, monitoring, and teaching, including skills training.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Time from enrollment of patients into the study until death or last date known alive at the end of November 1996.
RESULTS: During the 44-month follow-up period, 93 (24.8%) of 375 patients died. Forty-one (22%) of those who died were patients in the specialized home care intervention group, compared with 52 (28%) in the usual care group. Stage of disease at diagnosis differed between the two groups at baseline (38% late stage patients in the intervention group compared with 26% in the control group, P = .01), so stratified analysis was performed. Overall, the specialized home care intervention group was found to have increased survival (P = .002 using stratified log-rank test). Among early stage patients only, there was no difference in survival between the intervention and control groups. Among late stage patients, there was improved survival in the intervention group. For example, 2-year survival among late stage intervention group cases was 67% compared with 40% among control cases. When Cox's proportional hazard model was used to adjust for significant baseline covariates, the relative hazard of death in the usual care group was 2.04 (CI 1.33 to 3.12; P = .001) after adjusting for stage of disease and surgical hospitalization length of stay.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first empirical study of post-surgical cancer patients to link a specialized home care intervention by advanced practice nurses with improved survival. Additional research is needed to test home care interventions aimed at maintaining quality of life outcomes and their effects on survival of post-surgical cancer patients.
OBJECTIVES: To examine the impact of an interdisciplinary, collaborative practice intervention involving a primary care physician, a nurse, and a social worker for community-dwelling seniors with chronic illnesses.
METHODS: A concurrent, controlled cohort study of 543 patients in 18 private office practices of primary care physicians was conducted. The intervention group received care from their primary care physician working with a registered nurse and a social worker, while the control group received care as usual from their primary care physician. The outcome measures included changes in number of hospital admissions, readmissions, office visits, emergency department visits, skilled nursing facility admissions, home care visits, and changes in patient self-rated physical, emotional, and social functioning.
RESULTS: From 1992 (baseline year) to 1993, the two groups did not differ in service use or in self-reported health status. From 1993 to 1994, the hospitalization rate of the control group increased from 0.34 to 0.52, while the rate in the intervention group stayed at baseline (P= .03). The proportion of intervention patients with readmissions decreased from 6% to 4%, while the rate in the control group increased from 4% to 9% (P=.03). In the intervention group, mean office visits to all physicians fell by 1.5 visits compared with a 0.5-visit increase for the control group (P=.003). The patients in the intervention group reported an increase in social activities compared with the control group's decrease (P=.04). With fewer hospital admissions, average per-patient savings for 1994 were estimated at $90, inclusive of the intervention's cost but exclusive of savings from fewer office visits.
CONCLUSIONS: This model of primary care collaborative practice shows potential for reducing utilization and maintaining health status for seniors with chronic illnesses. Future work should explore the specific benefit accruing from physician involvement in the collaborative practice team.
Case management has been widely used with the intent of improving clinical outcomes while reducing medical costs. Studies of case management, however, have shown variable effectiveness. This study assessed the impact of a state health department case management program on hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, and preventive services among persons with diabetes receiving Medicaid fee-for-service health care. The patients enrolled in the non-disease-specific case management program were low-income, chronically ill and medically complex. Nurse case managers authorized and coordinated services in the home for these patients and established links to health-care professionals and community resources. A retrospective, non-randomized, controlled time series design using paid claims files was employed. Case management reduced admissions and hospital days but did not significantly impact ED visits or use of preventive services.
