电话随访及家访和电话随访联合干预在减少急性医疗保健利用中的重要性

IF 0.8 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Yuan Ying Lee, L. H. Tiew, Yee Kian Tay, J. Wong
{"title":"电话随访及家访和电话随访联合干预在减少急性医疗保健利用中的重要性","authors":"Yuan Ying Lee, L. H. Tiew, Yee Kian Tay, J. Wong","doi":"10.1108/jica-04-2021-0019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeTransitional care is increasingly important in reducing readmission rates and length of stay (LOS). Singapore is focusing on transitional care to address the evolving care needs of a multi-morbid ageing population. This study aims to investigate the impact of transitional care programs (TCPs) on acute healthcare utilization.Design/methodology/approachA retrospective, longitudinal, interventional study was conducted. High-risk patients were enrolled into a transitional care program of local tertiary hospital. Patients received either telephone follow-up (TFU) or home-based intervention (HBI) with TFU. Readmission rates and LOS were assessed for both groups.FindingsThere was no statistically significant difference in readmissions or LOS between TFU and HBI. After excluding demised patients, TFU had statistically significant lower LOS than HBI. Both interventions demonstrated statistically significant reductions in readmissions and LOS in pre–post analyses.Research limitations/implicationsTFU may be more effective than HBI in patients with lower clinical severity, despite both interventions showing statistically significant reductions in acute healthcare utilization. Study findings may be used to inform transitional care practices. Future studies should continue to examine the comparative effectiveness of transitional care interventions and the patient populations most likely to benefit.Originality/valuePrevious studies demonstrated promising outcomes for TFU and HBIs, but few have evaluated their comparative effectiveness on acute healthcare utilization and specific patient populations most likely to benefit. This study evaluated interventional effectiveness of both, which might be useful for informing allocation of resources based on clinical complexity and care needs.","PeriodicalId":51837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Integrated Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Importance of telephone follow-up and combined home visit and telephone follow-up interventions in reducing acute healthcare utilization\",\"authors\":\"Yuan Ying Lee, L. H. Tiew, Yee Kian Tay, J. Wong\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jica-04-2021-0019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeTransitional care is increasingly important in reducing readmission rates and length of stay (LOS). Singapore is focusing on transitional care to address the evolving care needs of a multi-morbid ageing population. This study aims to investigate the impact of transitional care programs (TCPs) on acute healthcare utilization.Design/methodology/approachA retrospective, longitudinal, interventional study was conducted. High-risk patients were enrolled into a transitional care program of local tertiary hospital. Patients received either telephone follow-up (TFU) or home-based intervention (HBI) with TFU. Readmission rates and LOS were assessed for both groups.FindingsThere was no statistically significant difference in readmissions or LOS between TFU and HBI. After excluding demised patients, TFU had statistically significant lower LOS than HBI. Both interventions demonstrated statistically significant reductions in readmissions and LOS in pre–post analyses.Research limitations/implicationsTFU may be more effective than HBI in patients with lower clinical severity, despite both interventions showing statistically significant reductions in acute healthcare utilization. Study findings may be used to inform transitional care practices. Future studies should continue to examine the comparative effectiveness of transitional care interventions and the patient populations most likely to benefit.Originality/valuePrevious studies demonstrated promising outcomes for TFU and HBIs, but few have evaluated their comparative effectiveness on acute healthcare utilization and specific patient populations most likely to benefit. This study evaluated interventional effectiveness of both, which might be useful for informing allocation of resources based on clinical complexity and care needs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51837,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Integrated Care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Integrated Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jica-04-2021-0019\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Integrated Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jica-04-2021-0019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:过渡性护理在减少再入院率和住院时间(LOS)方面越来越重要。新加坡的重点是过渡性护理,以满足多种疾病的老龄化人口不断变化的护理需求。摘要本研究旨在探讨过渡性照护计划(TCPs)对急症照护利用的影响。设计/方法/方法进行回顾性、纵向、干预性研究。高危患者纳入当地三级医院过渡性护理方案。患者接受电话随访(TFU)或基于家庭的TFU干预(HBI)。评估两组患者的再入院率和LOS。TFU和HBI在再入院和LOS方面无统计学差异。在排除死亡患者后,TFU的LOS明显低于HBI。在前后分析中,两种干预措施均显示统计学上显著降低再入院率和LOS。研究局限性/意义:在临床严重程度较低的患者中,stfu可能比HBI更有效,尽管两种干预措施均显示急性医疗保健使用率有统计学显著降低。研究结果可用于指导过渡性护理实践。未来的研究应该继续检查过渡性护理干预的相对有效性和最有可能受益的患者群体。原创性/价值先前的研究表明TFU和hbi的结果很有希望,但很少有研究评估它们在急性医疗保健利用和最有可能受益的特定患者群体方面的比较有效性。本研究评估了两者的介入效果,这可能有助于根据临床复杂性和护理需求分配资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Importance of telephone follow-up and combined home visit and telephone follow-up interventions in reducing acute healthcare utilization
PurposeTransitional care is increasingly important in reducing readmission rates and length of stay (LOS). Singapore is focusing on transitional care to address the evolving care needs of a multi-morbid ageing population. This study aims to investigate the impact of transitional care programs (TCPs) on acute healthcare utilization.Design/methodology/approachA retrospective, longitudinal, interventional study was conducted. High-risk patients were enrolled into a transitional care program of local tertiary hospital. Patients received either telephone follow-up (TFU) or home-based intervention (HBI) with TFU. Readmission rates and LOS were assessed for both groups.FindingsThere was no statistically significant difference in readmissions or LOS between TFU and HBI. After excluding demised patients, TFU had statistically significant lower LOS than HBI. Both interventions demonstrated statistically significant reductions in readmissions and LOS in pre–post analyses.Research limitations/implicationsTFU may be more effective than HBI in patients with lower clinical severity, despite both interventions showing statistically significant reductions in acute healthcare utilization. Study findings may be used to inform transitional care practices. Future studies should continue to examine the comparative effectiveness of transitional care interventions and the patient populations most likely to benefit.Originality/valuePrevious studies demonstrated promising outcomes for TFU and HBIs, but few have evaluated their comparative effectiveness on acute healthcare utilization and specific patient populations most likely to benefit. This study evaluated interventional effectiveness of both, which might be useful for informing allocation of resources based on clinical complexity and care needs.
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
Journal of Integrated Care
Journal of Integrated Care HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
12.50%
发文量
34
×
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