Vivian Nystrøm, Hilde Lurås, Tron Moger, Ann-Chatrin Linqvist Leonardsen
{"title":"入住市立急症病房与入住医院的患者体验和临床结果对比:挪威的一项多中心随机对照试验。","authors":"Vivian Nystrøm, Hilde Lurås, Tron Moger, Ann-Chatrin Linqvist Leonardsen","doi":"10.1080/02813432.2024.2377727","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT), randomising patients to either MAW or hospital.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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, <i>p</i> = 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, <i>p</i> = 0.03). There were no other significant differences between the MAW and hospital groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":21521,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care","volume":" ","pages":"659-667"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11552273/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient experiences and clinical outcomes of admissions to municipal acute wards versus a hospital: a multicentre randomised controlled trial in Norway.\",\"authors\":\"Vivian Nystrøm, Hilde Lurås, Tron Moger, Ann-Chatrin Linqvist Leonardsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02813432.2024.2377727\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT), randomising patients to either MAW or hospital.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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, <i>p</i> = 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, <i>p</i> = 0.03). There were no other significant differences between the MAW and hospital groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21521,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"659-667\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11552273/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"92\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2024.2377727\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2024.2377727","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
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, p = 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, p = 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.
期刊介绍:
Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care is an international online open access journal publishing articles with relevance to general practice and primary health care. Focusing on the continuous professional development in family medicine the journal addresses clinical, epidemiological and humanistic topics in relation to the daily clinical practice.
Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care is owned by the members of the National Colleges of General Practice in the five Nordic countries through the Nordic Federation of General Practice (NFGP). The journal includes original research on topics related to general practice and family medicine, and publishes both quantitative and qualitative original research, editorials, discussion and analysis papers and reviews to facilitate continuing professional development in family medicine. The journal''s topics range broadly and include:
• Clinical family medicine
• Epidemiological research
• Qualitative research
• Health services research.