CONTEXT: Comprehensive discharge planning by advanced practice nurses has demonstrated short-term reductions in readmissions of elderly patients, but the benefits of more intensive follow-up of hospitalized elders at risk for poor outcomes after discharge has not been studied. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness of an advanced practice nurse-centered discharge planning and home follow-up intervention for elders at risk for hospital readmissions. DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial with follow-up at 2, 6, 12, and 24 weeks after index hospital discharge. SETTING: Two urban, academically affiliated hospitals in Philadelphia, Pa. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible patients were 65 years or older, hospitalized between August 1992 and March 1996, and had 1 of several medical and surgical reasons for admission. INTERVENTION: Intervention group patients received a comprehensive discharge planning and home follow-up protocol designed specifically for elders at risk for poor outcomes after discharge and implemented by advanced practice nurses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Readmissions, time to first readmission, acute care visits after discharge, costs, functional status, depression, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 363 patients (186 in the control group and 177 in the intervention group) were enrolled in the study; 70% of intervention and 74% of control subjects completed the trial. Mean age of sample was 75 years; 50% were men and 45% were black. By week 24 after the index hospital discharge, control group patients were more likely than intervention group patients to be readmitted at least once (37.1 % vs 20.3 %; P<.001). Fewer intervention group patients had multiple readmissions (6.2% vs 14.5%; P = .01) and the intervention group had fewer hospital days per patient (1.53 vs 4.09 days; P<.001). Time to first readmission was increased in the intervention group (P<.001). At 24 weeks after discharge, total Medicare reimbursements for health services were about $1.2 million in the control group vs about $0.6 million in the intervention group (P<.001). There were no significant group differences in post-discharge acute care visits, functional status, depression, or patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: An advanced practice nurse-centered discharge planning and home care intervention for at-risk hospitalized elders reduced readmissions, lengthened the time between discharge and readmission, and decreased the costs of providing health care. Thus, the intervention demonstrated great potential in promoting positive outcomes for hospitalized elders at high risk for rehospitalization while reducing costs.
BACKGROUND: For chronically ill patients, readmission to the hospital can be frequent and costly. We studied the effect of an intervention designed to increase access to primary care after discharge from the hospital, with the goals of reducing readmissions and emergency department visits and increasing patients' quality of life and satisfaction with care. METHODS: In a multicenter randomized, controlled trial at nine Veterans Affairs Medical Centers, we randomly assigned 1396 veterans hospitalized with diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or congestive heart failure to receive either usual care or an intensive primary care intervention. The intervention involved close follow-up by a nurse and a primary care physician, beginning before discharge and continuing for the next six months. RESULTS: The patients were severely ill. Half of those with congestive heart failure (504 patients) had disease in New York Heart Association class III or IV; 30 percent of those with diabetes (751 patients) had end-organ damage; and a quarter of those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (583 patients) required home oxygen treatment or oral corticosteroids. The patients had extremely poor quality-of-life scores. Although they received more intensive primary care than the controls, the patients in the intervention group had significantly higher rates of readmission (0.19 vs 0.14 per month, P = 0.005) and more days of rehospitalization (10.2 vs 8.8, P = 0.041). The patients in the intervention group were more satisfied with their care (P < 0.001), but there was no difference between the study groups in quality-of-life scores, which remained very low (P = 0.53). CONCLUSIONS: For veterans discharged from Veterans Affairs hospitals, the primary care intervention we studied increased rather than decreased the rate of rehospitalization, although patients in the intervention group were more satisfied with their care.
BACKGROUND: Congestive heart failure is the most common indication for admission to the hospital among older adults. Behavioral factors, such as poor compliance with treatment, frequently contribute to exacerbations of heart failure, a fact suggesting that many admissions could be prevented. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized trial of the effect of a nurse-directed, multidisciplinary intervention on rates of readmission within 90 days of hospital discharge, quality of life, and costs of care for high-risk patients 70 years of age or older who were hospitalized with congestive heart failure. The intervention consisted of comprehensive education of the patient and family, a prescribed diet, social-service consultation and planning for an early discharge, a review of medications, and intensive follow-up. RESULTS: Survival for 90 days without readmission, the primary outcome measure, was achieved in 91 of the 142 patients in the treatment group, as compared with 75 of the 140 patients in the control group, who received conventional care (P = 0.09). There were 94 readmissions in the control group and 53 in the treatment group (risk ratio, 0.56; P = 0.02). The number of readmissions for heart failure was reduced by 56.2 percent in the treatment group (54 vs. 24, P = 0.04), whereas the number of readmissions for other causes was reduced by 28.5 percent (40 vs. 29, P not significant). In the control group, 23 patients (16.4 percent) had more than one readmission, as compared with 9 patients (6.3 percent) in the treatment group (risk ratio, 0.39; P = 0.01). In a subgroup of 126 patients, quality-of-life scores at 90 days improved more from base line for patients in the treatment group (P = 0.001). Because of the reduction in hospital admissions, the overall cost of care was $460 less per patient in the treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: A nurse-directed, multidisciplinary intervention can improve quality of life and reduce hospital use and medical costs for elderly patients with congestive heart failure.
