Readmission After Geriatric Inpatient Care: A Narrative Review and a Comparative Analysis.

IF 3 Q1 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
Carl Willers, Rikard Lindqvist, Martin Dreilich, Stefan Fors, Amelie Lindh Mazya, Gunnar H Nilsson, Anne-Marie Boström, Mahwish Naseer, Elisabeth Rydwik
{"title":"Readmission After Geriatric Inpatient Care: A Narrative Review and a Comparative Analysis.","authors":"Carl Willers, Rikard Lindqvist, Martin Dreilich, Stefan Fors, Amelie Lindh Mazya, Gunnar H Nilsson, Anne-Marie Boström, Mahwish Naseer, Elisabeth Rydwik","doi":"10.1177/21501319251320181","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Readmission can be be related to the work of several stakeholders involved in the care of individuals throughout the community, including, for example, primary care and social care providers. A narrative review was performed to assess definitions and frequency of readmission for older adults found in previous research. In addition, a dataset for a cohort of older adults in Stockholm, Sweden, was used to quantify how different definitions of readmission affect frequency.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The review was based on pre-specified search criteria within PubMed and Embase databases. All studies based on a cohort of older adults with a primary objective to assess readmission to inpatient care, were included for the assessment of readmission criteria. The dataset was based on a cohort of older adults treated at a geriatric department in Stockholm during 2016. Estimations of readmission were performed with the most common criteria found in the narrative review.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The narrative review showed that definitions of readmission included predominantly time-based criteria, either alone or combined with additional criteria such as medical condition or readmitting department. Frequency of readmission based on different definitions varied substantially; a 14-day time interval implied a rate of 8.0% whilst a 30-day interval-more commonly used-rendered a rate of 12.6%. The density of readmissions per day was higher during the first weeks after discharge, and then dropped continuously.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Transparency on definitions is imperative in studies that include rates of readmission. The levels of readmission rates are highly dependent on the study population and its context. Furthermore, the actual value of readmission monitoring is dependent on what purpose it is supposed to fulfill, and it is essential to put it into context of all relevant stakeholders including, for example, the primary care providers and different social care providers throughout the community.</p>","PeriodicalId":46723,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Primary Care and Community Health","volume":"16 ","pages":"21501319251320181"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11869310/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Primary Care and Community Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21501319251320181","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Readmission can be be related to the work of several stakeholders involved in the care of individuals throughout the community, including, for example, primary care and social care providers. A narrative review was performed to assess definitions and frequency of readmission for older adults found in previous research. In addition, a dataset for a cohort of older adults in Stockholm, Sweden, was used to quantify how different definitions of readmission affect frequency.

Materials and methods: The review was based on pre-specified search criteria within PubMed and Embase databases. All studies based on a cohort of older adults with a primary objective to assess readmission to inpatient care, were included for the assessment of readmission criteria. The dataset was based on a cohort of older adults treated at a geriatric department in Stockholm during 2016. Estimations of readmission were performed with the most common criteria found in the narrative review.

Results: The narrative review showed that definitions of readmission included predominantly time-based criteria, either alone or combined with additional criteria such as medical condition or readmitting department. Frequency of readmission based on different definitions varied substantially; a 14-day time interval implied a rate of 8.0% whilst a 30-day interval-more commonly used-rendered a rate of 12.6%. The density of readmissions per day was higher during the first weeks after discharge, and then dropped continuously.

Conclusion: Transparency on definitions is imperative in studies that include rates of readmission. The levels of readmission rates are highly dependent on the study population and its context. Furthermore, the actual value of readmission monitoring is dependent on what purpose it is supposed to fulfill, and it is essential to put it into context of all relevant stakeholders including, for example, the primary care providers and different social care providers throughout the community.

老年住院病人再入院:叙述回顾与比较分析。
背景:再入院可能与整个社区中涉及个人护理的几个利益相关者的工作有关,例如,包括初级保健和社会保健提供者。对以往研究中发现的老年人再入院的定义和频率进行了叙述性回顾。此外,还使用了瑞典斯德哥尔摩老年人队列的数据集来量化再入院的不同定义如何影响频率。材料和方法:本综述基于PubMed和Embase数据库中预先指定的搜索标准。所有基于老年人队列的研究均纳入再入院标准的评估,其主要目的是评估再入院情况。该数据集基于2016年在斯德哥尔摩老年科接受治疗的老年人队列。根据叙述性回顾中最常见的标准对再入院进行估计。结果:叙述性回顾显示,再入院的定义主要包括以时间为基础的标准,或单独或结合其他标准,如医疗状况或再入院部门。基于不同定义的再入院频率差异很大;14天的时间间隔意味着8.0%的利率,而30天的时间间隔(更常用)则意味着12.6%的利率。出院后第1周每天再入院人数较高,随后连续下降。结论:在包括再入院率的研究中,定义的透明度是必要的。再入院率的水平高度依赖于研究人群及其背景。此外,再入院监测的实际价值取决于它应该实现的目的,并且必须将其纳入所有相关利益相关者的背景下,例如,整个社区的初级保健提供者和不同的社会保健提供者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
2.80%
发文量
183
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信