Dataset Information

Interventions to Improve Communication at Hospital Discharge and Rates of Readmission: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Shortcomings in the education of patients at hospital discharge are associated with higher risks for treatment failure and hospital readmission. Whether improving communication at discharge through specific interventions has an association with patient-relevant outcomes remains unclear.

Objective

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the association of communication interventions at hospital discharge with readmission rates and other patient-relevant outcomes.

Data sources

PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were systematically searched from the inception of each database to February 28, 2021.

Study selection

Randomized clinical trials that randomized patients to receiving a discharge communication intervention or a control group were included.

Data extraction and synthesis

Two independent reviewers extracted data on outcomes and trial and patient characteristics. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Data were pooled using a random-effects model, and risk ratios (RRs) with corresponding 95% CIs are reported. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline.

Main outcomes and measures

The primary outcome was hospital readmission, and secondary outcomes included adherence to treatment regimen, patient satisfaction, mortality, and emergency department reattendance 30 days after hospital discharge.

Results

We included 60 randomized clinical trials with a total of 16 070 patients for the qualitative synthesis and 19 trials with a total of 3953 patients for the quantitative synthesis of the primary outcome. Of these, 11 trials had low risk of bias, 6 trials had high risk of bias, and 2 trials had unclear risk of bias. Communication interventions at discharge were significantly associated with lower readmission rates (179 of 1959 patients [9.1%] in intervention groups vs 270 of 1994 patients [13.5%] in control groups; RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56-0.84), higher adherence to treatment regimen (1729 of 2009 patients [86.1%] in intervention groups vs 1599 of 2024 patients [79.0%] in control groups; RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.13-1.37), and higher patient satisfaction (1187 of 1949 patients [60.9%] in intervention groups vs 991 of 2002 patients [49.5%] in control groups; RR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.20-1.66).

Conclusions and relevance

These findings suggest that communication interventions at discharge are significantly associated with fewer hospital readmissions, higher treatment adherence, and higher patient satisfaction and thus are important to facilitate the transition of care.

SUBMITTER: Becker C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8397933 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe Affordable Care Act has led to US national reductions in hospital 30-day readmission rates for heart failure (HF), acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and pneumonia. Whether readmission reductions have had the unintended consequence of increasing mortality after hospitalization is unknown.ObjectiveTo examine the correlation of paired trends in hospital 30-day readmission rates and hospital 30-day mortality rates after discharge.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective study of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 years or older hospitalized with HF, AMI, or pneumonia from January 1, 2008, through December 31, 2014.ExposureThirty-day risk-adjusted readmission rate (RARR).Main outcomes and measuresThirty-day RARRs and 30-day risk-adjusted mortality rates (RAMRs) after discharge were calculated for each condition in each month at each hospital in 2008 through 2014. Monthly trends in each hospital's 30-day RARRs and 30-day RAMRs after discharge were examined for each condition. The weighted Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated for hospitals' paired monthly trends in 30-day RARRs and 30-day RAMRs after discharge for each condition.ResultsIn 2008 through 2014, 2 962 554 hospitalizations for HF, 1 229 939 for AMI, and 2 544 530 for pneumonia were identified at 5016, 4772, and 5057 hospitals, respectively. In January 2008, mean hospital 30-day RARRs and 30-day RAMRs after discharge were 24.6% and 8.4% for HF, 19.3% and 7.6% for AMI, and 18.3% and 8.5% for pneumonia. Hospital 30-day RARRs declined in the aggregate across hospitals from 2008 through 2014; monthly changes in RARRs were -0.053% (95% CI, -0.055% to -0.051%) for HF, -0.044% (95% CI, -0.047% to -0.041%) for AMI, and -0.033% (95% CI, -0.035% to -0.031%) for pneumonia. In contrast, monthly aggregate changes across hospitals in hospital 30-day RAMRs after discharge varied by condition: HF, 0.008% (95% CI, 0.007% to 0.010%); AMI, -0.003% (95% CI, -0.005% to -0.001%); and pneumonia, 0.001% (95% CI, -0.001% to 0.003%). However, correlation coefficients in hospitals' paired monthly changes in 30-day RARRs and 30-day RAMRs after discharge were weakly positive: HF, 0.066 (95% CI, 0.036 to 0.096); AMI, 0.067 (95% CI, 0.027 to 0.106); and pneumonia, 0.108 (95% CI, 0.079 to 0.137). Findings were similar in secondary analyses, including with alternate definitions of hospital mortality.Conclusions and relevanceAmong Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries hospitalized for heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, or pneumonia, reductions in hospital 30-day readmission rates were weakly but significantly correlated with reductions in hospital 30-day mortality rates after discharge. These findings do not support increasing postdischarge mortality related to reducing hospital readmissions.

