急性脑卒中和心肌梗死患者的护理过渡:从住院到康复、恢复和二级预防。

DaiWai M Olson, Janet Prvu Bettger, Karen P Alexander, Amy S Kendrick, Julian R Irvine, Liz Wing, Remy R Coeytaux, Rowena J Dolor, Pamela W Duncan, Carmelo Graffagnino
{"title":"急性脑卒中和心肌梗死患者的护理过渡:从住院到康复、恢复和二级预防。","authors":"DaiWai M Olson,&nbsp;Janet Prvu Bettger,&nbsp;Karen P Alexander,&nbsp;Amy S Kendrick,&nbsp;Julian R Irvine,&nbsp;Liz Wing,&nbsp;Remy R Coeytaux,&nbsp;Rowena J Dolor,&nbsp;Pamela W Duncan,&nbsp;Carmelo Graffagnino","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To review the available published literature to assess whether evidence supports a beneficial role for coordinated transition of care services for the postacute care of patients hospitalized with first or recurrent stroke or myocardial infarction (MI). This review was framed around five areas of investigation: (1) key components of transition of care services, (2) evidence for improvement in functional outcomes, morbidity, mortality, and quality of life, (3) associated risks or potential harms, (4) evidence for improvement in systems of care, and (5) evidence that benefits and harms vary by patient-based or system-based characteristics.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>MEDLINE(®), CINAHL(®), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Embase(®).</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>We included studies published in English from 2000 to 2011 that specified postacute hospitalization transition of care services as well as prevention of recurrent stroke or MI.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 62 articles representing 44 studies were included for data abstraction. Transition of care interventions were grouped into four categories: (1) hospital -initiated support for discharge was the initial stage in the transition of care process, (2) patient and family education interventions were started during hospitalization but were continued at the community level, (3) community-based models of support followed hospital discharge, and (4) chronic disease management models of care assumed the responsibility for long-term care. Early supported discharge after stroke was associated with reduced total hospital length of stay without adverse effects on functional recovery, and specialty care after MI was associated with reduced mortality. Because of several methodological shortcomings, most studies did not consistently demonstrate that any specific intervention resulted in improved patient-or system -based outcomes. Some studies included more than one intervention, which made it difficult to determine the effect of individual components on clinical outcomes. There was inconsistency in the definition of what constituted a component of transition of care compared to \"standard care.\" Standard care was poorly defined, and nearly all studies were underpowered to demonstrate a statistical benefit. The endpoints varied greatly from study to study. Nearly all the studies were single-site based, and most (26 of 44) were conducted in countries with national health care systems quite different from that of the U.S., therefore limiting their generalizability.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although a basis for the definition of transition of care exists, more consensus is needed on the definition of the interventions and the outcomes appropriate to those interventions. There was limited evidence that two components of hospital-initiated support for discharge (early supported discharge after stroke and specialty care followup after MI)were associated with beneficial effects. No other interventions had sufficient evidence of benefit based on the findings of this systematic review. The adoption of a standard set of definitions, a refinement in the methodology used to study transition of care, and appropriate selection of patient-centered and policy-relevant outcomes should be employed to draw valid conclusions pertaining to specific components of transition of care.</p>","PeriodicalId":72991,"journal":{"name":"Evidence report/technology assessment","volume":" 202","pages":"1-197"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4780900/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Transition of care for acute stroke and myocardial infarction patients: from hospitalization to rehabilitation, recovery, and secondary prevention.\",\"authors\":\"DaiWai M Olson,&nbsp;Janet Prvu Bettger,&nbsp;Karen P Alexander,&nbsp;Amy S Kendrick,&nbsp;Julian R Irvine,&nbsp;Liz Wing,&nbsp;Remy R Coeytaux,&nbsp;Rowena J Dolor,&nbsp;Pamela W Duncan,&nbsp;Carmelo Graffagnino\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To review the available published literature to assess whether evidence supports a beneficial role for coordinated transition of care services for the postacute care of patients hospitalized with first or recurrent stroke or myocardial infarction (MI). This review was framed around five areas of investigation: (1) key components of transition of care services, (2) evidence for improvement in functional outcomes, morbidity, mortality, and quality of life, (3) associated risks or potential harms, (4) evidence for improvement in systems of care, and (5) evidence that benefits and harms vary by patient-based or system-based characteristics.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>MEDLINE(®), CINAHL(®), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Embase(®).</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>We included studies published in English from 2000 to 2011 that specified postacute hospitalization transition of care services as well as prevention of recurrent stroke or MI.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 62 articles representing 44 studies were included for data abstraction. Transition of care interventions were grouped into four categories: (1) hospital -initiated support for discharge was the initial stage in the transition of care process, (2) patient and family education interventions were started during hospitalization but were continued at the community level, (3) community-based models of support followed hospital discharge, and (4) chronic disease management models of care assumed the responsibility for long-term care. Early supported discharge after stroke was associated with reduced total hospital length of stay without adverse effects on functional recovery, and specialty care after MI was associated with reduced mortality. Because of several methodological shortcomings, most studies did not consistently demonstrate that any specific intervention resulted in improved patient-or system -based outcomes. Some studies included more than one intervention, which made it difficult to determine the effect of individual components on clinical outcomes. There was inconsistency in the definition of what constituted a component of transition of care compared to \\\"standard care.\\\" Standard care was poorly defined, and nearly all studies were underpowered to demonstrate a statistical benefit. The endpoints varied greatly from study to study. Nearly all the studies were single-site based, and most (26 of 44) were conducted in countries with national health care systems quite different from that of the U.S., therefore limiting their generalizability.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although a basis for the definition of transition of care exists, more consensus is needed on the definition of the interventions and the outcomes appropriate to those interventions. There was limited evidence that two components of hospital-initiated support for discharge (early supported discharge after stroke and specialty care followup after MI)were associated with beneficial effects. No other interventions had sufficient evidence of benefit based on the findings of this systematic review. The adoption of a standard set of definitions, a refinement in the methodology used to study transition of care, and appropriate selection of patient-centered and policy-relevant outcomes should be employed to draw valid conclusions pertaining to specific components of transition of care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72991,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evidence report/technology assessment\",\"volume\":\" 202\",\"pages\":\"1-197\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4780900/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evidence report/technology assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence report/technology assessment","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

