家庭医院(HITH)恶化患者的未来:转变范式。

IF 6.8 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Medical Journal of Australia Pub Date : 2025-01-22 DOI:10.5694/mja2.52588
Mya Cubitt, Seok Lim
{"title":"家庭医院(HITH)恶化患者的未来:转变范式。","authors":"Mya Cubitt,&nbsp;Seok Lim","doi":"10.5694/mja2.52588","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Australia's health care system is grappling with a mismatch of demand and capacity, with bottlenecks in access to, and transitions of, care and rising costs.<span><sup>1</sup></span> Hospital-in-the-home (HITH) models of care are suggested as sustainable patient-centred, value-based solutions.<span><sup>2</sup></span></p><p>HITH is defined as a 24-hour, 7-days-a-week service of “acute inpatient equivalent care, utilising highly skilled staff, hospital technologies, equipment, medication, and safety and quality standards, to deliver hospital-level care within a person's place of residence or preferred (non-hospital) treatment location”.<span><sup>3</sup></span> HITH models vary in clinical governance, combination and frequency of in-person or telehealth visits, patient selection and clinician staffing.<span><sup>4-6</sup></span> When HITH substitutes for hospital location of care (admission avoidance, AA) are compared to early supported discharge (ESD) or other hospital outreach services, clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction are comparable or improved, and care is cost-effective.<span><sup>7, 8</sup></span> However, evidence describing those patients for whom HITH is optimal and processes to recognise and respond to deteriorating HITH patients remains limited.<span><sup>9, 10</sup></span></p><p>The Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care (ACSQHC) defines health service standards of care, including “recognising and responding to acute deterioration” in a patient's physical, cognitive or mental state.<span><sup>11</sup></span> Currently, systems for managing deteriorating patients focus on hospital-located patients with escalation when mismatches in “clinical needs and the local resources to manage them” are identified.<span><sup>12</sup></span> In hospitals with rapid response teams, rates of activation of these teams vary considerably (1.35–71.3 per 1000 admissions).<span><sup>13</sup></span> Mixed efficacy in improving patient outcomes is observed, with concern regarding cost-effectiveness, sustainability, disruption to usual hospital routines, mortality as an outcome measure, deskilling of ward staff, and the impact on patient-centred care and doctor–patient relationships, especially in end-of-life care.<span><sup>14</sup></span> Relevant to the current context, evidence shows an increased reliance on systems for managing deteriorating patients with increasing patient complexity, economic and hospital capacity stress, and a focus on patient flow.<span><sup>14</sup></span></p><p>HITH models of care attached to Australian health services are subject to ACSQHC safety and quality accreditation standards.<span><sup>11, 15</sup></span> Despite HITH being available in Australia for many years, gaps remain in translation of hospital systems to manage deteriorating patients to HITH locations of care, standardised definitions, and data collection, making audit, research, benchmarking and policy difficult.<span><sup>8, 16</sup></span> The incidence of HITH patient deterioration and transfer back to hospital is difficult to establish because it is confused with post-discharge readmission rates, reported within disease-specific research and not model of care research, and impacted by variability in patient complexity and acuity.<span><sup>9, 17-19</sup></span></p><p>Systems to manage deteriorating patients rely on identification of patient deterioration, and safe, timely, appropriate responses. HITH models introduce geographical distance, variable contexts of care, altered opportunities for patient observation, and adjacent community-based stakeholders including paid and unpaid caregivers and health care providers such as general practitioners, specialist physicians, nurses, allied health practitioners and paramedicine practitioners. Coordinating across these fragmented hospital and community services is complex without real-time information sharing and communication systems.</p><p>HITH services rely on patient selection to mitigate risk.<span><sup>20</sup></span> Services that achieve safe, earlier diversion of higher acuity, more complex patients offer more value.<span><sup>4</sup></span> Geographical distance offers opportunities for innovative digital adjuncts such as wearable and continuous monitoring devices and video telehealth.<span><sup>21, 22</sup></span> However, the sensitivity, specificity, noise to signal ratio for clinical deterioration remains unclear. Also, the cost-effectiveness, utility in risk assessment, and value of digital adjuncts to clinicians, patients and caregivers need clarification. Current evidence suggests that HITH nurses use clinical cues in collaboration with patients and caregivers along with context-specific social and environmental factors, such as safety in the home for patients, workforce and caregivers to identify and respond to clinical deterioration.