The study included patients admitted three times or more. Patients were 45 years of age or older and lived within 25 miles of the hospital. Patients were randomly assigned to a control group and those that received home visits. Patients were visited by the RN within 7 days after discharge. Each patient had nine visits over the next 3 months. Seventy-five patients participated in this study. The average age of the sample was 66.12 +/- 16 years. There was an equal number of men and women in the two groups. The nurses made 130 home visits. During these visits, 38 interventions were accomplished. These interventions allowed the patients to remain at home. Prior to this study, the incidence of readmission for these patients was notable. This study showed that home visits with appropriate interventions by military staff nurses reduces the incidence of rehospitalization.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility and potential impact of a non-pharmacologic multidisciplinary intervention for reducing hospital readmissions in elderly patients with congestive heart failure. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized clinical trial, with 2:1 assignment to the study intervention or usual care. SETTING: 550-bed secondary and tertiary care university teaching hospital. PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS: 98 patients > or = 70 years of age (mean 79 +/- 6 years) admitted with documented congestive heart failure. INTERVENTIONS: Comprehensive multidisciplinary treatment strategy consisting of intensive teaching by a geriatric cardiac nurse, a detailed review of medications by a geriatric cardiologist with specific recommendations designed to improve medication compliance and reduce side effects, early consultation with social services to facilitate discharge planning, dietary teaching by a hospital dietician, and close follow-up after discharge by home care and the study team. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: All patients were followed for 90 days after initial hospital discharge. The primary study endpoints were rehospitalization within the 90-day interval and the cumulative number of days hospitalized during follow-up. The 90-day readmission rate was 33.3% (21.7%-44.9%) for the patients receiving the study intervention (n = 63) compared with 45.7% (29.2%-62.2%) for the control patients (n = 35). The mean number of days hospitalized was 4.3 +/- 1.1 (2.1-6.5) for the treated patients vs 5.7 +/- 2.0 (1.8-9.6) for the usual-care patients. In a prospectively defined subgroup of patients at intermediate risk for readmission (n = 61), readmissions were reduced by 42.2% (from 47.6% to 27.5%; p = 0.10), and the average number of hospital days during follow-up decreased from 6.7 +/- 3.2 days to 3.2 +/- 1.2 days (p = NS). CONCLUSIONS: These pilot data suggest that a comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach to reducing repetitive hospitalizations in elderly patients with congestive heart failure may lead to a reduction in readmissions and hospital days, particularly in patients at moderate risk for early rehospitalization. Further evaluation of this treatment strategy, including an assessment of the cost-effectiveness, is warranted.
Multiple hospital admissions, especially those related to chronic disease, represent a particular challenge to the acute health care sector in Australia.
OBJECTIVE:
To determine whether a nurse-led chronic disease management model of transitional care reduced readmissions to acute care.
DESIGN:
A quasi-experimental controlled trial.
SETTING:
A large tertiary metropolitan teaching hospital. Participants: 166 general medical patients aged > or = 65 years with either a history of readmissions to acute care or multiple medical comorbidities.
INTERVENTION:
Implementation of a chronic disease management model of transitional care aimed at improving patient management and reducing readmissions to acute care.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:
Readmission rates and emergency department presentation rates at 3-and 6-month follow up. Secondary outcome measures include quality of life, discharge destination, and primary health care service utilisation.
RESULTS:
There was no difference in readmission rates, emergency department presentation rates, quality of life, discharge destination or primary health care service utilisation. The difficulties inherent in evaluating this type of multifactorial intervention are discussed and consideration is given to patient factors, the difficulty of influencing readmission rates, and local system issues.
CONCLUSION:
The outcomes of this study reflect the tension that exists between implementing multifaceted integrated health service programs and attempting to evaluate them within complex and changing environments using robust research methodologies.
