...
首页> 外文期刊>Scandinavian journal of primary health care. >Can municipality-based post-discharge follow-up visits including a general practitioner reduce early readmission among the fragile elderly (65+years old)? A randomized controlled trial
【24h】

Can municipality-based post-discharge follow-up visits including a general practitioner reduce early readmission among the fragile elderly (65+years old)? A randomized controlled trial

机译:包括全科医生在内的市政府出院后随访能否减少脆弱老年人(65岁以上)的早期再入院?随机对照试验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Objective. To evaluate how municipality-based post-discharge follow-up visits including a general practitioner and municipal nurse affect early readmission among high-risk older people discharged from a hospital department of internal medicine. Design and setting. Centrally randomized single-centre pragmatic controlled trial comparing intervention and usual care with investigator-blinded outcome assessment. Intervention. The intervention was home visits with a general practitioner and municipal nurse within seven days of discharge focusing on medication, rehabilitation plan, functional level, and need for further health care initiatives. The visit was concluded by planning one or two further visits. Controls received standard health care services. Patients. People aged 65. years discharged from Holbaek University Hospital, Denmark, in 2012 considered at high risk of readmission. Main outcome measures. The primary outcome was readmission within 30 days. Secondary outcomes at 30 and 180 days included readmission, primary health care, and municipal services. Outcomes were register-based and analysis used the intention-to-treat principle. Results. A total of 270 and 261 patients were randomized to intervention and control groups, respectively. The groups were similar in baseline characteristics. In all 149 planned discharge follow-up visits were carried out (55%). Within 30 days, 24% of the intervention group and 23% of the control group were readmitted (p = 0.93). No significant differences were found for any other secondary outcomes except that the intervention group received more municipal nursing services. Conclusion. This municipality-based follow-up intervention was only feasible in half the planned visits. The intervention as delivered had no effect on readmission or subsequent use of primary or secondary health care services.
机译:目的。评估包括全科医生和市政护士在内的市政府出院后随访访问如何影响从医院内科部门出院的高危老年人的早期再入院。设计和设置。中心随机单中心实用对照试验,将干预和常规护理与研究者盲目的结局评估进行比较。介入。干预措施是出院后7天内与一名全科医生和市政护士进行家访,重点是药物,康复计划,功能水平以及是否需要进一步的医疗保健措施。通过计划再进行一次或两次访问来结束此次访问。控件获得了标准的卫生保健服务。耐心。 2012年,丹麦霍尔拜克大学医院出诊的65岁患者被认为有再次住院的高风险。主要观察指标。主要结果是30天内再次入院。 30天和180天的次要结局包括再入院,初级卫生保健和市政服务。结果基于登记,分析使用意向治疗原则。结果。总共将270名和261名患者随机分为干预组和对照组。各组的基线特征相似。在所有149个计划的出院随访中,进行了随访(55%)。在30天内,重新进入了干预组的24%和对照组的23%(p = 0.93)。除干预组接受更多市政护理服务外,其他任何次要结局均无显着差异。结论。这种基于市政当局的后续干预措施仅在计划访问的一半时间内是可行的。所提供的干预措施对再入院或随后使用初级或二级卫生保健服务没有影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号