<span><sup>23, 24</sup></span></p><p>HITH offers unique opportunities to incorporate nuanced qualitative observation tools, such as caregiver assessment and escalation, proven effective in paediatric cohorts.<span><sup>25</sup></span> Similar systems are evolving in adult care to detect deterioration in adults living with multimorbidity, cognitive impairment and frailty.<span><sup>26</sup></span> Situations with appropriate limitations on futile care or palliative intent, coupled with deficiencies in community aged care services, ageism, poor shared understanding of HITH capabilities and risks of hospital-based care increase complexity in HITH systems managing deteriorating patients.<span><sup>27</sup></span> Co-designing integrated care that includes effective systems to manage deteriorating patients with patients, caregivers and stakeholders across hospital and community services is crucial to optimise patient-centred outcomes and maintain trust in the health care system. When poorly implemented, unintended consequences include caregiver burden to recognise, escalate and observe deteriorating patient events.<span><sup>28</sup></span></p><p>After recognition, HITH systems to manage deteriorating patients should provide clear options in terms of what happens next, including the timing, people involved and location. Clinicians must be skilled in weighing up and accepting risk across individualised thresholds and timeframes for in-person or telehealth assessment, access to diagnostic and intervention resources, in community or hospital locations, with safety-netting in observation and care during and after recognition, assessment and response to deteriorating patients. When relocating patients to hospital, clinicians must establish when, by which mode of transport, to which resourced patient reception area for assessment and management, under governance of which accountable unit and using which communication strategies for patients, caregivers and clinicians.<span><sup>29</sup></span></p><p>Current HITH pathways to manage deteriorating patients rely on existing community-based systems, such as ambulance and emergency department services, especially after hours (Box). Patients, caregivers and HITH clinicians are usually advised to call 000 despite limited system enablers for information sharing and clinical handover between HITH, paramedicine and receiving emergency department clinicians. Should these emergency system resources be allocated to HITH deteriorating patients? Ironically, deteriorating HITH patients then enter bottlenecks that HITH models of care were designed to ease, waiting for ambulances to arrive, or ramped in emergency departments waiting to access over-stretched hospital services. Alternative hospital access points (eg, day procedure units, specialist services such as oncology and dialysis, and patient flow wards such as transit lounges) are unable to meet the needs of the deteriorating patient in the community, especially after hours, thus perpetuating reliance on primary care, ambulance services and emergency departments.</p><p>Systems to manage HITH deteriorating patients should mitigate these risks through education and partnership with community services, visual clues identifying patients as admitted HITH patients (door signs and patient identification labels), and prominently displayed 24-hour HITH phone access for patients, caregivers and clinicians. In the United States, regulations mandate safety elements, including service-specific patient selection criteria, pre-established advanced care planning, minimum daily in-person assessments, processes for patients uncontactable within 15 minutes of scheduled care, immediate on-demand remote audio connection to a registered nurse or physician and in-home response within 30 minutes if needed.<span><sup>30, 31</sup></span> To meet safety regulations, many American HITH services employ paramedics and buy their own patient transport vehicles.</p><p>Safely upscaling HITH models of care requires integration of 24/7 HITH-suitable systems to manage deteriorating patients. Accountability to these systems will mitigate the risk of unintended burden on patients, caregivers, clinicians and existing services, such as ambulance and emergency departments.</p><p>HITH offers opportunities to break down existing silos between hospital and community locations of health and care delivery to advance the safe, timely recognition and response to deteriorating patients.</p><p>Open access publishing facilitated by The University of Melbourne, as part of the Wiley - The University of Melbourne agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians.</p><p>No relevant disclosures.</p><p>Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.</p>","PeriodicalId":18214,"journal":{"name":"Medical Journal of Australia","volume":"222 4","pages":"168-171"},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.5694/mja2.52588","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A future for the hospital-in-the-home (HITH) deteriorating patient: shifting the paradigm\",\"authors\":\"Mya Cubitt,&nbsp;Seok Lim\",\"doi\":\"10.5694/mja2.52588\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Australia's health care system is grappling with a mismatch of demand and capacity, with bottlenecks in access to, and transitions of, care and rising costs.<span><sup>1</sup></span> Hospital-in-the-home (HITH) models of care are suggested as sustainable patient-centred, value-based solutions.<span><sup>2</sup></span></p><p>HITH is defined as a 24-hour, 7-days-a-week service of “acute inpatient equivalent care, utilising highly skilled staff, hospital technologies, equipment, medication, and safety and quality standards, to deliver hospital-level care within a person's place of residence or preferred (non-hospital) treatment location”.<span><sup>3</sup></span> HITH models vary in clinical governance, combination and frequency of in-person or telehealth visits, patient selection and clinician staffing.<span><sup>4-6</sup></span> When HITH substitutes for hospital location of care (admission avoidance, AA) are compared to early supported discharge (ESD) or other hospital outreach services, clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction are comparable or improved, and care is cost-effective.<span><sup>7, 8</sup></span> However, evidence describing those patients for whom HITH is optimal and processes to recognise and respond to deteriorating HITH patients remains limited.<span><sup>9, 10</sup></span></p><p>The Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care (ACSQHC) defines health service standards of care, including “recognising and responding to acute deterioration” in a patient's physical, cognitive or mental state.<span><sup>11</sup></span> Currently, systems for managing deteriorating patients focus on hospital-located patients with escalation when mismatches in “clinical needs and the local resources to manage them” are identified.<span><sup>12</sup></span> In hospitals with rapid response teams, rates of activation of these teams vary considerably (1.35–71.3 per 1000 admissions).<span><sup>13</sup></span> Mixed efficacy in improving patient outcomes is observed, with concern regarding cost-effectiveness, sustainability, disruption to usual hospital routines, mortality as an outcome measure, deskilling of ward staff, and the impact on patient-centred care and doctor–patient relationships, especially in end-of-life care.<span><sup>14</sup></span> Relevant to the current context, evidence shows an increased reliance on systems for managing deteriorating patients with increasing patient complexity, economic and hospital capacity stress, and a focus on patient flow.<span><sup>14</sup></span></p><p>HITH models of care attached to Australian health services are subject to ACSQHC safety and quality accreditation standards.<span><sup>11, 15</sup></span> Despite HITH being available in Australia for many years, gaps remain in translation of hospital systems to manage deteriorating patients to HITH locations of care, standardised definitions, and data collection, making audit, research, benchmarking and policy difficult.<span><sup>8, 16</sup></span> The incidence of HITH patient deterioration and transfer back to hospital is difficult to establish because it is confused with post-discharge readmission rates, reported within disease-specific research and not model of care research, and impacted by variability in patient complexity and acuity.<span><sup>9, 17-19</sup></span></p><p>Systems to manage deteriorating patients rely on identification of patient deterioration, and safe, timely, appropriate responses. HITH models introduce geographical distance, variable contexts of care, altered opportunities for patient observation, and adjacent community-based stakeholders including paid and unpaid caregivers and health care providers such as general practitioners, specialist physicians, nurses, allied health practitioners and paramedicine practitioners. Coordinating across these fragmented hospital and community services is complex without real-time information sharing and communication systems.</p><p>HITH services rely on patient selection to mitigate risk.<span><sup>20</sup></span> Services that achieve safe, earlier diversion of higher acuity, more complex patients offer more value.<span><sup>4</sup></span> Geographical distance offers opportunities for innovative digital adjuncts such as wearable and continuous monitoring devices and video telehealth.<span><sup>21, 22</sup></span> However, the sensitivity, specificity, noise to signal ratio for clinical deterioration remains unclear. Also, the cost-effectiveness, utility in risk assessment, and value of digital adjuncts to clinicians, patients and caregivers need clarification. Current evidence suggests that HITH nurses use clinical cues in collaboration with patients and caregivers along with context-specific social and environmental factors, such as safety in the home for patients, workforce and caregivers to identify and respond to clinical deterioration.<span><sup>23, 24</sup></span></p><p>HITH offers unique opportunities to incorporate nuanced qualitative observation tools, such as caregiver assessment and escalation, proven effective in paediatric cohorts.<span><sup>25</sup></span> Similar systems are evolving in adult care to detect deterioration in adults living with multimorbidity, cognitive impairment and frailty.<span><sup>26</sup></span> Situations with appropriate limitations on futile care or palliative intent, coupled with deficiencies in community aged care services, ageism, poor shared understanding of HITH capabilities and risks of hospital-based care increase complexity in HITH systems managing deteriorating patients.<span><sup>27</sup></span> Co-designing integrated care that includes effective systems to manage deteriorating patients with patients, caregivers and stakeholders across hospital and community services is crucial to optimise patient-centred outcomes and maintain trust in the health care system. When poorly implemented, unintended consequences include caregiver burden to recognise, escalate and observe deteriorating patient events.<span><sup>28</sup></span></p><p>After recognition, HITH systems to manage deteriorating patients should provide clear options in terms of what happens next, including the timing, people involved and location. Clinicians must be skilled in weighing up and accepting risk across individualised thresholds and timeframes for in-person or telehealth assessment, access to diagnostic and intervention resources, in community or hospital locations, with safety-netting in observation and care during and after recognition, assessment and response to deteriorating patients. When relocating patients to hospital, clinicians must establish when, by which mode of transport, to which resourced patient reception area for assessment and management, under governance of which accountable unit and using which communication strategies for patients, caregivers and clinicians.<span><sup>29</sup></span></p><p>Current HITH pathways to manage deteriorating patients rely on existing community-based systems, such as ambulance and emergency department services, especially after hours (Box). Patients, caregivers and HITH clinicians are usually advised to call 000 despite limited system enablers for information sharing and clinical handover between HITH, paramedicine and receiving emergency department clinicians. Should these emergency system resources be allocated to HITH deteriorating patients? Ironically, deteriorating HITH patients then enter bottlenecks that HITH models of care were designed to ease, waiting for ambulances to arrive, or ramped in emergency departments waiting to access over-stretched hospital services. Alternative hospital access points (eg, day procedure units, specialist services such as oncology and dialysis, and patient flow wards such as transit lounges) are unable to meet the needs of the deteriorating patient in the community, especially after hours, thus perpetuating reliance on primary care, ambulance services and emergency departments.</p><p>Systems to manage HITH deteriorating patients should mitigate these risks through education and partnership with community services, visual clues identifying patients as admitted HITH patients (door signs and patient identification labels), and prominently displayed 24-hour HITH phone access for patients, caregivers and clinicians. In the United States, regulations mandate safety elements, including service-specific patient selection criteria, pre-established advanced care planning, minimum daily in-person assessments, processes for patients uncontactable within 15 minutes of scheduled care, immediate on-demand remote audio connection to a registered nurse or physician and in-home response within 30 minutes if needed.<span><sup>30, 31</sup></span> To meet safety regulations, many American HITH services employ paramedics and buy their own patient transport vehicles.</p><p>Safely upscaling HITH models of care requires integration of 24/7 HITH-suitable systems to manage deteriorating patients. Accountability to these systems will mitigate the risk of unintended burden on patients, caregivers, clinicians and existing services, such as ambulance and emergency departments.</p><p>HITH offers opportunities to break down existing silos between hospital and community locations of health and care delivery to advance the safe, timely recognition and response to deteriorating patients.</p><p>Open access publishing facilitated by The University of Melbourne, as part of the Wiley - The University of Melbourne agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians.</p><p>No relevant disclosures.</p><p>Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18214,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Journal of Australia\",\"volume\":\"222 4\",\"pages\":\"168-171\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.5694/mja2.52588\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Journal of Australia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.5694/mja2.52588\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Journal of Australia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.5694/mja2.52588","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

澳大利亚的医疗保健系统正在努力解决需求和能力不匹配的问题,在获得和过渡护理方面存在瓶颈,成本不断上升家庭医院(HITH)护理模式被建议为可持续的以患者为中心、基于价值的解决方案。2hth被定义为每周7天、每天24小时的服务,“利用高度熟练的工作人员、医院技术、设备、药物以及安全和质量标准,在患者的居住地或首选(非医院)治疗地点提供与急性住院病人相当的护理”HITH模式在临床管理、面对面或远程医疗访问的组合和频率、患者选择和临床医生配备方面各不相同。4-6与早期支持出院(ESD)或其他医院外展服务相比,HITH替代医院护理地点(入院避免,AA),临床结果和患者满意度相当或有所改善,并且护理具有成本效益。7,8然而,描述HITH最适合的患者以及识别和应对恶化HITH患者的过程的证据仍然有限。9,10澳大利亚卫生保健安全和质量委员会(ACSQHC)定义了卫生保健服务标准,包括“识别和应对”病人身体、认知或精神状态的“急性恶化”目前,管理病情恶化患者的系统侧重于医院内的患者,当“临床需求与当地管理资源”不匹配时,病情就会升级在设有快速反应小组的医院,这些小组的激活率差别很大(每1000名病人中有1.35-71.3人)在改善患者预后方面观察到好坏参半的效果,其中涉及成本效益、可持续性、对常规医院程序的破坏、作为结果衡量标准的死亡率、病房工作人员的技能培训以及对以患者为中心的护理和医患关系的影响,特别是在临终关怀方面与当前情况相关的证据表明,随着患者复杂性、经济和医院能力压力的增加,越来越依赖于管理病情恶化患者的系统,并关注患者流量。14 .澳大利亚保健服务附带的hith护理模式须遵守ACSQHC安全和质量认证标准。11,15尽管HITH在澳大利亚已经存在多年,但在医院系统的翻译方面仍然存在差距,以管理恶化的患者到HITH的护理地点,标准化定义和数据收集,使审计,研究,基准和政策变得困难。8,16 HITH患者病情恶化和转回医院的发生率很难确定,因为它与出院后再入院率相混淆,这是在疾病特异性研究中报告的,而不是在护理研究模型中报告的,并且受到患者复杂性和敏锐度变化的影响。9,17 -19管理病情恶化患者的系统依赖于对患者病情恶化的识别,以及安全、及时、适当的应对措施。HITH模式引入了地理距离、不同的护理环境、不同的患者观察机会以及邻近的社区利益相关者,包括有偿和无偿护理人员和卫生保健提供者,如全科医生、专科医生、护士、联合卫生从业人员和辅助医疗从业人员。在没有实时信息共享和通信系统的情况下,协调这些分散的医院和社区服务是很复杂的。艾滋病毒感染服务依靠患者选择来降低风险能够安全、早地为高度度、更复杂的患者转诊的服务提供了更大的价值地理距离为可穿戴和连续监测设备以及视频远程保健等创新数字辅助设备提供了机会。21,22然而,临床恶化的敏感性、特异性、信噪比仍不清楚。此外,需要澄清成本效益、风险评估中的效用以及数字辅助工具对临床医生、患者和护理人员的价值。目前的证据表明,HITH护士与患者和护理人员合作,利用临床线索以及特定情境的社会和环境因素,如患者家中的安全、劳动力和护理人员,来识别和应对临床恶化。23,24 hith为纳入细致的定性观察工具提供了独特的机会,例如在儿科队列中证明有效的护理人员评估和升级成人护理中也在发展类似的系统,以检测患有多种疾病、认知障碍和虚弱的成年人的病情恶化。 对无效护理或姑息治疗意图的适当限制,加上社区老年护理服务的不足,年龄歧视,对HITH能力和医院护理风险的共同理解不足,增加了HITH系统管理恶化患者的复杂性共同设计综合护理,包括与医院和社区服务部门的患者、护理人员和利益相关者一起管理病情恶化患者的有效系统,对于优化以患者为中心的结果和维持对卫生保健系统的信任至关重要。如果实施不当,会产生意想不到的后果,包括给护理人员带来识别、升级和观察不断恶化的患者事件的负担。28 .识别后,用于管理病情恶化患者的卫生保健系统应就接下来发生的事情提供明确的选择,包括时间、相关人员和地点。临床医生必须熟练权衡和接受个性化阈值和时间框架的风险,以便在社区或医院进行面对面或远程医疗评估,获得诊断和干预资源,并在识别、评估和应对病情恶化的患者期间和之后进行观察和护理,建立安全网。在将患者重新安置到医院时,临床医生必须确定何时、采用哪种运输方式、到哪个有资源的患者接待区进行评估和管理,由哪个问责单位管理,以及对患者、护理人员和临床医生使用哪种沟通策略。29 .目前管理病情恶化患者的卫生保健途径依赖于现有的社区系统,如救护车和急诊科服务,特别是非工作时间服务(方框)。患者、护理人员和HITH临床医生通常被建议拨打000,尽管HITH、辅助医疗和接收急诊科临床医生之间信息共享和临床移交的系统启用器有限。这些应急系统资源是否应分配给艾滋病毒恶化患者?具有讽刺意味的是,病情恶化的HITH患者随后进入HITH护理模式旨在缓解的瓶颈,等待救护车到达,或在急诊科等待获得超负荷的医院服务。其他医院接入点(如日间手术单位、肿瘤和透析等专科服务以及中转候诊室等病人流动病房)无法满足社区中病情恶化的病人的需要,特别是在非工作时间,因此长期依赖初级保健、救护车服务和急诊科。管理HITH恶化患者的系统应通过教育和与社区服务机构的合作、识别患者为入院HITH患者的视觉线索(门牌和患者识别标签)以及为患者、护理人员和临床医生提供24小时HITH电话访问的显著位置来减轻这些风险。在美国,法规规定了安全要素,包括特定服务的患者选择标准,预先建立的高级护理计划,最低限度的每日亲自评估,在15分钟内无法联系的患者的流程,即时按需远程音频连接到注册护士或医生,如果需要,在30分钟内在家响应。30,31为了符合安全规定,许多美国hiv服务机构雇用护理人员并购买自己的病人运输车。安全升级hth护理模式需要整合适合hth的24/7系统,以管理病情恶化的患者。对这些系统的问责将减轻对患者、护理人员、临床医生和现有服务机构(如救护车和急诊科)造成意外负担的风险。卫生保健服务提供了机会,打破医院和社区卫生和保健服务地点之间现有的孤岛,促进安全、及时地识别和应对病情恶化的患者。开放获取出版由墨尔本大学促进,作为Wiley -墨尔本大学协议的一部分,通过澳大利亚大学图书馆员理事会。无相关披露。不是委托;外部同行评审。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A future for the hospital-in-the-home (HITH) deteriorating patient: shifting the paradigm

Australia's health care system is grappling with a mismatch of demand and capacity, with bottlenecks in access to, and transitions of, care and rising costs.1 Hospital-in-the-home (HITH) models of care are suggested as sustainable patient-centred, value-based solutions.2

HITH is defined as a 24-hour, 7-days-a-week service of “acute inpatient equivalent care, utilising highly skilled staff, hospital technologies, equipment, medication, and safety and quality standards, to deliver hospital-level care within a person's place of residence or preferred (non-hospital) treatment location”.3 HITH models vary in clinical governance, combination and frequency of in-person or telehealth visits, patient selection and clinician staffing.4-6 When HITH substitutes for hospital location of care (admission avoidance, AA) are compared to early supported discharge (ESD) or other hospital outreach services, clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction are comparable or improved, and care is cost-effective.7, 8 However, evidence describing those patients for whom HITH is optimal and processes to recognise and respond to deteriorating HITH patients remains limited.9, 10

The Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care (ACSQHC) defines health service standards of care, including “recognising and responding to acute deterioration” in a patient's physical, cognitive or mental state.11 Currently, systems for managing deteriorating patients focus on hospital-located patients with escalation when mismatches in “clinical needs and the local resources to manage them” are identified.12 In hospitals with rapid response teams, rates of activation of these teams vary considerably (1.35–71.3 per 1000 admissions).13 Mixed efficacy in improving patient outcomes is observed, with concern regarding cost-effectiveness, sustainability, disruption to usual hospital routines, mortality as an outcome measure, deskilling of ward staff, and the impact on patient-centred care and doctor–patient relationships, especially in end-of-life care.14 Relevant to the current context, evidence shows an increased reliance on systems for managing deteriorating patients with increasing patient complexity, economic and hospital capacity stress, and a focus on patient flow.14

HITH models of care attached to Australian health services are subject to ACSQHC safety and quality accreditation standards.11, 15 Despite HITH being available in Australia for many years, gaps remain in translation of hospital systems to manage deteriorating patients to HITH locations of care, standardised definitions, and data collection, making audit, research, benchmarking and policy difficult.8, 16 The incidence of HITH patient deterioration and transfer back to hospital is difficult to establish because it is confused with post-discharge readmission rates, reported within disease-specific research and not model of care research, and impacted by variability in patient complexity and acuity.9, 17-19

Systems to manage deteriorating patients rely on identification of patient deterioration, and safe, timely, appropriate responses. HITH models introduce geographical distance, variable contexts of care, altered opportunities for patient observation, and adjacent community-based stakeholders including paid and unpaid caregivers and health care providers such as general practitioners, specialist physicians, nurses, allied health practitioners and paramedicine practitioners. Coordinating across these fragmented hospital and community services is complex without real-time information sharing and communication systems.

HITH services rely on patient selection to mitigate risk.20 Services that achieve safe, earlier diversion of higher acuity, more complex patients offer more value.4 Geographical distance offers opportunities for innovative digital adjuncts such as wearable and continuous monitoring devices and video telehealth.21, 22 However, the sensitivity, specificity, noise to signal ratio for clinical deterioration remains unclear. Also, the cost-effectiveness, utility in risk assessment, and value of digital adjuncts to clinicians, patients and caregivers need clarification. Current evidence suggests that HITH nurses use clinical cues in collaboration with patients and caregivers along with context-specific social and environmental factors, such as safety in the home for patients, workforce and caregivers to identify and respond to clinical deterioration.23, 24

HITH offers unique opportunities to incorporate nuanced qualitative observation tools, such as caregiver assessment and escalation, proven effective in paediatric cohorts.25 Similar systems are evolving in adult care to detect deterioration in adults living with multimorbidity, cognitive impairment and frailty.26 Situations with appropriate limitations on futile care or palliative intent, coupled with deficiencies in community aged care services, ageism, poor shared understanding of HITH capabilities and risks of hospital-based care increase complexity in HITH systems managing deteriorating patients.27 Co-designing integrated care that includes effective systems to manage deteriorating patients with patients, caregivers and stakeholders across hospital and community services is crucial to optimise patient-centred outcomes and maintain trust in the health care system. When poorly implemented, unintended consequences include caregiver burden to recognise, escalate and observe deteriorating patient events.28

After recognition, HITH systems to manage deteriorating patients should provide clear options in terms of what happens next, including the timing, people involved and location. Clinicians must be skilled in weighing up and accepting risk across individualised thresholds and timeframes for in-person or telehealth assessment, access to diagnostic and intervention resources, in community or hospital locations, with safety-netting in observation and care during and after recognition, assessment and response to deteriorating patients. When relocating patients to hospital, clinicians must establish when, by which mode of transport, to which resourced patient reception area for assessment and management, under governance of which accountable unit and using which communication strategies for patients, caregivers and clinicians.29

Current HITH pathways to manage deteriorating patients rely on existing community-based systems, such as ambulance and emergency department services, especially after hours (Box). Patients, caregivers and HITH clinicians are usually advised to call 000 despite limited system enablers for information sharing and clinical handover between HITH, paramedicine and receiving emergency department clinicians. Should these emergency system resources be allocated to HITH deteriorating patients? Ironically, deteriorating HITH patients then enter bottlenecks that HITH models of care were designed to ease, waiting for ambulances to arrive, or ramped in emergency departments waiting to access over-stretched hospital services. Alternative hospital access points (eg, day procedure units, specialist services such as oncology and dialysis, and patient flow wards such as transit lounges) are unable to meet the needs of the deteriorating patient in the community, especially after hours, thus perpetuating reliance on primary care, ambulance services and emergency departments.

Systems to manage HITH deteriorating patients should mitigate these risks through education and partnership with community services, visual clues identifying patients as admitted HITH patients (door signs and patient identification labels), and prominently displayed 24-hour HITH phone access for patients, caregivers and clinicians. In the United States, regulations mandate safety elements, including service-specific patient selection criteria, pre-established advanced care planning, minimum daily in-person assessments, processes for patients uncontactable within 15 minutes of scheduled care, immediate on-demand remote audio connection to a registered nurse or physician and in-home response within 30 minutes if needed.30, 31 To meet safety regulations, many American HITH services employ paramedics and buy their own patient transport vehicles.

Safely upscaling HITH models of care requires integration of 24/7 HITH-suitable systems to manage deteriorating patients. Accountability to these systems will mitigate the risk of unintended burden on patients, caregivers, clinicians and existing services, such as ambulance and emergency departments.

HITH offers opportunities to break down existing silos between hospital and community locations of health and care delivery to advance the safe, timely recognition and response to deteriorating patients.

Open access publishing facilitated by The University of Melbourne, as part of the Wiley - The University of Melbourne agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians.

No relevant disclosures.

Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

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
Medical Journal of Australia
Medical Journal of Australia 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
410
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Medical Journal of Australia (MJA) stands as Australia's foremost general medical journal, leading the dissemination of high-quality research and commentary to shape health policy and influence medical practices within the country. Under the leadership of Professor Virginia Barbour, the expert editorial team at MJA is dedicated to providing authors with a constructive and collaborative peer-review and publication process. Established in 1914, the MJA has evolved into a modern journal that upholds its founding values, maintaining a commitment to supporting the medical profession by delivering high-quality and pertinent information essential to medical practice.
期刊最新文献
Continuity of Care in General Practice in Australia: A Whole-Of-Population Serial Cross-Sectional Study Short-Term Safety and Adverse Event Risk Profiles for SARS-CoV-2 Booster Vaccine Doses in Australian Adults: A Survey Study Hospital-Admitted Injection-Related Infections Among Incarcerated People Who Inject Drugs in Australia: A Retrospective Cohort Study The Effects of Social Media on Adolescent Mental Health: Findings From a Population-Based Cohort Study in Australia When ‘Liver Enzymes’ Are Not Hepatic: Late-Onset Pompe Disease
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1