Project description:Background and aimsHospital readmissions among COVID-19 patients have increased the load on the healthcare systems and added more pressure to hospital capacity. This affects the ability to accommodate newly diagnosed COVID-19 patients and other non-COVID-19 patients who require hospitalization. Therefore, this systematic review aims to understand the rates of and risk factors for hospital readmissions and all-cause mortality among COVID-19 patients who were hospitalized after being discharged following index hospitalization.MethodsOur systematic review protocol is registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42021232324) and prepared in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. We will search MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), MedRxiv, Web of Science (Science Citation Index), ProQuest Coronavirus research database, Cochrane Covid-19 study register, and WHO COVID-19: Global literature on coronavirus disease will be identified from December 31, 2019, to May 31, 2021. Two investigators will independently screen titles and abstracts and select studies reporting hospital readmissions among COVID-19 patients. Further, data extraction and risk of bias assessment will be carried out separately by these independent reviewers. We will extract data on demographics, readmissions, all-cause mortality, emergency department visits, comorbidities, and factors associated with hospitalization among COVID-19 patients. Random-effect meta-analysis will be performed if homogeneous groups of studies are found. The combined evidence will be further stratified according to important background characteristics if the data allow.DiscussionThis systematic review will summarize the available epidemiological evidence regarding rates of hospital readmissions, comorbidities, and related factors among COVID-19 patients who were readmitted after index hospitalization. A better understanding of the relationship between patient profiles and the rate of hospitalization will be helpful in the development of guidelines for patient management.

Project description:ImportanceQuality improvement (QI) interventions can reduce hospital readmission, but little is known about their economic value.ObjectiveTo systematically review economic evaluations of QI interventions designed to reduce readmissions.Data sourcesDatabases searched included PubMed, Econlit, the Centre for Reviews & Dissemination Economic Evaluations, New York Academy of Medicine's Grey Literature Report, and Worldcat (January 2004 to July 2016).Study selectionDual reviewers selected English-language studies from high-income countries that evaluated organizational or structural changes to reduce hospital readmission, and that reported program and readmission-related costs.Data extraction and synthesisDual reviewers extracted intervention characteristics, study design, clinical effectiveness, study quality, economic perspective, and costs. We calculated the risk difference and net costs to the health system in 2015 US dollars. Weighted least-squares regression analyses tested predictors of the risk difference and net costs.Main outcomes and measuresMain outcomes measures included the risk difference in readmission rates and incremental net cost. This systematic review and data analysis is reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.ResultsOf 5205 articles, 50 unique studies were eligible, including 25 studies in populations limited to heart failure (HF) that included 5768 patients, 21 in general populations that included 10 445 patients, and 4 in unique populations. Fifteen studies lasted up to 30 days while most others lasted 6 to 24 months. Based on regression analyses, readmissions declined by an average of 12.1% among patients with HF (95% CI, 8.3%-15.9%; P < .001; based on 22 studies with complete data) and by 6.3% among general populations (95% CI, 4.0%-8.7%; P < .001; 18 studies). The mean net savings to the health system per patient was $972 among patients with HF (95% CI, -$642 to $2586; P = .23; 24 studies), and the mean net loss was $169 among general populations (95% CI, -$2610 to $2949; P = .90; 21 studies), reflecting nonsignificant differences. Among general populations, interventions that engaged patients and caregivers were associated with greater net savings ($1714 vs -$6568; P = .006).Conclusions and relevanceMulticomponent QI interventions can be effective at reducing readmissions relative to the status quo, but net costs vary. Interventions that engage general populations of patients and their caregivers may offer greater value to the health system, but the implications for patients and caregivers are unknown.

