Generic care pathway for elderly patients in need of home care services after discharge from hospital: a cluster randomised controlled trial

Tove Røsstad, Øyvind Salvesen, Aslak Steinsbekk, Anders Grimsmo, Olav Sletvold, Helge Garåsen, Tove Røsstad, Øyvind Salvesen, Aslak Steinsbekk, Anders Grimsmo, Olav Sletvold, Helge Garåsen

Abstract

Background: Improved discharge arrangements and targeted post-discharge follow-up can reduce the risk of adverse events after hospital discharge for elderly patients. Although more care is to shift from specialist to primary care, there are few studies on post-discharge interventions run by primary care. A generic care pathway, Patient Trajectory for Home-dwelling elders (PaTH) including discharge arrangements and follow-up by primary care, was developed and introduced in Central Norway Region in 2009, applying checklists at defined stages in the patient trajectory. In a previous paper, we found that PaTH had potential of improving follow-up in primary care. The aim of this study was to establish the effect of PaTH-compared to usual care-for elderly in need of home care services after discharge from hospital.

Methods: We did an unblinded, cluster randomised controlled trial with 12 home care clusters. Outcomes were measured at the patient level during a 12-month follow-up period for the individual patient and analysed applying linear and logistic mixed models. Primary outcomes were readmissions within 30 days and functional level assessed by Nottingham extended ADL scale. Secondary outcomes were number and length of inpatient hospital care and nursing home care, days at home, consultations with the general practitioners (GPs), mortality and health related quality of life (SF-36).

Results: One-hundred and sixty-three patients were included in the PaTH group (six clusters), and 141 patients received care as usual (six clusters). We found no statistically significant differences between the groups for primary and secondary outcomes except for more consultations with the GPs in PaTH group (p = 0.04). Adherence to the intervention was insufficient as only 36% of the patients in the intervention group were assessed by at least three of the four main checklists in PaTH, but this improved over time.

Conclusions: Lack of adherence to PaTH rendered the study inconclusive regarding the elderly's functional level, number of readmissions after hospital discharge, and health care utilisation except for more consultations with the GPs. A targeted exploration of prerequisites for implementation is recommended in the pre-trial phase of complex intervention studies.

Trial registration: Clinical Trials.gov NCT01107119 , retrospectively registered 2010.04.18.

Keywords: Care coordination; Care pathway; Checklists; Complex intervention; Continuity of care; Controlled randomised trial; Elderly; Health service research; Primary health care.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Patient trajectory for home-dwelling elders (PaTH) (12). The boxes represent procedures and checklists and the arrows the flow of information between the involved parties. The most important information from all checklists was included in the individual daily care plan which was available to all home care professionals at the point of care
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Organisation of health care services participating in PaTH. HCC = home care cluster GP = general practitioner. All hospitals serve as general hospitals to the participating municipalities. Hospital III also has regional and university functions. Every municipality has one or more home care units with nurses and nursing assistants providing health and social care to inhabitants with reduced functional level. One home care cluster included one to three home care units in the same municipality. GPs usually work in group practices and operate independently of the home care services. Every inhabitant has a right of free choice of a regular GP, which implies that the GP may have patients in common with all home care units in the municipality. Larger municipalities have health care allocation offices with municipal case managers who do a broad assessment of patients in need of municipal health and social care services other than private physiotherapy and GP services. They have a purchaser role deciding on what kind of services to be provided
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Flow of clusters and participants

