Safety and efficiency of discharge to home hospitalization directly after emergency department care of patients with acute heart failure.

Carolina Sánchez Marcos, Begoña Espinosa, Emmanuel Coloma, David San Inocencio, Sonja Pilarcikova, Sergio Guzmán Martínez, Mariona Ramón, Alejandro Carratalá Ballesta, Omar Saavedra, Nicole Ivars Obermeier, Ernest Bragulat, Adriana Gil-Rodrigo, Ainoa Ugarte, Pere Llorens, Òscar Miró
{"title":"Safety and efficiency of discharge to home hospitalization directly after emergency department care of patients with acute heart failure.","authors":"Carolina Sánchez Marcos, Begoña Espinosa, Emmanuel Coloma, David San Inocencio, Sonja Pilarcikova, Sergio Guzmán Martínez, Mariona Ramón, Alejandro Carratalá Ballesta, Omar Saavedra, Nicole Ivars Obermeier, Ernest Bragulat, Adriana Gil-Rodrigo, Ainoa Ugarte, Pere Llorens, Òscar Miró","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To analyze whether discharge to home hospitalization (HHosp) directly from emergency departments (EDs) after care for acute heart failure (AHF) is efficient and if there are short-term differences in outcomes between patients in HHosp vs those admitted to a conventional hospital ward (CHosp).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Secondary analysis of cases from the EAHFE registry (Epidemiology of Acute Heart Failure in Emergency Departments). The EAHFE is a multicenter, multipurpose, analytical, noninterventionist registry of consecutive AHF patients after treatment in EDs. Cases were included retrospectively and registered to facilitate prospective follow-up. Included were all patients diagnosed with AHF and discharged to HHosp from 2 EDs between March 2016 and February 2019 (3 years). Cases from 6 months were analyzed in 3 periods: March-April 2016 (corresponding to EAHFE-5), January-February 2018 (EAHFE-6), and January-February 2019 (EAHFE-7). The findings were adjusted for characteristics at baseline and during the AHF decompensation episode.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 370 patients were discharged to HHosp and 646 to CHosp. Patients in the HHosp group were older and had more comorbidities and worse baseline functional status. However, the decompensation episode was less severe, triggered more often by anemia and less often by a hypertensive crisis or acute coronary syndrome. The HHosp patients were in care longer (median [interquartile range], 9 [7-14] days vs 7 [5-11] days for CHosp patients, P .001), but there were no differences in mortality during hospital care (7.0% vs. 8.0%, P = .56), 30-day adverse events after discharge from the ED (30.9% vs. 32.9%, P = .31), or 1-year mortality (41.6% vs. 41.4%, P = .84). Risks associated with HHosp care did not differ from those of CHosp. The odds ratios (ORs) for HHosp care were as follows for mortality while in care, OR 0.90 (95% CI, 0.41-1.97); adverse events within 30 days of ED discharge, OR 0.88 (95% CI, 0.62-1.26); and 1-year mortality, OR 1.03 (95% CI, 0.76-1.39). Direct costs of HHosp and CHosp averaged €1309 and €5433, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>After ED treatment of AHF, discharge to HHosp requires longer care than CHosp, but short- and longterm outcomes are the same and at a lower cost.</p>","PeriodicalId":11644,"journal":{"name":"Emergencias : revista de la Sociedad Espanola de Medicina de Emergencias","volume":"35 3","pages":"176-184"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emergencias : revista de la Sociedad Espanola de Medicina de Emergencias","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To analyze whether discharge to home hospitalization (HHosp) directly from emergency departments (EDs) after care for acute heart failure (AHF) is efficient and if there are short-term differences in outcomes between patients in HHosp vs those admitted to a conventional hospital ward (CHosp).