Project description:BackgroundHospital readmission rates are being used to evaluate performance. A survey of the present rates is needed before policies can be developed to decrease incidence of readmission. We address three questions: What is the present rate of 30-day readmission in orthopedics? How do factors such as orthopedic specialty, data source, patient insurance, and time of data collection affect the 30-day readmission rate? What are the causes and risk factors for 30-day readmissions?Methods/findingsA review was first registered with Prospero (CRD42014010293, 6/17/2014) and a meta-analysis was performed to assess the current 30-day readmission rate in orthopedics. Studies published after 2006 were retrieved, and 24 studies met the inclusion criteria. The 30-day readmission rate was extrapolated from each study along with the orthopedic subspecialty, data source, patient insurance, time of collection, patient demographics, and cause of readmission. A sensitivity analysis was completed on the stratified groups. The overall 30-day readmission rate across all orthopedics was 5.4 percent (95% confidence interval: 4.8,6.0). There was no significant difference between subspecialties. Studies that retrieved data from a multicenter registry had a lower 30-day readmission rate than those reporting data from a single hospital or a large national database. Patient populations that only included Medicare patients had a higher 30-day readmission rate than populations of all insurance. The 30-day readmission rate has decreased in the past ten years. Age, length of stay, discharge to skilled nursing facility, increased BMI, ASA score greater than 3, and Medicare/Medicaid insurance showed statistically positive correlation with increased 30-day readmissions in greater than 75 percent of studies. Surgical site complications accounted for 46 percent of 30-day readmissions.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis shows the present rate of 30-day readmissions in orthopedics. Demonstrable heterogeneity between studies underlines the importance of uniform collection and reporting of readmission rates for hospital evaluation and reimbursement.

Project description:BackgroundSeveral care transition interventions propose that post-discharge phone calls can reduce adverse events and decrease costly return visits to the hospital. However, given the multi-faceted nature of most care transitions interventions, the true relationship between post-discharge phone calls and readmissions in a real world setting is uncertain.ObjectiveTo determine the effect of receiving a post-discharge telephone call on all-cause 30-day readmission in a general medicine population.DesignRetrospective observational study.ParticipantsPatients discharged home from the Medicine Service at a tertiary care academic medical center between November 2010 and May 2012.InterventionPatients received two telephone call attempts by a nurse within 72 h of discharge. Nurses followed a standard script to address issues associated with readmission.Main outcome and measuresBilling data captured readmissions. We used logistic regression-adjusted patient and clinical covariates as well as a propensity score representing likelihood of being called to determine the association between call receipt and risk for readmission.Key resultsThere were 5,507 eligible patients. In unadjusted analyses, patients who received a call and completed the intervention were significantly less likely to be readmitted compared to those who did not [155 (5.8 %) vs 123 (8.6 %), p < 0.01]. In multivariable models adjusting for socio-demographic and clinical covariates alone, completing a post-discharge telephone call intervention was associated with lower odds for readmission (AOR 0.71; 95 % CI: 0.55-0.91). However, when models adjusted for the likelihood of receiving the phone call using the propensity score, no association between call receipt and readmission was observed (AOR 0.91; 95%CI: 0.69-1.20).ConclusionsEffectiveness of post-discharge phone call programs may be more related to whether patients are able to answer a phone call than to the care delivered by the phone call. Programs would benefit from improving their ability to perform phone outreach while simultaneously improving on the care delivered during the calls.

