Labrosciano Clementine, Air Tracy, Tavella Rosanna, Beltrame John F, Ranasinghe Isuru
Health Performance and Policy Research Unit, Basil Hetzel Institute for Translational Research, 37A Woodville Road, Woodville South, SA 5011, Australia. Email:
Translational Vascular Function Research Collaborative, Basil Hetzel Institute for Translational Research, 37A Woodville Road, Woodville South, SA 5011, Australia. Email:
Aust Health Rev. 2020 Feb;44(1):93-103. doi: 10.1071/AH18028.
Objective International studies suggest high rates of readmissions after cardiovascular hospitalisations, but the burden in Australia is uncertain. We summarised the characteristics, frequency, risk factors of readmissions and interventions to reduce readmissions following cardiovascular hospitalisation in Australia. Methods A scoping review of the published literature from 2000-2016 was performed using Medline, EMBASE and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases and relevant grey literature. Results We identified 35 studies (25 observational, 10 reporting outcomes of interventions). Observational studies were typically single-centre (11/25) and reported readmissions following hospitalisations for heart failure (HF; 10/25), acute coronary syndrome (7/25) and stroke (6/25), with other conditions infrequently reported. The definition of a readmission was heterogeneous and was assessed using diverse methods. Readmission rate, most commonly reported at 1 month (14/25), varied from 6.3% to 27%, with readmission rates of 10.1-27% for HF, 6.5-11% for stroke and 12.7-17% for acute myocardial infarction, with a high degree of heterogeneity among studies. Of the 10 studies of interventions to reduce readmissions, most (n=8) evaluated HF management programs and three reported a significant reduction in readmissions. We identified a lack of national studies of readmissions and those assessing the cost and resource impact of readmissions on the healthcare system as well as a paucity of successful interventions to lower readmissions. Conclusions High rates of readmissions are reported for cardiovascular conditions, although substantial methodological heterogeneity exists among studies. Nationally standardised definitions are required to accurately measure readmissions and further studies are needed to address knowledge gaps and test interventions to lower readmissions in Australia. What is known about the topic? International studies suggest readmissions are common following cardiovascular hospitalisations and are costly to the health system, yet little is known about the burden of readmission in the Australian setting or the effectiveness of intervention to reduce readmissions. What does this paper add? We found relatively high rates of readmissions following common cardiovascular conditions although studies differed in their methodology making it difficult to accurately gauge the readmission rate. We also found several knowledge gaps including lack of national studies, studies assessing the impact on the health system and few interventions proven to reduce readmissions in the Australian setting. What are the implications for practitioners? Practitioners should be cautious when interpreting studies of readmissions due the heterogeneity in definitions and methods used in Australian literature. Further studies are needed to test interventions to reduce readmissions in the Australians setting.
目的 国际研究表明,心血管疾病住院后的再入院率很高,但澳大利亚的负担尚不确定。我们总结了澳大利亚心血管疾病住院后的再入院特征、频率、风险因素以及减少再入院的干预措施。方法 使用Medline、EMBASE和护理及联合健康文献累积索引(CINAHL)数据库以及相关灰色文献,对2000年至2016年发表的文献进行范围综述。结果 我们确定了35项研究(25项观察性研究,10项报告干预结果)。观察性研究通常为单中心研究(11/25),报告了心力衰竭(HF;10/25)、急性冠状动脉综合征(7/25)和中风(6/25)住院后的再入院情况,其他情况报告较少。再入院的定义不统一,采用了多种评估方法。再入院率最常报告的时间是1个月(14/25),范围从6.3%到27%,HF的再入院率为10.1 - 27%,中风为6.5 - 11%,急性心肌梗死为12.7 - 17%,研究之间存在高度异质性。在10项减少再入院的干预研究中,大多数(n = 8)评估了HF管理项目,3项报告再入院率显著降低。我们发现缺乏关于再入院的全国性研究,以及评估再入院对医疗系统成本和资源影响的研究,而且成功降低再入院率的干预措施也很少。结论 心血管疾病的再入院率很高,尽管研究之间存在大量方法学上的异质性。需要全国标准化的定义来准确衡量再入院情况,还需要进一步研究来填补知识空白并测试降低澳大利亚再入院率的干预措施。关于该主题已知的信息是什么?国际研究表明,心血管疾病住院后再入院很常见,且对卫生系统成本高昂,但对于澳大利亚背景下的再入院负担或减少再入院干预措施的有效性知之甚少。本文补充了什么?我们发现常见心血管疾病后的再入院率相对较高,尽管研究方法不同,难以准确衡量再入院率。我们还发现了几个知识空白,包括缺乏全国性研究、评估对卫生系统影响的研究以及在澳大利亚背景下很少有被证明能降低再入院率的干预措施。对从业者有什么启示?由于澳大利亚文献中使用的定义和方法存在异质性,从业者在解释再入院研究时应谨慎。需要进一步研究来测试降低澳大利亚再入院率的干预措施。