Patient experiences and clinical outcomes of admissions to municipal acute wards versus a hospital: a multicentre randomised controlled trial in Norway.

BACKGROUND

In Norway, municipal acute wards (MAWs) were implemented as alternatives to hospitalisation. Evaluations of the quality of MAW services are lacking. The primary objective of this study was to compare patient experiences after admission to a MAW versus to a hospital. The secondary objective was to compare 'readmissions', 'length of stay', 'self-assessed health-related quality of life' as measured by the EuroQol 5 items 5 level (EQ-5D-5L) index, and 'health status' measured by the RAND-12, in patients admitted to a MAW versus a hospital.

METHODS

A multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT), randomising patients to either MAW or hospital.

RESULTS

In total, 164 patients were enrolled in the study; 115 were randomised to MAW and 49 to hospital. There were no significant differences between the MAW and hospital groups regarding patient experience, which was rated positively in both groups. Patients in the MAW group reported significantly better physical health status as measured by the RAND-12 four to six weeks after admittance than those randomised to hospital (physical component summary score, 31.7 versus 27.1,  = 0.04). The change in EQ-5D index score from baseline to four to six weeks after admittance was significantly greater among patients randomised to MAWs versus hospitals (0.20 versus 0.02,  = 0.03). There were no other significant differences between the MAW and hospital groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, patient experiences and readmissions were similar, whether patients were admitted to a MAW or a hospital. The significant differences in health status and quality of life favouring the MAWs suggest that these healthcare services may be better for elderly patients. However, unfortunately we did not reach the planned sample size due to challenges in the data collection posed by the Covid-19 pandemic.