Project description:ImportanceHigh rates of suicide after psychiatric hospitalization are reported in many studies, yet the magnitude of the increases and the factors underlying them remain unclear.ObjectivesTo quantify the rates of suicide after discharge from psychiatric facilities and examine what moderates those rates.Data sourcesEnglish-language, peer-reviewed publications published from January 1, 1946, to May 1, 2016, were located using MEDLINE, PsychINFO, and EMBASE with the search terms ((suicid*).ti AND (hospital or discharg* OR inpatient or in-patient OR admit*).ab and ((mortality OR outcome* OR death*) AND (psych* OR mental*)).ti AND (admit* OR admis* or hospital* OR inpatient* OR in-patient* OR discharg*).ab. Hand searching was also done.Study selectionStudies reporting the number of suicides among patients discharged from psychiatric facilities and the number of exposed person-years and studies from which these data could be calculated.Data extraction and synthesisThe meta-analysis adhered to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. A random-effects model was used to calculate a pooled estimate of postdischarge suicides per 100 000 person-years.Main outcomes and measuresThe suicide rate after discharge from psychiatric facilities was the main outcome, and the association between the duration of follow-up and the year of the sampling were the main a priori moderators.ResultsA total of 100 studies reported 183 patient samples (50 samples of females, 49 of males, and 84 of mixed sex; 129 of adults or unspecified patients, 20 of adolescents, 19 of older patients, and 15 from long-term or forensic discharge facilities), including a total of 17 857 suicides during 4 725 445 person-years. The pooled estimate postdischarge suicide rate was 484 suicides per 100 000 person-years (95% CI, 422-555 suicides per 100 000 person-years; prediction interval, 89-2641), with high between-sample heterogeneity (I2 = 98%). The suicide rate was highest within 3 months after discharge (1132; 95% CI, 874-1467) and among patients admitted with suicidal ideas or behaviors (2078; 95% CI, 1512-2856). Pooled suicide rates per 100 000 patients-years were 654 for studies with follow-up periods of 3 months to 1 year, 494 for studies with follow-up periods of 1 to 5 years, 366 for studies with follow-up periods of 5 to 10 years, and 277 for studies with follow-up periods longer than 10 years. Suicide rates were higher among samples collected in the periods 1995-2004 (656; 95% CI, 518-831) and 2005-2016 (672; 95% CI, 428-1055) than in earlier samples.Conclusions and relevanceThe immediate postdischarge period is a time of marked risk, but rates of suicide remain high for many years after discharge. Patients admitted because of suicidal ideas or behaviors and those in the first months after discharge should be a particular focus of concern. Previously admitted patients should be able to access long-term care and assistance.

Project description:BackgroundAvoidable hospital readmission is a major problem among health systems. Although there are effective peri-discharge interventions for reducing avoidable hospital readmission, successful implementation is challenging. This systematic review of qualitative studies aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to implementing peri-discharge interventions from providers' and service users' perspectives.MethodsWe searched four databases for potentially eligible qualitative studies from databases' inception to March 2020, and updated literature search for studies published between January 2020 to October 2021. Barriers and facilitators to implementing peri-discharge interventions were identified and mapped onto the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs. Inductive analysis of the CFIR constructs was performed to yield thematic areas that illustrated the relationship between various facilitators and barriers, generating practical insights to key implementation issues.ResultsThirteen qualitative studies were included in this systematic review. Key issues were clustered in the CFIR constructs of Design Quality and Complexity of the intervention, strength of Network and Communication, being responsive to Patient Needs with sufficient Resource support, and External Incentives. The three thematic areas were rationality of the interventions, readiness and effort of multidisciplinary implementation teams, and influence of external stakeholders. Common barriers included (i) limited resources, (ii) poor communication among team members, (iii) incompatibility between the new intervention and existing work routine, (iv) complicated implementation process, (v) low practicality of supporting instruments, and (vi) lack of understanding about the content and effectiveness of the new interventions. Common facilitators were (i) information sharing via regular meetings on implementation issues, (ii) organizational culture that values quality and accountability, (iii) financial penalties for hospitals with high avoidable readmissions rates, (iv) external support offered via quality improvement programs and community resources, and (v) senior leadership support.ConclusionThis study synthesized commonly-presenting barriers and facilitators to implementing peri-discharge interventions among different healthcare organizations. Findings may inform development of implementation strategies in different health systems after appropriate tailoring, based on a consensus-based formative research process.