Material and methods: Secondary analysis of cases from the EAHFE registry (Epidemiology of Acute Heart Failure in Emergency Departments). The EAHFE is a multicenter, multipurpose, analytical, noninterventionist registry of consecutive AHF patients after treatment in EDs. Cases were included retrospectively and registered to facilitate prospective follow-up. Included were all patients diagnosed with AHF and discharged to HHosp from 2 EDs between March 2016 and February 2019 (3 years). Cases from 6 months were analyzed in 3 periods: March-April 2016 (corresponding to EAHFE-5), January-February 2018 (EAHFE-6), and January-February 2019 (EAHFE-7). The findings were adjusted for characteristics at baseline and during the AHF decompensation episode.

Results: A total of 370 patients were discharged to HHosp and 646 to CHosp. Patients in the HHosp group were older and had more comorbidities and worse baseline functional status. However, the decompensation episode was less severe, triggered more often by anemia and less often by a hypertensive crisis or acute coronary syndrome. The HHosp patients were in care longer (median [interquartile range], 9 [7-14] days vs 7 [5-11] days for CHosp patients, P .001), but there were no differences in mortality during hospital care (7.0% vs. 8.0%, P = .56), 30-day adverse events after discharge from the ED (30.9% vs. 32.9%, P = .31), or 1-year mortality (41.6% vs. 41.4%, P = .84). Risks associated with HHosp care did not differ from those of CHosp. The odds ratios (ORs) for HHosp care were as follows for mortality while in care, OR 0.90 (95% CI, 0.41-1.97); adverse events within 30 days of ED discharge, OR 0.88 (95% CI, 0.62-1.26); and 1-year mortality, OR 1.03 (95% CI, 0.76-1.39). Direct costs of HHosp and CHosp averaged €1309 and €5433, respectively.

Conclusion: After ED treatment of AHF, discharge to HHosp requires longer care than CHosp, but short- and longterm outcomes are the same and at a lower cost.

急性心力衰竭患者急诊科治疗后直接出院回家住院的安全性和效率。
目的分析急性心力衰竭(AHF)治疗后直接从急诊科(ED)出院回家住院(HHosp)是否有效,以及HHosp与传统病房(CHosp)患者的短期疗效是否存在差异:对 EAHFE 登记(急诊科急性心力衰竭流行病学)中的病例进行二次分析。EAHFE 是一项多中心、多用途、分析性、非干预性登记项目,登记对象为在急诊科接受治疗的连续急性心力衰竭患者。病例以回顾性方式纳入,并进行登记以方便前瞻性随访。登记对象包括 2016 年 3 月至 2019 年 2 月(3 年)期间在 2 家急诊室确诊为 AHF 并出院至 HHosp 的所有患者。6个月内的病例分3个时期进行分析:2016年3月至4月(对应EAHFE-5)、2018年1月至2月(EAHFE-6)和2019年1月至2月(EAHFE-7)。研究结果根据基线和AHF失代偿发作期间的特征进行了调整:HH医院组患者年龄较大,合并症较多,基线功能状态较差。不过,失代偿发作的程度较轻,多由贫血引发,较少由高血压危象或急性冠状动脉综合征引发。重症监护病房患者的住院时间更长(中位数[四分位数间距],9[7-14]天 vs 重症监护病房患者7[5-11]天,P .001),但住院期间的死亡率(7.0% vs. 8.0%,P = .56)、急诊室出院后30天不良事件(30.9% vs. 32.9%,P = .31)或1年死亡率(41.6% vs. 41.4%,P = .84)均无差异。HHosp 护理的相关风险与 CHosp 没有差异。 HHosp 护理的几率比(ORs)如下:护理期间的死亡率,OR 0.90(95% CI,0.41-1.97);急诊室出院后 30 天内的不良事件,OR 0.88(95% CI,0.62-1.26);1 年死亡率,OR 1.03(95% CI,0.76-1.39)。HHosp和CHosp的直接费用平均分别为1309欧元和5433欧元:结论:在急诊室治疗 AHF 后,出院至 HHosp 比 CHosp 需要更长时间的护理,但短期和长期疗效相同,且费用更低。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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