Search

Background: Hospital-at-home (HAH) is increasingly becoming an alternative for in-hospital stay in selected clinical scenarios. Nevertheless, there is still a question whether HAH could be a viable option for acutely ill patients, otherwise hospitalized in departments of general-internal medicine., Methods: This was a retrospective matched study, conducted at a telemedicine controlled HAH department, being part of a tertiary medical center. The objective was to compare clinical outcomes of acutely ill patients (both COVID-19 and non-COVID) admitted to either in-hospital or HAH. Non-COVID patients had one of three acute infectious diseases: urinary tract infections (UTI, either lower or upper), pneumonia, or cellulitis., Results: The analysis involved 159 HAH patients (64 COVID-19 and 95 non-COVID) who were compared to a matched sample of in-hospital patients (192 COVID-19 and 285 non-COVID). The median length-of-hospital stay (LOS) was 2 days shorter in the HAH for both COVID-19 patients (95% CI: 1-3; p = 0.008) and non-COVID patients (95% CI; 1-3; p < 0.001). The readmission rates within 30 days were not significantly different for both COVID-19 patients (Odds Ratio (OR) = 1; 95% CI: 0.49-2.04; p = 1) and non-COVID patients (OR = 0.7; 95% CI; 0.39-1.28; p = 0.25). The differences remained insignificant within one year. The risk of death within 30 days was significantly lower in the HAH group for COVID-19 patients (OR = 0.34; 95% CI: 0.11-0.86; p = 0.018) and non-COVID patients (OR = 0.38; 95% CI: 0.14-0.9; p = 0.019). For one year survival period, the differences were significant for COVID-19 patients (OR = 0.5; 95% CI: 0.31-0.9; p = 0.044) and insignificant for non-COVID patients (OR = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.4-1; p = 0.052)., Conclusions: Care for acutely ill patients in the setting of telemedicine-based hospital at home has the potential to reduce hospitalization length without increasing readmission risk and to reduce both 30 days and one-year mortality rates., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Zychlinski et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

The correlation between anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antibody levels and infection was reported. Here, we estimated the role of pre-fourth dose levels using data from 1098 healthcare workers. The risk of infection was reduced by 46% (95% confidence interval, 29%-59%) for each 10-fold increase in prebooster levels. Prebooster antibody levels could be used to optimally time boosters., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. G. R.-Y. reports institutional grant funding of studies not related to the current study from Pfizer and Moderna; and consulting fees/honoraria from Teva, MSD, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Moderna, and Medison. N. B. and Y. L. report institutional grants from Pfizer and Moderna. Y. L. reports an investigator-initiated grant from Pfizer, unrelated to this work. Y. K. reports other financial or nonfinancial interests as a lecturer in Tel Aviv University—as a faculty and as guest lecturer in Reichman University. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in hospitalised patients but is known be suboptimally managed; the National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcomes and Death (NCEPOD) report in 2009 identified significant failings in AKI care. An audit, using standards suggested by the NCEPOD report, of all adult inpatients with AKI in a large central-London NHS hospital in a 7-day period in 2011 showed poor recognition and management of AKI. In response, an AKI 'care bundle' was developed and deployed throughout the hospital along with a programme of enhanced education. Re-audit in 2013 showed that AKI was significantly more likely to have been recognised by the clinical team than in 2011, and patients with AKI were significantly more likely to have had fluid status clinically assessed and nephrotoxic medication stopped in 2013 than in 2011. There was no significant improvement in fluid administration if assessed as hypovolaemic and compliance with the guideline for prevention of contrast nephropathy. In 2011, all audit measures were met in 3.7% of patient-days versus 8.4% in 2013. More in-depth work is necessary to better understand the factors which limit optimal care., (© Royal College of Physicians 2015. All rights reserved.)