摘要

目的:回顾现有的已发表文献,以评估是否有证据支持在首次或复发性卒中或心肌梗死(MI)住院患者的急性后护理中协调过渡护理服务的有益作用。本综述围绕五个调查领域展开:(1)护理服务转型的关键组成部分;(2)改善功能结果、发病率、死亡率和生活质量的证据;(3)相关风险或潜在危害;(4)改善护理系统的证据;(5)益处和危害因患者或系统特征而异的证据。数据来源:MEDLINE(®),CINAHL(®),Cochrane系统评价数据库,Embase(®)。回顾方法:我们纳入了2000年至2011年间发表的英文研究,这些研究明确了急性住院后护理服务的转移以及卒中或心肌梗死复发的预防。结果:总共纳入了62篇文章,代表44项研究。护理过渡干预分为四类:(1)医院发起的出院支持是护理过程过渡的初始阶段;(2)患者和家庭教育干预在住院期间开始,但在社区层面继续进行;(3)出院后社区支持模式;(4)慢性病管理护理模式承担长期护理的责任。卒中后早期支持出院与减少总住院时间相关,且对功能恢复无不良影响,心肌梗死后的专科护理与降低死亡率相关。由于一些方法上的缺陷,大多数研究并没有一致地证明任何特定的干预措施都能改善基于患者或系统的结果。一些研究包括一项以上的干预措施,这使得很难确定单个成分对临床结果的影响。与“标准护理”相比,在构成护理过渡组成部分的定义上存在不一致。标准治疗的定义不明确,几乎所有的研究都不足以证明其统计学上的益处。不同研究的终点差异很大。几乎所有的研究都是基于单一地点的,而且大多数(44个中的26个)是在国家卫生保健系统与美国大不相同的国家进行的,因此限制了它们的普遍性。结论:虽然存在护理转移定义的基础,但对干预措施的定义和适合这些干预措施的结果还需要更多的共识。有限的证据表明,医院发起的出院支持的两个组成部分(卒中后早期支持出院和心肌梗死后的专科护理随访)与有益效果相关。根据本系统综述的发现,没有其他干预措施有足够的证据表明其有益。采用一套标准的定义,改进用于研究护理转变的方法,并适当选择以患者为中心和与政策相关的结果,以得出与护理转变的具体组成部分有关的有效结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Transition of care for acute stroke and myocardial infarction patients: from hospitalization to rehabilitation, recovery, and secondary prevention.

Objectives: To review the available published literature to assess whether evidence supports a beneficial role for coordinated transition of care services for the postacute care of patients hospitalized with first or recurrent stroke or myocardial infarction (MI). This review was framed around five areas of investigation: (1) key components of transition of care services, (2) evidence for improvement in functional outcomes, morbidity, mortality, and quality of life, (3) associated risks or potential harms, (4) evidence for improvement in systems of care, and (5) evidence that benefits and harms vary by patient-based or system-based characteristics.

Data sources: MEDLINE(®), CINAHL(®), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Embase(®).

Review methods: We included studies published in English from 2000 to 2011 that specified postacute hospitalization transition of care services as well as prevention of recurrent stroke or MI.

Results: A total of 62 articles representing 44 studies were included for data abstraction. Transition of care interventions were grouped into four categories: (1) hospital -initiated support for discharge was the initial stage in the transition of care process, (2) patient and family education interventions were started during hospitalization but were continued at the community level, (3) community-based models of support followed hospital discharge, and (4) chronic disease management models of care assumed the responsibility for long-term care. Early supported discharge after stroke was associated with reduced total hospital length of stay without adverse effects on functional recovery, and specialty care after MI was associated with reduced mortality. Because of several methodological shortcomings, most studies did not consistently demonstrate that any specific intervention resulted in improved patient-or system -based outcomes. Some studies included more than one intervention, which made it difficult to determine the effect of individual components on clinical outcomes. There was inconsistency in the definition of what constituted a component of transition of care compared to "standard care." Standard care was poorly defined, and nearly all studies were underpowered to demonstrate a statistical benefit. The endpoints varied greatly from study to study. Nearly all the studies were single-site based, and most (26 of 44) were conducted in countries with national health care systems quite different from that of the U.S., therefore limiting their generalizability.

Conclusions: Although a basis for the definition of transition of care exists, more consensus is needed on the definition of the interventions and the outcomes appropriate to those interventions. There was limited evidence that two components of hospital-initiated support for discharge (early supported discharge after stroke and specialty care followup after MI)were associated with beneficial effects. No other interventions had sufficient evidence of benefit based on the findings of this systematic review. The adoption of a standard set of definitions, a refinement in the methodology used to study transition of care, and appropriate selection of patient-centered and policy-relevant outcomes should be employed to draw valid conclusions pertaining to specific components of transition of care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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