Search

The delivery of acute health care has changed with the adoption of new technologies to meet changing community needs. In response to this, hospital systems and governments have invested in alternative models of care, including hospital in the home (HITH), where acute care that would typically require inpatient treatment is provided in the patient's home. The academic literature presents evidence for comparable or improved patient outcomes associated with HITH interventions. However, it is currently unknown how consumers and providers view the model in the context of a new healthcare facility. This study aimed to elicit consumer and provider views about HITH and how the implementation of a HITH model of care in a new hospital could meet their healthcare needs. We adopted a qualitative approach for this research. Semistructured workshops and interviews were conducted via Zoom, where we presented patient vignettes of different models of care to consumers and providers and recorded their responses using scribes. Qualitative data were independently coded by pairs of researchers to identify themes and subthemes, and demographic data were aggregated. A total of 51 consumers and 35 providers attended the workshops. Consumers and providers frequently described similar themes, particularly accessibility, patient factors, and the health system consequences of HITH. However, the importance and focus of these topics varied across participants. Participants endorsed HITH as a flexible, patient-centred model with potential for wellbeing benefits. However, they noted the potential need for additional resources and increased anxiety among patients with lower health literacy. To address this, participants described the need for clear escalation protocols, communication channels, and expectations around HITH care. In conclusion, HITH is an established model that brings acute care into the homes of patients. The findings of this study support the provision of flexible acute care delivery to meet consumer needs and address the challenges encountered during the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this systematic review was to examine the relationship between strategies to improve care delivery for older adults in ED and evaluation measures of patient outcomes, patient experience, staff experience, and system performance. Methods: A systematic review of English language studies published since inception to December 2022, available from CINAHL, Embase, Medline, and Scopus was conducted. Studies were reviewed by pairs of independent reviewers and included if they met the following criteria: participant mean age of ≥ 65 years; ED setting or directly influenced provision of care in the ED; reported on improvement interventions and strategies; reported patient outcomes, patient experience, staff experience, or system performance. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by pairs of independent reviewers using The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. Data were synthesised using a hermeneutic approach. Results: Seventy-six studies were included in the review, incorporating strategies for comprehensive assessment and multi-faceted care (n = 32), targeted care such as management of falls risk, functional decline, or pain management (n = 27), medication safety (n = 5), and trauma care (n = 12). We found a misalignment between comprehensive care delivered in ED for older adults and ED performance measures oriented to rapid assessment and referral. Eight (10.4%) studies reported patient experience and five (6.5%) reported staff experience. Conclusion: It is crucial that future strategies to improve care delivery in ED align the needs of older adults with the purpose of the ED system to ensure sustainable improvement effort and critical functioning of the ED as an interdependent component of the health system. Staff and patient input at the design stage may advance prioritisation of higher-impact interventions aligned with the pace of change and illuminate experience measures. More consistent reporting of interventions would inform important contextual factors and allow for replication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this systematic review was to examine the relationship between strategies to improve care delivery for older adults in ED and evaluation measures of patient outcomes, patient experience, staff experience, and system performance. Methods: A systematic review of English language studies published since inception to December 2022, available from CINAHL, Embase, Medline, and Scopus was conducted. Studies were reviewed by pairs of independent reviewers and included if they met the following criteria: participant mean age of ≥ 65 years; ED setting or directly influenced provision of care in the ED; reported on improvement interventions and strategies; reported patient outcomes, patient experience, staff experience, or system performance. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by pairs of independent reviewers using The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. Data were synthesised using a hermeneutic approach. Results: Seventy-six studies were included in the review, incorporating strategies for comprehensive assessment and multi-faceted care (n = 32), targeted care such as management of falls risk, functional decline, or pain management (n = 27), medication safety (n = 5), and trauma care (n = 12). We found a misalignment between comprehensive care delivered in ED for older adults and ED performance measures oriented to rapid assessment and referral. Eight (10.4%) studies reported patient experience and five (6.5%) reported staff experience. Conclusion: It is crucial that future strategies to improve care delivery in ED align the needs of older adults with the purpose of the ED system to ensure sustainable improvement effort and critical functioning of the ED as an interdependent component of the health system. Staff and patient input at the design stage may advance prioritisation of higher-impact interventions aligned with the pace of change and illuminate experience measures. More consistent reporting of interventions would inform important contextual factors and allow for replication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]