Department of Geriatrics, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Department of Geriatrics, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2021 Nov-Dec;97:104511. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2021.104511. Epub 2021 Aug 26.
Purpose Previous studies reported reduced risk of readmission, mortality and shorter length of hospital stay (LOS) among geriatric patients receiving an early (<24h), hospital-based geriatric team intervention after discharge. The objective of this study was to compare a novel, early municipality-based, nurse-led and general practitioner (GP)-supported transitional care intervention (TCI) to an established hospital-based TCI among frail, older, geriatric patients. Material and methods A randomised controlled trial was conducted within a single geriatric department and the adjacent municipality. Inclusion criteria: acutely admitted, frail patients 75+ years old. Eligible patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to the two TCIs. Primary outcome was 30-day unplanned readmission. Secondary outcomes were 90-day all-cause mortality and LOS. Stratified analysis according to type of dwelling was made. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and number needed to treat (NNT) were reported. Results 3,103 patients (median age (IQR): 85 (80-90); 57% female) were included. Readmission rates were 22% in the municipality-based intervention (n=332/1,545), and 18% in the hospital-based intervention (n=276/1,558); OR was 1.27, 95% CI (1.06-1.52), p=0.008 and NNT=27. OR for cohabiting patients was 1.47, 95% CI (1.02-2.08); p=0.035. No significant difference was observed in mortality (22% vs. 21%; OR=1.05, 95% CI (0.89-1.25), p=0.577) or LOS (median (IQR): 6 (2-8) vs. 6 (2-8) days, p=0.1787). Conclusions The new municipality-based, nurse-led and GP-supported intervention was inferior to the hospital-based geriatric team intervention in preventing 30-day readmission among frail, geriatric patients. There was no significant difference between the two interventions in regard to 90-day mortality or LOS.
先前的研究报告表明,在出院后接受早期(<24 小时)、以医院为基础的老年病团队干预的老年患者中,再入院率、死亡率和住院时间(LOS)降低。本研究的目的是比较一种新的、早期的基于市的、由护士领导和全科医生(GP)支持的过渡性护理干预(TCI)与在脆弱的老年患者中与已建立的医院 TCI。
在一个单一的老年科和相邻的市进行了一项随机对照试验。纳入标准:急性入院、虚弱的 75 岁以上患者。符合条件的患者被随机分配(1:1)到两种 TCI 中。主要结局是 30 天内无计划再入院。次要结局为 90 天全因死亡率和 LOS。根据居住类型进行分层分析。报告了优势比(OR)及其 95%置信区间(CI)和需要治疗的人数(NNT)。
3103 名患者(中位数年龄(IQR):85(80-90);57%为女性)被纳入研究。基于市的干预组的再入院率为 22%(n=332/1545),基于医院的干预组为 18%(n=276/1558);OR 为 1.27,95%CI(1.06-1.52),p=0.008,NNT=27。同居患者的 OR 为 1.47,95%CI(1.02-2.08);p=0.035。在死亡率(22%vs.21%;OR=1.05,95%CI(0.89-1.25),p=0.577)或 LOS(中位数(IQR):6(2-8)vs.6(2-8)天,p=0.1787)方面,两种干预措施之间没有显著差异。
新的基于市的、由护士领导和 GP 支持的干预措施在预防脆弱的老年患者 30 天内再入院方面不如基于医院的老年病团队干预措施有效。两种干预措施在 90 天死亡率或 LOS 方面没有显著差异。