References

    1. Forster AJ, Murff HJ, Peterson JF, Gandhi TK, Bates DW. Adverse drug events occurring following hospital discharge. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(4):317–323. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.30390.x.
    1. Mesteig M, Helbostad JL, Sletvold O, Rosstad T, Saltvedt I. Unwanted incidents during transition of geriatric patients from hospital to home: a prospective observational study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010;10:1. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-10-1.
    1. Kripalani S, Lefevre F, Phillips CO, Williams MV, Basaviah P, Baker DW. Deficits in communication and information transfer between hospital-based and primary care physicians: implications for patient safety and continuity of care. JAMA. 2007;297(8):831–841. doi: 10.1001/jama.297.8.831.
    1. Hesselink G, Schoonhoven L, Barach P, Spijker A, Gademan P, Kalkman C, Liefers J, Vernooij-Dassen M, Wollersheim H. Improving patient handovers from hospital to primary care: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157(6):417–428. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-157-6-201209180-00006.
    1. Rennke S, Nguyen OK, Shoeb MH, Magan Y, Wachter RM, Ranji SR. Hospital-initiated transitional care interventions as a patient safety strategy: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(5 Pt 2):433–440. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-158-5-201303051-00011.
    1. Leppin AL, Gionfriddo MR, Kessler M, Brito JP, Mair FS, Gallacher K, Wang Z, Erwin PJ, Sylvester T, Boehmer K, et al. Preventing 30-day hospital readmissions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174(7):1095–1107. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.1608.
    1. Munton T, Martin A, Marrero I, Llewellyn A, Gibson K, Gomersall A. Getting out of hospital. London: Matrix Evidence; 2011.
    1. The Coordination Reform. Proper treatment - at the right place and right time. Report to the Storting no 47. Oslo: Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services; 2009. []. Accessed 9 Apr 2017.
    1. Rytter L, Jakobsen HN, Ronholt F, Hammer AV, Andreasen AH, Nissen A, Kjellberg J. Comprehensive discharge follow-up in patients’ homes by GPs and district nurses of elderly patients. A randomized controlled trial. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2010;28(3):146–153. doi: 10.3109/02813431003764466.
    1. Garåsen H, Windspoll R, Johnsen R. Intermediate care at a community hospital as an alternative to prolonged general hospital care for elderly patients: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Public Health. 2007;7:68. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-7-68.
    1. Garåsen H, Windspoll R, Johnsen R. Long-term patients’ outcomes after intermediate care at a community hospital for elderly patients. 12-month follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Scand J Public Health. 2008;36(2):197–204. doi: 10.1177/1403494808089685.
    1. Rosstad T, Garasen H, Steinsbekk A, Sletvold O, Grimsmo A. Development of a patient-centred care pathway across healthcare providers: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13:121. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-13-121.
    1. Rosstad T, Garasen H, Steinsbekk A, Haland E, Kristoffersen L, Grimsmo A. Implementing a care pathway for elderly patients, a comparative qualitative process evaluation in primary care. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;15:86. doi: 10.1186/s12913-015-0751-1.
    1. Campbell H, Hotchkiss R, Bradshaw N, Porteous M. Integrated care pathways. BMJ. 1998;316(7125):133–137. doi: 10.1136/bmj.316.7125.133.
    1. Lindman A, Damgaard K, Tjomsland O, Helgeland J. [Readmissions of elderly patients in Norway] Oslo: Nasjonalt kunnskapssenter for helsetjenesten (The Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services); 2012. p. 35.
    1. Wu CY, Chuang LL, Lin KC, Lee SD, Hong WH. Responsiveness, minimal detectable change, and minimal clinically important difference of the Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living Scale in patients with improved performance after stroke rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92(8):1281–1287. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.03.008.
    1. Sylliaas H, Brovold T, Wyller TB, Bergland A. Prolonged strength training in older patients after hip fracture: a randomised controlled trial. Age Ageing. 2012;41(2):206–212. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afr164.
    1. Prestmo A, Hagen G, Sletvold O, Helbostad JL, Thingstad P, Taraldsen K, Lydersen S, Halsteinli V, Saltnes T, Lamb SE, et al. Comprehensive geriatric care for patients with hip fractures: a prospective, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;385(9978):1623. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62409-0.
    1. Parker SG, Oliver P, Pennington M, Bond J, Jagger C, Enderby P, Curless R, Vanoli A, Fryer K, Julious S, et al. Rehabilitation of older patients: day hospital compared with rehabilitation at home. Clinical outcomes. Age Ageing. 2011;40(5):557–562. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afr046.
    1. Ware JE., Jr SF-36 health survey update. Spine. 2000;25(24):3130–3139. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00008.
    1. WHO. International classification of impairments, disabilities and handicaps: A manual of classification relating to the concequences of disease. Switzerland: WHO; 1980. []. Accessed 9 Apr 2017.
    1. About IPLOS – a register for statistics on municipal health and care services. Norwegian Directorate of Health. []. Accessed 9 Apr 2017.
    1. Twisk J, de Boer M, de Vente W, Heymans M. Multiple imputation of missing values was not necessary before performing a longitudinal mixed-model analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(9):1022–1028. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.03.017.
    1. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. []. Accessed 9 Apr 2017.
    1. Campbell MK, Piaggio G, Elbourne DR, Altman DG. Consort 2010 statement: extension to cluster randomised trials. BMJ. 2012;345:e5661. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e5661.
    1. Rutterford C, Copas A, Eldridge S. Methods for sample size determination in cluster randomized trials. Int J Epidemiol. 2015;44(3):1051–1067. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyv113.
    1. Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008;337:a1655. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1655.
    1. Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: new guidance. UK: Medical Research Council; 2008. . Accessed 9 Apr 2017.
    1. Allen D, Gillen E, Rixson L. Systematic review of the effectiveness of integrated care pathways: what works, for whom, in which circumstances? Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2009;7(2):61–74. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-1609.2009.00127.x.
    1. Whittle C, Hewison A. Integrated care pathways: pathways to change in health care? J Health Organ Manag. 2007;21(3):297–306. doi: 10.1108/14777260710751753.
    1. Smith SM, Soubhi H, Fortin M, Hudon C, O’Dowd T. Managing patients with multimorbidity: systematic review of interventions in primary care and community settings. BMJ. 2012;345:e5205. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e5205.
    1. May C, Finch T, Mair F, Ballini L, Dowrick C, Eccles M, Gask L, Macfarlane A, Murray E, Rapley T, et al. Understanding the implementation of complex interventions in health care: the normalization process model. BMC Health Serv Res. 2007;7:148. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-148.
    1. May C, Finch T. Implementing, Embedding, and Integration Practices: an Outline of Normalization Process Theory. Sociology. 2009;43(3):535–554. doi: 10.1177/0038038509103208.

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner