Limits...
Can municipality-based post-discharge follow-up visits including a general practitioner reduce early readmission among the fragile elderly (65+ years old)? A randomized controlled trial.

Thygesen LC, Fokdal S, Gjørup T, Taylor RS, Zwisler AD, Prevention of Early Readmission Research Gro - Scand J Prim Health Care (2015)

Bottom Line: The primary outcome was readmission within 30 days.No significant differences were found for any other secondary outcomes except that the intervention group received more municipal nursing services.The intervention as delivered had no effect on readmission or subsequent use of primary or secondary health care services.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark , Copenhagen , Denmark.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To evaluate how municipality-based post-discharge follow-up visits including a general practitioner and municipal nurse affect early readmission among high-risk older people discharged from a hospital department of internal medicine.

Design and setting: Centrally randomized single-centre pragmatic controlled trial comparing intervention and usual care with investigator-blinded outcome assessment.

Intervention: The intervention was home visits with a general practitioner and municipal nurse within seven days of discharge focusing on medication, rehabilitation plan, functional level, and need for further health care initiatives. The visit was concluded by planning one or two further visits. Controls received standard health care services.

Patients: People aged 65 + years discharged from Holbæk University Hospital, Denmark, in 2012 considered at high risk of readmission.

Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was readmission within 30 days. Secondary outcomes at 30 and 180 days included readmission, primary health care, and municipal services. Outcomes were register-based and analysis used the intention-to-treat principle.

Results: A total of 270 and 261 patients were randomized to intervention and control groups, respectively. The groups were similar in baseline characteristics. In all 149 planned discharge follow-up visits were carried out (55%). Within 30 days, 24% of the intervention group and 23% of the control group were readmitted (p = 0.93). No significant differences were found for any other secondary outcomes except that the intervention group received more municipal nursing services.

Conclusion: This municipality-based follow-up intervention was only feasible in half the planned visits. The intervention as delivered had no effect on readmission or subsequent use of primary or secondary health care services.

Show MeSH
Time to (A) first readmission, (B) first unplanned readmission, and (C) first readmission to a department of medicine.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4834505&req=5

Figure 2: Time to (A) first readmission, (B) first unplanned readmission, and (C) first readmission to a department of medicine.

Mentions: The intervention and control groups did not differ in the primary outcome, with 23% of control patients and 24% of intervention patients readmitted within 30 days of discharge (p = 0.93) (Table III). The number of admissions and length of stay were also similar. The survival curve for time until first readmission also showed no difference between the two groups during the first 30 days (Figure 2A) (log-rank test, p = 0.70).


Can municipality-based post-discharge follow-up visits including a general practitioner reduce early readmission among the fragile elderly (65+ years old)? A randomized controlled trial.

Thygesen LC, Fokdal S, Gjørup T, Taylor RS, Zwisler AD, Prevention of Early Readmission Research Gro - Scand J Prim Health Care (2015)

Time to (A) first readmission, (B) first unplanned readmission, and (C) first readmission to a department of medicine.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4834505&req=5

Figure 2: Time to (A) first readmission, (B) first unplanned readmission, and (C) first readmission to a department of medicine.
Mentions: The intervention and control groups did not differ in the primary outcome, with 23% of control patients and 24% of intervention patients readmitted within 30 days of discharge (p = 0.93) (Table III). The number of admissions and length of stay were also similar. The survival curve for time until first readmission also showed no difference between the two groups during the first 30 days (Figure 2A) (log-rank test, p = 0.70).

Bottom Line: The primary outcome was readmission within 30 days.No significant differences were found for any other secondary outcomes except that the intervention group received more municipal nursing services.The intervention as delivered had no effect on readmission or subsequent use of primary or secondary health care services.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark , Copenhagen , Denmark.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To evaluate how municipality-based post-discharge follow-up visits including a general practitioner and municipal nurse affect early readmission among high-risk older people discharged from a hospital department of internal medicine.

Design and setting: Centrally randomized single-centre pragmatic controlled trial comparing intervention and usual care with investigator-blinded outcome assessment.

Intervention: The intervention was home visits with a general practitioner and municipal nurse within seven days of discharge focusing on medication, rehabilitation plan, functional level, and need for further health care initiatives. The visit was concluded by planning one or two further visits. Controls received standard health care services.

Patients: People aged 65 + years discharged from Holbæk University Hospital, Denmark, in 2012 considered at high risk of readmission.

Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was readmission within 30 days. Secondary outcomes at 30 and 180 days included readmission, primary health care, and municipal services. Outcomes were register-based and analysis used the intention-to-treat principle.

Results: A total of 270 and 261 patients were randomized to intervention and control groups, respectively. The groups were similar in baseline characteristics. In all 149 planned discharge follow-up visits were carried out (55%). Within 30 days, 24% of the intervention group and 23% of the control group were readmitted (p = 0.93). No significant differences were found for any other secondary outcomes except that the intervention group received more municipal nursing services.

Conclusion: This municipality-based follow-up intervention was only feasible in half the planned visits. The intervention as delivered had no effect on readmission or subsequent use of primary or secondary health care services.

Show MeSH