Szczepura Ala, Nelson Sara, Wild Deidre
Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, West Midlands, UK.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2008 Dec 22;8:269. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-8-269.
A joint NHS-Local Authority initiative in England designed to provide a dedicated nursing and physiotherapy in-reach team (IRT) to four residential care homes has been evaluated. The IRT supported 131 residents and maintained 15 'virtual' beds for specialist nursing in these care homes.
Data captured prospectively (July 2005 to June 2007) included: numbers of referrals; reason for referral; outcome (e.g. admission to IRT bed, short-term IRT support); length of stay in IRT; prevented hospital admissions; early hospital discharges; avoided nursing home transfers; and detection of unrecognised illnesses. An economic analysis was undertaken.
733 referrals were made during the 2 years (range 0.5 to 13.0 per resident per annum) resulting in a total of 6,528 visits. Two thirds of referrals aimed at maintaining the resident's independence in the care home. According to expert panel assessment, 197 hospital admissions were averted over the period; 20 early discharges facilitated; and 28 resident transfers to a nursing home prevented. Detection of previously unrecognised illnesses accounted for a high number of visits. Investment in IRT equalled 44.38 pounds per resident per week. Savings through reduced hospital admissions, early discharges, delayed transfers to nursing homes, and identification of previously unrecognised illnesses are conservatively estimated to produce a final reduction in care cost of 6.33 pounds per resident per week. A sensitivity analysis indicates this figure might range from a weekly overall saving of 36.90 pounds per resident to a 'worst case' estimate of 2.70 pounds extra expenditure per resident per week.Evaluation early in implementation may underestimate some cost-saving activities and greater savings may emerge over a longer time period. Similarly, IRT costs may reduce over time due to the potential for refinement of team without major loss in effectiveness.
Introduction of a specialist nursing in-reach team for residential homes is at least cost neutral and, in all probability, cost saving. Further benefits include development of new skills in the care home workforce and enhanced quality of care. Residents are enabled to stay in familiar surroundings rather than unnecessarily spending time in hospital or being transferred to a higher dependency nursing home setting.
对英国国民健康服务体系(NHS)与地方当局联合发起的一项倡议进行了评估,该倡议旨在为四家养老院提供一支专门的护理和物理治疗内驻团队(IRT)。IRT为这些养老院的131名居民提供了支持,并维持了15张专科护理“虚拟”床位。
前瞻性收集的数据(2005年7月至2007年6月)包括:转诊数量;转诊原因;结果(如入住IRT床位、接受短期IRT支持);在IRT的住院时间;避免的住院情况;提前出院情况;避免的养老院转院情况;以及未被识别疾病的发现情况。进行了经济分析。
在这两年中进行了733次转诊(每位居民每年0.5至13.0次),导致总共6528次就诊。三分之二的转诊旨在维持居民在养老院的独立性。根据专家小组评估,在此期间避免了197次住院;促成了20次提前出院;并防止了28名居民转至养老院。发现先前未被识别的疾病占了大量就诊次数。对IRT的投资为每位居民每周44.38英镑。通过减少住院、提前出院、延迟转至养老院以及识别先前未被识别的疾病而节省的费用保守估计为每位居民每周最终减少护理成本6.33英镑。敏感性分析表明,这个数字可能在每位居民每周总体节省36.90英镑到“最坏情况”估计的每位居民每周额外支出2.70英镑之间。在实施初期进行评估可能会低估一些节省成本的活动,并且在更长的时间段内可能会出现更大的节省。同样,由于有可能在不严重损失有效性的情况下优化团队,IRT成本可能会随着时间降低。
为养老院引入专科护理内驻团队至少成本持平,而且很可能节省成本。进一步的好处包括培养养老院工作人员的新技能以及提高护理质量。居民能够留在熟悉的环境中,而不必不必要地在医院花费时间或被转至依赖性更高的养老院环境。