NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.
National Guideline Centre (UK). Emergency and acute medical care in over 16s: service delivery and organisation. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE); 2018 Mar. (NICE Guideline, No. 94.)
![Cover of Emergency and acute medical care in over 16s: service delivery and organisation](/corehtml/pmc/pmcgifs/bookshelf/thumbs/th-niceng94-lrg.png)
Emergency and acute medical care in over 16s: service delivery and organisation.
Show details13. Community rehabilitation
13.1. Introduction
Acute medical illness can be associated with a temporary reduction in our ability to carry out the normal activities of daily living. This can be due to the effect of the illness itself, side effects of treatment or becoming deconditioned from reduced activity whilst in hospital. Therefore rehabilitation is often needed during recovery from an acute medical illness so that patients can return to the same level of functioning and independence.
Whilst rehabilitation should start as soon as possible, there is some uncertainty over the clinical and cost effectiveness of the location of rehabilitation, as certain equipment and expert healthcare professionals (for example, physiotherapists or occupational therapists) may be needed to deliver the optimal rehabilitation therapy.
13.2. Review question: Does the provision of community-based rehabilitation services following acute medical illness improve patient outcomes?
For full details see review protocol in Appendix A.
Table 1
PICO characteristics of review question.
13.3. Clinical evidence
Twenty- nine studies (all RCTs) were included in the review;6,13,14,19,38,56,64,65,76,88,90,91,93,96,113,122,126,131,134,155,164,177,191,192,198,199,202,208,211,243,244,251 these are summarised in Table 2 and Table 3 below. Evidence from these studies is summarised in the GRADE clinical evidence summary below (Table 4).
Table 2
Summary of studies included in the review: Admission avoidance.
Table 3
Summary of studies included in the review: Early discharge.
Table 4
Clinical evidence summary: Community rehabilitation versus hospital rehabilitation after acute medical emergencies.
See also the study selection flow chart in Appendix B, study evidence tables in Appendix D, forest plots in Appendix C, GRADE tables in Appendix F and excluded studies list in Appendix G.
The studies were also divided by the aim of the intervention: a) avoiding hospital admission (n=3 studies) and b) facilitating early discharge from hospital after admission (n=26 studies).
Interventions in category A: admission avoidance is a service that provides active treatment by health care professionals outside hospital for a condition that otherwise would require acute hospital in-patient admission.
Interventions in category B: early discharge is a service that provides active treatment by health care professionals outside hospital for a condition that otherwise would require continued acute hospital in-patient care.
13.3.1. Admissions avoidance
Outcomes as reported in study (not analysable)
Activities of daily living (number of functions lost, score 0 to 6) (Ricauda 2004): Median (IQR): community rehab group =4 (2-5); hospital group = 4 (2-6), p=0.57.
Functional impairment (range 28 to 126; high score =greater independence) (Ricauda 2004). At 6 months: Median IQR: community rehab group =106 (67.5-121.5); hospital group = 96.5 (56.5-116.5), p=0.26.
National Institute of Health Stroke Scale Score (range 0-36; low score = improvement) (Ricauda 2004): At 6 months: Median IQR: community rehab group=8 (4-26); hospital group =8 (6-24), p=0.37.
Geriatric Depression Scale score (range 0-30) higher scores indicate depression (Ricauda 2004). At 6 months: Median IQR: community rehab group=10 (5-15); hospital group=17 (13-20), p<0.001.
Canadian Neurological Scale Score (range 0-10; higher score= improvement): At 6 months: Median IQR: community rehab group =10 (8.5-10.0); hospital group=9.5 (7.0-10.0), p=0.39.
13.3.2. Early discharge
Table 5
Clinical evidence summary: Community rehabilitation versus hospital rehabilitation after acute medical emergencies.
Outcomes as reported in study (not analysable)
One study (Cunliffe 2004) used Euroqol (Quality of life score): Euroqol (−0.59 to 1); at 3 months: mean difference 0.07 (95% CI −0.01 to 0.14); at 12 months: mean difference 0.02 (95% CI −0.06 to 0.09); Cunliffe 2004: GHQ - carer (36 to 0); at 3 months: mean difference −2.0 (95% CI −3.8 to −0.1); at 12 months, mean difference −1.1 (95% CI −3.7 to 1.5); mean GP visits over 12 months: community rehabilitation: 6 compared to the hospital group: 6.7, p=0.16.
One study (Roderick 2001) included quality of life data: quality of life median (IQR): physical health at 6 months; community rehabilitation group: 35.2 (26.5, 43.7) (n=49), hospital group: 32.7 (26.8, 39.2) (n=50); mental health at 6 months; community rehabilitation group: 57.4 (49.9, 62.9) (n=49), hospital group: 57.1 (50.6, 63.0) (n=50).
One study (Rodgers 1997) included quality of life data: quality of life median, (IQR): community rehabilitation group: 2 (1-5) compared to the hospital group: 3 (1-5); hospital length of stay median (IQR): Community rehabilitation group: 13 days (IQR 8-25) compared to the hospital group: 22 days (IQR 10-57), p<0.02; General health questionnaire for carers (30) median (range): community rehabilitation group: 5 (0-21) (n=22) compared to the hospital group: 5 (1-27) (n=19).
One study (Anderson 2000) included total hospital bed days: median (IQR): community rehabilitation group: 15 (8.0, 22.0) compared to the hospital group: 30 (17.3, 48.5), median difference -15, 95% CI −22.0 to −6.0; Readmission stay (days) median (IQR): community rehabilitation group: 6.0 (3.0 to 39.0) compared to hospital group: 4.0 (1.0 to 29.0), median difference 2.0, 95% CI −7.0 to 18.0, p=0.26.
One study (Bautz-Holter 2002) included length of stay: median: community rehabilitation group: 22 days compared to the hospital group: 31 days, p=0.09.
One study (Donnelly 2004) included length of stay: mean/median: community rehabilitation group: mean 42 days, median 31 days compared to the hospital group: mean 50 days, median 32 days.
One study (Indredavik 2000) included mean stroke unit length of stay: community rehabilitation group: 11 days compared to the hospital group: 11 days; mean hospital length of stay (stroke unit plus rehabilitation): community rehabilitation group: 18.6 days compared to the hospital group: 31.1 days; mean (range) number of GP visits at 1 year; community rehabilitation group: 7.5 (0-58) days compared to hospital group: 6.4 (0-35).
One study (Fleming 2004) included median (IQR) GP visits at 12 months: community rehabilitation group: 3 (1-6) compared to the hospital group: 4 (0-6); median (IQR) length of stay at discharge from index admission; community rehabilitation group: 8 (7-15), hospital group: 18 (8-34); median (IQR) hospital bed days from randomisation to 12 months; community rehabilitation group: 16 (8-35), hospital group: 34.5 (18-60); median (IQR) days either in hospital or in CHRS facility from randomisation to 12 months; community rehabilitation group: 60 (34-87), hospital group: 34.5 (18-63).
One study (Thorsen 2006) included Length of stay at index admission: community rehabilitation group: 14 days, hospital group: 30 days.
13.4. Economic evidence
Published literature
Six economic evaluations in 7 papers were identified with the relevant comparison and have been included in this review.38,55,91,130,131,170,238 These are summarised in the economic evidence profiles below (Table 6, Table 7 and Table 9) and the economic evidence tables in Appendix E.
Table 6
Economic evidence profile: Community based stroke rehabilitation versus inpatient rehabilitation.
Table 7
Economic evidence profile: Community based geriatric rehabilitation versus inpatient rehabilitation.
Four economic evaluations relating to this review question were identified but were excluded due to combination of limited applicability and methodological limitations.147,168,193,210 These are listed in Appendix H, with reasons for exclusion given.
The economic article selection protocol and flow chart for the whole guideline can found in the guideline’s Appendix 41A and Appendix 41B.
Table 8
Economic evidence profile: Community based cardiac rehabilitation versus outpatient rehabilitation.
13.5. Evidence statements
Clinical
Admission avoidance
- Three studies comprising 453 participants evaluated the role of community rehabilitation for improving outcomes in secondary care in adults and young people at risk of an AME, or with a suspected or confirmed AME. The evidence suggested that community rehabilitation may provide a benefit in reduced mortality (2 studies, moderate quality). The evidence suggested that there was no difference between the groups for quality of life - physical component summary (1 study, low quality) and quality of life score – mental component summary (1 study, moderate quality). However, there was a possible increase in length of treatment (1 study, low quality) in the community rehabilitation group.
Early discharge
- Twenty six studies comprising 3852 participants evaluated the role of community rehabilitation for improving outcomes in secondary care in adults and young people at risk of an AME, or with a suspected or confirmed AME. The evidence suggested that community rehabilitation may provide a benefit in reduced GP presentations (2 studies, moderate quality), admissions to hospital at 6 months (5 studies, very low quality) and at 6 years (1 study, very low quality) and length of stay in hospital (8 studies, moderate quality) and length of stay in hospital and programme (3 studies, moderate quality). However, there was no effect on admissions at 12 months (7 studies, moderate quality) and mortality, although the trend was more deaths at 6 months (8 studies, very low quality) but fewer at 12 months (6 studies, very low quality) and no difference at 2-6 years (6 studies, moderate quality). However, there was a possible increase in adverse events (5 studies, very low quality). The evidence for quality of life with different scores suggested no effect or an improvement (9 studies, moderate quality). The evidence suggested that community rehabilitation may provide a benefit in terms of patient satisfaction (6 studies, very low to low quality). The evidence for carer satisfaction suggested no difference (6 studies, moderate quality) or an improvement (1 study, low quality) when reported using different scores and/or methodologies.
Economic
- A UK cost–utility model found community-based rehabilitation following early supported discharge for stroke patients to be cost-effective (ICER: £6184) compared to usual care. This study was assessed as directly applicable with potentially serious limitations.
- One cost-consequences analysis found that community-based rehabilitation following early supported discharge was less costly than inpatient rehabilitation for stroke patients (cost saving: £1491 per patient) and improved functionality (1.7 higher Barthel index score), lower mortality and higher care giver strain (0.24 higher care giver strain index score). This study was assessed as directly applicable with potentially serious limitations.
- One cost-consequences analysis found that community-based rehabilitation was less costly (cost saving: £3238 per patient) and had better outcomes (less delirium, better quality of life, lower length of stay in hospital and in treatment, higher patient satisfaction, higher carer satisfaction and higher GP satisfaction) compared with inpatient rehabilitation for frail older people. This study was assessed as directly applicable with potentially serious limitations.
- Three economic evaluations found that home-based cardiac rehabilitation was dominated by hospital-based outpatient rehabilitation for MI patients (cost: £480 more per patient). These studies were assessed as directly applicable with potentially serious to minor limitations.
13.6. Recommendations and link to evidence
Recommendations |
|
Research recommendation | - |
Relative values of different outcomes | Quality of life, mortality, avoidable adverse events, patient and/or carer satisfaction and number of admissions to hospital were considered by the guideline committee to be critical outcomes. Number of GP presentations, readmission, length of hospital stay and number of presentations to the Emergency Department were considered by the committee to be important outcomes. |
Trade-off between benefits and harms |
A total of 29 studies were identified that assessed community rehabilitation compared to hospital rehabilitation. These studies were separated into admission avoidance or early discharge studies. Stratum - Admissions avoidance: Three studies suggested that community rehabilitation may provide benefits in reduced mortality.. The evidence suggested that there was no difference between the groups for quality of life (physical component and mental component). There was no evidence for the following outcomes: avoidable adverse events, quality of life, patient and/or carer satisfaction, number of presentation to the ED, number of admissions to hospital or number of GP presentations. Stratum - Early discharge: Evidence from 26 studies suggested that community rehabilitation provides a benefit in fewer GP presentations, admissions to hospital at 6 months and at 6 years and reduced length of stay in hospital and in programme. However, there was no effect on admissions at 12 months; mortality trends suggested more deaths at 6 months, fewer at 12 months and no difference at 2-6 years. However, there was a possible increase in adverse events. The evidence for quality of life with different scores suggested no effect or an improvement. There was potential benefit in terms of patient satisfaction. The evidence for carer satisfaction suggested no difference or an improvement when reported using different scores and/or methodologies. There was no evidence for the outcome relating to number of presentations to the ED. The committee considered that the data were consistent with a benefit for rehabilitation in the community, which also has high patient acceptability. The committee agreed that rehabilitation in the community should be offered to patients as an alternative to routine hospital inpatient rehabilitation, depending on their clinical condition and after discussion of risks and benefits. Community rehabilitation is a viable alternative to hospital inpatient treatment for selected patients, and would be the preferred option to maintain patients’ independence. |
Trade-off between net effects and costs |
Two included studies assessed the cost effectiveness of early supported discharge and rehabilitation following acute admissions for stroke. The studies showed that early supported discharge with rehabilitation in the community is cost effective (either dominant - or has an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) less than £20,000 per QALY gained). Three economic evaluations found home-based cardiac rehabilitation to be more costly and less effective than hospital outpatient based rehabilitation. One study assessed the cost effectiveness of community-based geriatric rehabilitation compared to inpatient rehabilitation. This study showed that geriatric rehabilitation in the community was dominant (more effective and less costly) compared to inpatient rehabilitation. The committee considered the clinical evidence which showed improvement in patient-centred outcomes, including patient and/or carer satisfaction. However, there was lack of evidence regarding improved functional outcomes and independence for elderly patients which the committee believed, based on their clinical experience, would be improved. The committee were of the view that patients’ quality of life could be enhanced by improved independence and satisfaction. Overall, the committee considered the possible improvements in health outcomes and cost savings to outweigh the costs of providing community based rehabilitation for patients recovering from an AME. Community rehabilitation services are quite common across the country, for example, early supported discharge for suitable patients who have had an acute stroke. But for some parts of the country, providers and commissioners may have to set up or expand the capacity of existing services (including training or hiring of additional staff, including physiotherapists. The rehabilitation services could be integrated within the intermediate care services. The impact of such services should be to free up hospital beds and improved patient outcomes. |
Quality of evidence |
Admission avoidance: The evidence was graded moderate for mortality and length of stay due to imprecision. Length of treatment data was graded as low due to risk of bias and imprecision. The outcome of quality of life (physical and mental component summary) was graded low to moderate due to imprecision Early discharge: The evidence was graded very low to moderate due to risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency. Economic evaluations One study of cardiac rehabilitation was assessed as directly applicable with minor limitations. The rest of the evidence was assessed as partially applicable (because of the setting and/or the measure of health outcome) with potentially serious limitations. |
Other considerations |
As with all forms of rehabilitation, the ‘dose’ of the intervention may be relatively small in terms of the amount of time the practitioner can devote to each patient. The committee noted that rehabilitation would often need to be delivered or reinforced by different disciplines, requiring coordination between those disciplines and the various community and social care agencies to ensure that care was focused on the goals for each patient, involved (and, where necessary, educated) the patient and family or carers, and was integrated between sectors, particularly community nursing. Further discussion on integrated care can be found in Chapter 38. The majority of the evidence was in the stroke population and there was insufficient evidence on other clinical conditions making generalisations more difficult. However, a sub-group analysis by population did not explain heterogeneity within the outcomes. In some specific conditions, such as stroke, the evidence is stronger on outcomes relating to independence (not evaluated specifically in trials on other clinical conditions). The committee agreed that community rehabilitation should be focused on maximising and maintaining independence and thereby reduce the overall burden on the healthcare system. |
References
- 1.
- Swing-beds meet patients needs and improve hospitals cash-flow. Hospitals. 1982; 56(13):39–40 [PubMed: 7084902]
- 2.
- Adler MW, Waller JJ, Creese A, Thorne SC. Randomised controlled trial of early discharge for inguinal hernia and varicose veins. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. 1978; 32(2):136–142 [PMC free article: PMC1060932] [PubMed: 98548]
- 3.
- Aimonino N, Molaschi M, Salerno D, Roglia D, Rocco M, Fabris F. The home hospitalization of frail elderly patients with advanced dementia. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics. 2001; 7:19–23 [PubMed: 11431041]
- 4.
- Aimonino N, Salerno D, Roglia D, Molaschi M, Fabris F. The home hospitalization service of elderly patients with ischemic stroke: follow-up study. European Journal of Neurology. 2000; 7:(Suppl 3):111–112
- 5.
- Allen J. Surgical Internet at a glance: the Virtual Hospital. American Journal of Surgery. 1999; 178(1):1 [PubMed: 10456693]
- 6.
- Anderson C, Ni MC, Rubenach S, Clark M, Spencer C, Winsor A. Early supportive discharge and rehabilitation trial in stroke (ESPRIT). Royal Australasian College of Physicians Annual Scientific Meeting. 2000;16
- 7.
- Anderson C, Rubenach S, Mhurchu CN, Clark M, Spencer C, Winsor A. Home or hospital for stroke rehabilitation? results of a randomized controlled trial: I: health outcomes at 6 months. Stroke. 2000; 31(5):1024–1031 [PubMed: 10797161]
- 8.
- Anderson C, Ni Mhurchu C, Brown PM, Carter K. Stroke rehabilitation services to accelerate hospital discharge and provide home-based care: an overview and cost analysis. Pharmacoeconomics. 2002; 20(8):537–552 [PubMed: 12109919]
- 9.
- Anderson DJ, Burrell AD, Bearne A. Cost associated with venous thromboembolism treatment in the community. Journal of Medical Economics. 2002; 5(1-10):1–10
- 10.
- Anderson L, Thompson DR, Oldridge N, Zwisler A, Rees K, Martin N et al. Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for coronary heart disease. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016; Issue 1:CD001800. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD001800.pub3 [PMC free article: PMC6491180] [PubMed: 26730878] [CrossRef]
- 11.
- Armstrong CD, Hogg WE, Lemelin J, Dahrouge S, Martin C, Viner GS et al. Home-based intermediate care program vs hospitalization: cost comparison study. Canadian Family Physician. 2008; 54(1):66–73 [PMC free article: PMC2293319] [PubMed: 18208958]
- 12.
- Arrigo I, Brunner-LaRocca H, Lefkovits M, Pfisterer M, Hoffmann A. Comparative outcome one year after formal cardiac rehabilitation: the effects of a randomized intervention to improve exercise adherence. European Journal of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation. 2008; 15(3):306–311 [PubMed: 18525385]
- 13.
- Arthur HM, Smith KM, Kodis J, McKelvie R. A controlled trial of hospital versus home-based exercise in cardiac patients. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 2002; 34(10):1544–1550 [PubMed: 12370553]
- 14.
- Askim T, Morkved S, Engen A, Roos K, Aas T, Indredavik B. Effects of a community-based intensive motor training program combined with early supported discharge after treatment in a comprehensive stroke unit: a randomized, controlled trial. Stroke. 2010; 41(8):1697–1703 [PubMed: 20558830]
- 15.
- Askim T, Rohweder G, Lydersen S, Indredavik B. Evaluation of an extended stroke unit service with early supported discharge for patients living in a rural community. A randomized controlled trial. Clinical Rehabilitation. 2004; 18(3):238–248 [PubMed: 15137554]
- 16.
- Aujesky D, Roy PM, Verschuren F, Righini M, Osterwalder J, Egloff M et al. Outpatient versus inpatient treatment for patients with acute pulmonary embolism: an international, open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial. The Lancet. 2011; 378(9785):41–48 [PubMed: 21703676]
- 17.
- Bakken MS, Ranhoff AH, Engeland A, Ruths S. Inappropriate prescribing for older people admitted to an intermediate-care nursing home unit and hospital wards. Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care. 2012; 30(3):169–175 [PMC free article: PMC3443941] [PubMed: 22830533]
- 18.
- Barnes MP. Community rehabilitation after stroke. Critical Reviews in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine. 2003; 15(3-4):223–234
- 19.
- Bautz-Holter E, Sveen U, Rygh J, Rodgers H, Wyller TB. Early supported discharge of patients with acute stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Disability and Rehabilitation. 2002; 24(7):348–355 [PubMed: 12022784]
- 20.
- Beech R, Russell W, Little R, Sherlow-Jones S. An evaluation of a multidisciplinary team for intermediate care at home. International Journal of Integrated Care. 2004; 4:e02 [PMC free article: PMC1393274] [PubMed: 16773151]
- 21.
- Bernhaut J, Mackay K. Extended nursing roles in intermediate care: a cost-benefit evaluation. Nursing Times. 2002; 98(21):37–39 [PubMed: 12168441]
- 22.
- Bethell HJ, Mullee MA. A controlled trial of community based coronary rehabilitation. British Heart Journal. 1990; 64(6):370–375 [PMC free article: PMC1224812] [PubMed: 2271343]
- 23.
- Beynon JH, Padiachy D. The past and future of geriatric day hospitals. Reviews in Clinical Gerontology. 2009; 19(1):45–51
- 24.
- Blackburn GG, Foody JM, Sprecher DL, Park E, Apperson-Hansen C, Pashkow FJ. Cardiac rehabilitation participation patterns in a large, tertiary care center: evidence for selection bias. Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation. 2000; 20(3):189–195 [PubMed: 10860201]
- 25.
- Blair J, Corrigall H, Angus NJ, Thompson DR, Leslie S. Home versus hospital-based cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review. Rural and Remote Health. 2011; 11(2):1532 [PubMed: 21488706]
- 26.
- Board N, Brennan N, Caplan GA. A randomised controlled trial of the costs of hospital as compared with hospital in the home for acute medical patients. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health. 2000; 24(3):305–311 [PubMed: 10937409]
- 27.
- Booth JE, Roberts JA, Flather M, Lamping DL, Mister R, Abdalla M et al. A trial of early discharge with homecare compared to conventional hospital care for patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. Heart. 2004; 90(11):1344–1345 [PMC free article: PMC1768555] [PubMed: 15486143]
- 28.
- Boston NK, Boynton PM, Hood S. An inner city GP unit versus conventional care for elderly patients: prospective comparison of health functioning, use of services and patient satisfaction. Family Practice. 2001; 18(2):141–148 [PubMed: 11264263]
- 29.
- Bowman C, Black D. Intermediate not indeterminate care. Hospital Medicine. 1998; 59(11):877–879 [PubMed: 10197122]
- 30.
- Boxall A-M, Barclay L, Sayers A, Caplan GA. Managing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the community: a randomized controlled trial of home-based pulmonary rehabilitation for elderly housebound patients. Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation. 2005; 25(6):378–385 [PubMed: 16327534]
- 31.
- Brooks N. Intermediate care rapid assessment support service: an evaluation. British Journal of Community Nursing. 2002; 7(12):623–633 [PubMed: 12514491]
- 32.
- Brooks N, Ashton A, Hainsworth B. Pilot evaluation of an intermediate care scheme. Nursing Standard. 2003; 17(23):33–35 [PubMed: 12655764]
- 33.
- Brunner M, Skeat J, Morris ME. Outcomes of speech-language pathology following stroke: investigation of inpatient rehabilitation and rehabilitation in the home programs. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. 2008; 10(5):305–313 [PubMed: 20840030]
- 34.
- Bryan K. Policies for reducing delayed discharge from hospital. British Medical Bulletin. 2010; 95(1):33–46 [PubMed: 20647227]
- 35.
- Buckingham SA, Taylor RS, Jolly K, Zawada A, Dean SG, Cowie A et al. Home-based versus centre-based cardiac rehabilitation: abridged Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. Open Heart. 2016; 3(2):no [PMC free article: PMC5030549] [PubMed: 27738516]
- 36.
- Buus BJ, Refsgaard J, Kanstrup H, Paaske JS, Qvist I, Christensen B et al. Hospital-based versus community-based shared care cardiac rehabilitation after acute coronary syndrome: protocol for a randomized clinical trial. Danish Medical Journal. 2013; 60(9):A4699 [PubMed: 24001464]
- 37.
- Campbell H, Karnon J, Dowie R. Cost analysis of a hospital-at-home initiative using discrete event simulation. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 2001; 6(1):14–22 [PubMed: 11219355]
- 38.
- Caplan GA, Coconis J, Board N, Sayers A, Woods J. Does home treatment affect delirium? A randomised controlled trial of rehabilitation of elderly and care at home or usual treatment (The REACH-OUT trial). Age and Ageing. 2006; 35(1):53–60 [PubMed: 16239239]
- 39.
- Caplan GA, Meller A, Squires B, Chan S, Willett W. Advance care planning and hospital in the nursing home. Age and Ageing. 2006; 35(6):581–585 [PubMed: 16807309]
- 40.
- Caplan GA, Sulaiman NS, Mangin DA, Aimonino Ricauda N, Wilson AD, Barclay L. A meta-analysis of “hospital in the home”. Medical Journal of Australia. 2012; 197(9):512–519 [PubMed: 23121588]
- 41.
- Caplan GA, Williams AJ, Daly B, Abraham K. A randomized, controlled trial of comprehensive geriatric assessment and multidisciplinary intervention after discharge of elderly from the emergency department-the DEED II study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2004; 52(9):1417–1423 [PubMed: 15341540]
- 42.
- Carroll C. Minding the Gap: what does intermediate care do? CME Journal Geriatric Medicine. 2005; 7(2):96–101
- 43.
- Chaiyawat P, Kulkantrakorn K. Long-term effectiveness home rehabilitation program for ischemic stroke. International Journal of Stroke. 2010; 5:(Suppl 2):286
- 44.
- Chaiyawat P, Kulkantrakorn K. Quality of life, depression and dementia in randomized controlled trial of long-term home rehabilitation for ischemic stroke. International Journal of Stroke. 2010; 5:(Suppl 2):285–286
- 45.
- Chang WC, Chan GHK, Jim OTT, Lau ESK, Hui CLM, Chan SKW et al. Optimal duration of an early intervention programme for first-episode psychosis: randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Psychiatry. 2015; 206(6):492–500 [PubMed: 25657355]
- 46.
- Chappell H, Dickey C. Decreased rehospitalization costs through intermittent nursing visits to nursing home patients. Journal of Nursing Administration. 1993; 23(3):49–52 [PubMed: 8473929]
- 47.
- Chard SE. Community neurorehabilitation: a synthesis of current evidence and future research directions. NeuroRx. 2006; 3(4):525–534 [PMC free article: PMC3593402] [PubMed: 17012066]
- 48.
- Chen A, Bushmeneva K, Zagorski B, Colantonio A, Parsons D, Wodchis WP. Direct cost associated with acquired brain injury in Ontario. BMC Neurology. 2012; 12:76 [PMC free article: PMC3518141] [PubMed: 22901094]
- 49.
- Coast J, Richards SH, Peters TJ, Gunnell DJ, Darlow MA, Pounsford J. Hospital at home or acute hospital care? A cost minimisation analysis. BMJ. 1998; 316(7147):1802–1806 [PMC free article: PMC28581] [PubMed: 9624074]
- 50.
- Cobelli F, Tavazzi L. Relative role of ambulatory and residential rehabilitation. Journal of Cardiovascular Risk. 1996; 3(2):172–175 [PubMed: 8836859]
- 51.
- Coburn AF, Fortinsky RH, McGuire CA. The impact of Medicaid reimbursement policy on subacute care in hospitals. Medical Care. 1989; 27(1):25–33 [PubMed: 2492065]
- 52.
- Cohen IL, Booth FV. Cost containment and mechanical ventilation in the United States. New Horizons. 1994; 2(3):283–290 [PubMed: 8087585]
- 53.
- Colprim D, Inzitari M. Incidence and risk factors for unplanned transfers to acute general hospitals from an intermediate care and rehabilitation geriatric facility. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association. 2014; 15(9):687–4 [PubMed: 25086689]
- 54.
- Colprim D, Martin R, Parer M, Prieto J, Espinosa L, Inzitari M. Direct admission to intermediate care for older adults with reactivated chronic diseases as an alternative to conventional hospitalization. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association. 2013; 14(4):300–302 [PubMed: 23294969]
- 55.
- Cowie A, Moseley O. Home- versus hospital-based exercise training in heart failure: an economic analysis. British Journal of Cardiology. 2014; 21(2):76
- 56.
- Cowie A, Thow MK, Granat MH, Mitchell SL. Effects of home versus hospital-based exercise training in chronic heart failure. International Journal of Cardiology. 2012; 158(2):296–298 [PubMed: 22595810]
- 57.
- Craig LE, Wu O, Bernhardt J, Langhorne P. Approaches to economic evaluations of stroke rehabilitation. International Journal of Stroke. 2014; 9(1):88–100 [PubMed: 23521855]
- 58.
- Crawford-Faucher A. Home- and center-based cardiac rehabilitation equally effective. American Family Physician. 2010; 82(8):994–995
- 59.
- Crotty M, Kittel A, Hayball N. Home rehabilitation for older adults with fractured hips: how many will take part? Journal of Quality in Clinical Practice. 2000; 20(2-3):65–68 [PubMed: 11057986]
- 60.
- Crotty M, Miller M, Whitehead C, Krishnan J, Hearn T. Hip fracture treatments-what happens to patients from residential care? Journal of Quality in Clinical Practice. 2000; 20(4):167–170 [PubMed: 11207957]
- 61.
- Crotty M, Whitehead C, Miller M, Gray S. Patient and caregiver outcomes 12 months after home-based therapy for hip fracture: a randomized controlled trial. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2003; 84(8):1237–1239 [PubMed: 12917867]
- 62.
- Crotty M, Whitehead CH, Gray S, Finucane PM. Early discharge and home rehabilitation after hip fracture achieves functional improvements: a randomized controlled trial. Clinical Rehabilitation. 2002; 16(4):406–413 [PubMed: 12061475]
- 63.
- Cunliffe A, Husbands S, Gladman J. Satisfaction with an early supported discharge service for older people. Age and Ageing. 2002; 31:(Suppl 2):43
- 64.
- Cunliffe AL, Gladman JRF, Husbands SL, Miller P, Dewey ME, Harwood RH. Sooner and healthier: a randomised controlled trial and interview study of an early discharge rehabilitation service for older people. Age and Ageing. 2004; 33(3):246–252 [PubMed: 15082429]
- 65.
- Dalal HM, Evans PH, Campbell JL, Taylor RS, Watt A, Read KL et al. Home-based versus hospital-based rehabilitation after myocardial infarction: a randomized trial with preference arms--Cornwall Heart Attack Rehabilitation Management Study (CHARMS). International Journal of Cardiology. 2007; 119(2):202–211 [PubMed: 17196274]
- 66.
- Dalal HM, Evans PH. Achieving national service framework standards for cardiac rehabilitation and secondary prevention. BMJ. 2003; 326(7387):481–484 [PMC free article: PMC150183] [PubMed: 12609946]
- 67.
- Daskapan A, Arikan H, Caglar N, Tunali N, Ataman S. Comparison of supervised exercise training and home-based exercise training in chronic heart failure. Saudi Medical Journal. 2005; 26(5):842–847 [PubMed: 15951880]
- 68.
- Deutsch A, Granger CV, Heinemann AW, Fiedler RC, DeJong G, Kane RL et al. Poststroke rehabilitation: outcomes and reimbursement of inpatient rehabilitation facilities and subacute rehabilitation programs. Stroke. 2006; 37(6):1477–1482 [PubMed: 16627797]
- 69.
- Dias FD, Sampaio LMM, da Silva GA, Gomes ELFD, do Nascimento ESP, Alves VLS et al. Home-based pulmonary rehabilitation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomized clinical trial. International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. 2013; 8:537–544 [PMC free article: PMC3821544] [PubMed: 24235824]
- 70.
- Dolansky MA, Xu F, Zullo M, Shishehbor M, Moore SM, Rimm AA. Post-acute care services received by older adults following a cardiac event: a population-based analysis. Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing. 2010; 25(4):342–349 [PMC free article: PMC2885047] [PubMed: 20539168]
- 71.
- Dombi WA. Avalere health study conclusively proves home care is cost effective, saves billions for Medicare yearly, and effectively limits re-hospitalization. Caring. 2009; 28(6):22–23 [PubMed: 19626962]
- 72.
- Donaldson RJ. Hospital versus domiciliary care in acute myocardial infarction. Health and Hygiene. 1982; 4(2-4):103–107
- 73.
- Donath S. Hospital in the home: real cost reductions or merely cost-shifting? Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health. 2001; 25(2):187–188 [PubMed: 11357920]
- 74.
- Donlevy JA, Pietruch BL. The connection delivery model: care across the continuum. Nursing Management. 1996; 27(5):34–36 [PubMed: 8710342]
- 75.
- Donnelly ML, Jamieson JL, Brett-Maclean P. Primary care geriatrics in British Columbia: a short report. Geriatrics Today: Journal of the Canadian Geriatrics Society. 2002; 5(4):175–178
- 76.
- Donnelly M, Power M, Russell M, Fullerton K. Randomized controlled trial of an early discharge rehabilitation service: the Belfast Community Stroke Trial. Stroke. 2004; 35(1):127–133 [PubMed: 14671238]
- 77.
- Dorney-Smith S. Nurse-led homeless intermediate care: an economic evaluation. British Journal of Nursing. 2011; 20(18):1193–1197 [PubMed: 22067642]
- 78.
- Dow B. The shifting cost of care: early discharge for rehabilitation. Australian Health Review. 2004; 28(3):260–265 [PubMed: 15595907]
- 79.
- Dow B, Black K, Bremner F, Fearn M. A comparison of a hospital-based and two home-based rehabilitation programmes. Disability and Rehabilitation. 2007; 29(8):635–641 [PubMed: 17453984]
- 80.
- Duffy JR, Hoskins LM, Dudley-Brown S. Improving outcomes for older adults with heart failure: a randomized trial using a theory-guided nursing intervention. Journal of Nursing Care Quality. 2010; 25(1):56–64 [PubMed: 19512945]
- 81.
- Early Supported Discharge Trialists. Services for reducing duration of hospital care for acute stroke patients. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2001; Issue 2:CD000443. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD000443 [PubMed: 10796365] [CrossRef]
- 82.
- Early Supported Discharge Trialists. Services for reducing duration of hospital care for acute stroke patients. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2005; Issue 2:CD000443. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD000443.pub2 [PubMed: 15846604] [CrossRef]
- 83.
- Eldar R. Rehabilitation in the community for patients with stroke: a review. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation. 2000; 6(4):48–59
- 84.
- Elder AT. Can we manage more acutely ill elderly patients in the community? Age and Ageing. 2001; 30(6):441–443 [PubMed: 11742768]
- 85.
- Emme C, Mortensen EL, Rydahl-Hansen S, Ostergaard B, Svarre Jakobsen A, Schou L et al. The impact of virtual admission on self-efficacy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease - a randomised clinical trial. Journal of Clinical Nursing. 2014; 23(21-22):3124–3137 [PubMed: 24476457]
- 86.
- Emme C, Rydahl-Hansen S, Ostergaard B, Schou L, Svarre Jakobsen A, Phanareth K. How virtual admission affects coping - telemedicine for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Journal of Clinical Nursing. 2014; 23(9-10):1445–1458 [PubMed: 24372676]
- 87.
- Eron LJ, Marineau M, Baclig E, Yonehara C, King P. The virtual hospital: treating acute infections in the home by telemedicine. Hawaii Medical Journal. 2004; 63(10):291–293 [PubMed: 15570714]
- 88.
- Evans RL, Connis RT, Haselkorn JK. Evaluating rehabilitation medicine: effects on survival, function, and home care. Home Health Care Services Quarterly. 1997; 16(3):35–53 [PubMed: 10173443]
- 89.
- Feltner C, Jones CD, Cene CW, Zheng ZJ, Sueta CA, Coker-Schwimmer EJL et al. Transitional care interventions to prevent readmissions for persons with heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2014; 160(11):774–784 [PubMed: 24862840]
- 90.
- Fjaertoft H, Indredavik B, Johnsen R, Lydersen S. Acute stroke unit care combined with early supported discharge. Long-term effects on quality of life. A randomized controlled trial. Clinical Rehabilitation. 2004; 18(5):580–586 [PubMed: 15293492]
- 91.
- Fjaertoft H, Indredavik B, Magnussen J, Johnsen R. Early supported discharge for stroke patients improves clinical outcome. Does it also reduce use of health services and costs? One-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Cerebrovascular Diseases. 2005; 19(6):376–383 [PubMed: 15860914]
- 92.
- Fjaertoft H, Rohweder G, Indredavik B. Stroke unit care combined with early supported discharge improves 5-year outcome: a randomized controlled trial. Stroke. 2011; 42(6):1707–1711 [PubMed: 21474806]
- 93.
- Fleming SA, Blake H, Gladman JRF, Hart E, Lymbery M, Dewey ME et al. A randomised controlled trial of a care home rehabilitation service to reduce long-term institutionalisation for elderly people. Age and Ageing. 2004; 33(4):384–390 [PubMed: 15151912]
- 94.
- Gaspoz JM, Lee TH, Weinstein MC, Cook EF, Goldman P, Komaroff AL et al. Cost-effectiveness of a new short-stay unit to “rule out” acute myocardial infarction in low risk patients. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 1994; 24(5):1249–1259 [PubMed: 7930247]
- 95.
- Gjelsvik BEB, Hofstad H, Smedal T, Eide GE, Naess H, Skouen JS et al. Balance and walking after three different models of stroke rehabilitation: early supported discharge in a day unit or at home, and traditional treatment (control). BMJ Open. 2014; 4(5):e004358 [PMC free article: PMC4025466] [PubMed: 24833680]
- 96.
- Gladman JR, Lincoln NB, Barer DH. A randomised controlled trial of domiciliary and hospital-based rehabilitation for stroke patients after discharge from hospital. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry. 1993; 56(9):960–966 [PMC free article: PMC489729] [PubMed: 8410035]
- 97.
- Glasby J, Martin G, Regen E. Older people and the relationship between hospital services and intermediate care: results from a national evaluation. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2008; 22(6):639–649 [PubMed: 19012144]
- 98.
- Glick HA, Polsky D, Willke RJ, Alves WM, Kassell N, Schulman K. Comparison of the use of medical resources and outcomes in the treatment of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage between Canada and the United States. Stroke. 1998; 29(2):351–358 [PubMed: 9472873]
- 99.
- Gobbi M, Monger E, Watkinson G, Spencer A, Weaver M, Lathlean J et al. Virtual Interactive Practice: a strategy to enhance learning and competence in health care students. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics. 2004; 107(Pt 2):874–878 [PubMed: 15360937]
- 100.
- Gracey DR, Viggiano RW, Naessens JM, Hubmayr RD, Silverstein MD, Koenig GE. Outcomes of patients admitted to a chronic ventilator-dependent unit in an acute-care hospital. Mayo Clinic Proceedings. 1992; 67(2):131–136 [PubMed: 1545576]
- 101.
- Graham LA. Organization of rehabilitation services. Handbook of Clinical Neurology. 2013; 110:113–120 [PubMed: 23312635]
- 102.
- Grande GE, Farquhar MC, Barclay SI, Todd CJ. Caregiver bereavement outcome: relationship with hospice at home, satisfaction with care, and home death. Journal of Palliative Care. 2004; 20(2):69–77 [PubMed: 15332470]
- 103.
- Gregory P, Edwards L, Faurot K, Williams SW, Felix ACG. Patient preferences for stroke rehabilitation. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation. 2010; 17(5):394–400 [PubMed: 21131265]
- 104.
- Gregory PC, Han E. Disparities in postacute stroke rehabilitation disposition to acute inpatient rehabilitation vs. home: findings from the North Carolina Hospital Discharge Database. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2009; 88(2):100–107 [PubMed: 19169175]
- 105.
- Griffiths P. Intermediate care in nursing-led units - a comprehensive overview of the evidence base. Reviews in Clinical Gerontology. 2006; 16(1):71–77
- 106.
- Griffiths P, Harris R, Richardson G, Hallett N, Heard S, Wilson-Barnett J. Substitution of a nursing-led inpatient unit for acute services: randomized controlled trial of outcomes and cost of nursing-led intermediate care. Age and Ageing. 2001; 30(6):483–488 [PubMed: 11742777]
- 107.
- Griffiths P, Wilson-Barnett J. Influences on length of stay in intermediate care: lessons from the nursing-led inpatient unit studies. International Journal of Nursing Studies. 2000; 37(3):245–255 [PubMed: 10754190]
- 108.
- Griffiths P, Wilson-Barnett J, Richardson G, Spilsbury K, Miller F, Harris R. The effectiveness of intermediate care in a nursing-led in-patient unit. International Journal of Nursing Studies. 2000; 37(2):153–161 [PubMed: 10684957]
- 109.
- Griffiths PD, Edwards MH, Forbes A, Harris RL, Ritchie G. Effectiveness of intermediate care in nursing-led in-patient units. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2004; Issue 4:CD002214. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD002214.pub2 [PubMed: 15495030] [CrossRef]
- 110.
- Griffiths P. Effectiveness of intermediate care delivered in nurse-led units. British Journal of Community Nursing. 2006; 11(5):205–208 [PubMed: 16723914]
- 111.
- Griffiths P, Edwards M, Forbes A, Harris R. Post-acute intermediate care in nursing-led units: a systematic review of effectiveness. International Journal of Nursing Studies. 2005; 42(1):107–116 [PubMed: 15582644]
- 112.
- Gunnell D, Coast J, Richards SH, Peters TJ, Pounsford JC, Darlow MA. How great a burden does early discharge to hospital-at-home impose on carers? A randomized controlled trial. Age and Ageing. 2000; 29(2):137–142 [PubMed: 10791448]
- 113.
- Hackett ML, Vandal AC, Anderson CS, Rubenach SE. Long-term outcome in stroke patients and caregivers following accelerated hospital discharge and home-based rehabilitation. Stroke. a journal of cerebral circulation 2002; 33(2):643–645 [PubMed: 11823686]
- 114.
- Hannan EL, Racz MJ, Walford G, Ryan TJ, Isom OW, Bennett E et al. Predictors of readmission for complications of coronary artery bypass graft surgery. JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association. 2003; 290(6):773–780 [PubMed: 12915430]
- 115.
- Hansen FR, Spedtsberg K, Schroll M. Geriatric follow-up by home visits after discharge from hospital: a randomized controlled trial. Age and Ageing. 1992; 21(6):445–450 [PubMed: 1471584]
- 116.
- Hardy C, Whitwell D, Sarsfield B, Maimaris C. Admission avoidance and early discharge of acute hospital admissions: an accident and emergency based scheme. Emergency Medicine Journal. 2001; 18(6):435–440 [PMC free article: PMC1725709] [PubMed: 11696489]
- 117.
- Hauser B, Robinson J, Powers JS, Laubacher MA. The evaluation of an intermediate care--geriatric evaluation unit in a Veterans Administration Hospital. Southern Medical Journal. 1991; 84(5):597–602 [PubMed: 2035080]
- 118.
- Heseltine D. Community outreach rehabilitation. Age and Ageing. 2001; 30:(Suppl 3):40–42 [PubMed: 11511487]
- 119.
- Higgins HC, Hayes RL, McKenna KT. Rehabilitation outcomes following percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Patient Education and Counseling. 2001; 43(3):219–230 [PubMed: 11384820]
- 120.
- Hill JD, Hampton JR, Mitchell JR. A randomised trial of home-versus-hospital management for patients with suspected myocardial infarction. The Lancet. 1978; 1(8069):837–841 [PubMed: 76794]
- 121.
- Hoenig H, Morey M, Jackson J, Siebert C, Williams N, Clune J. The RETURN trial: a pilot study of in-home rehabilitation for ICU survivors. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2010; 58:S8
- 122.
- Hofstad H, Naess H, Moe-Nilssen R, Skouen JS. Early supported discharge after stroke in Bergen (ESD Stroke Bergen): a randomized controlled trial comparing rehabilitation in a day unit or in the patients’ homes with conventional treatment. International Journal of Stroke. 2013; 8(7):582–587 [PubMed: 22594689]
- 123.
- Hughes SL, Cummings J, Weaver F, Manheim LM, Conrad KJ, Nash K. A randomized trial of Veterans Administration home care for severely disabled veterans. Medical Care. 1990; 28(2):135–145 [PubMed: 2153881]
- 124.
- Ince AT, Senturk H, Singh VK, Yildiz K, Danalioglu A, Cinar A et al. A randomized controlled trial of home monitoring versus hospitalization for mild non-alcoholic acute interstitial pancreatitis: a pilot study. Pancreatology. 2014; 14(3):174–178 [PubMed: 24854612]
- 125.
- Indredavik B, Bakke F, Slordahl SA, Rokseth R, Haheim LL. Treatment in a combined acute and rehabilitation stroke unit: which aspects are most important? Stroke. 1999; 30(5):917–923 [PubMed: 10229720]
- 126.
- Indredavik B, Fjaertoft H, Ekeberg G, Loge AD, Morch B. Benefit of an extended stroke unit service with early supported discharge: a randomized, controlled trial. Stroke. 2000; 31(12):2989–2994 [PubMed: 11108761]
- 127.
- Indredavik B, Rohweder G, Naalsund E, Lydersen S. Medical complications in a comprehensive stroke unit and an early supported discharge service. Stroke. 2008; 39(2):414–420 [PubMed: 18096834]
- 128.
- Jakobsen AS, Laursen LC, Ostergaard B, Rydahl-Hansen S, Phanareth KV. Hospital-admitted COPD patients treated at home using telemedicine technology in The Virtual Hospital Trial: methods of a randomized effectiveness trial. Trials. 2013; 14:280 [PMC free article: PMC3766220] [PubMed: 24139548]
- 129.
- Jolly K, Lip GY, Taylor RS, Mant JW, Lane DA, Lee KW et al. Recruitment of ethnic minority patients to a cardiac rehabilitation trial: the Birmingham Rehabilitation Uptake Maximisation (BRUM) study [ISRCTN72884263]. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2005; 5:18 [PMC free article: PMC1166559] [PubMed: 15904499]
- 130.
- Jolly K, Lip GYH, Taylor RS, Raftery J, Mant J, Lane D et al. The Birmingham rehabilitation uptake maximisation study (BRUM): a randomised controlled trial comparing home-based with centre-based cardiac rehabilitation. Heart. 2009; 95(1):36–42 [PubMed: 18332063]
- 131.
- Jolly K, Taylor R, Lip GY, Greenfield S, Raftery J, Mant J et al. The Birmingham Rehabilitation Uptake Maximisation Study (BRUM). Home-based compared with hospital-based cardiac rehabilitation in a multi-ethnic population: cost-effectiveness and patient adherence. Health Technology Assessment. 2007; 11(35):1–118 [PubMed: 17767899]
- 132.
- Jones J, Wilson A, Parker H, Wynn A, Jagger C, Spiers N et al. Economic evaluation of hospital at home versus hospital care: cost minimisation analysis of data from randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 1999; 319(7224):1547–1550 [PMC free article: PMC28300] [PubMed: 10591720]
- 133.
- Jones J, Carroll A. Hospital admission avoidance through the introduction of a virtual ward. British Journal of Community Nursing. 2014; 19(7):330–334 [PubMed: 25039341]
- 134.
- Kalra L, Evans A, Perez I, Knapp M, Donaldson N, Swift CG. Alternative strategies for stroke care: a prospective randomised controlled trial. The Lancet. 2000; 356(9233):894–899 [PubMed: 11036894]
- 135.
- Karapolat H, Eyigor S, Zoghi M, Yagdi T, Nalbantgil S, Durmaz B et al. Effects of cardiac rehabilitation program on exercise capacity and chronotropic variables in patients with orthotopic heart transplant. Clinical Research in Cardiology. 2008; 97(7):449–456 [PubMed: 18317667]
- 136.
- Kehusmaa S, Autti-Ramo I, Valaste M, Hinkka K, Rissanen P. Economic evaluation of a geriatric rehabilitation programme: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine. 2010; 42(10):949–955 [PubMed: 21031292]
- 137.
- Kenny RA, O’Shea D, Walker HF. Impact of a dedicated syncope and falls facility for older adults on emergency beds. Age and Ageing. 2002; 31(4):272–275 [PubMed: 12147565]
- 138.
- Knapp M, Beecham J, Koutsogeorgopoulou V, Hallam A, Fenyo A, Marks IM et al. Service use and costs of home-based versus hospital-based care for people with serious mental illness. British Journal of Psychiatry. 1994; 165(2):195–203 [PubMed: 7953032]
- 139.
- Konrad D, Corrigan ML, Hamilton C, Steiger E, Kirby DF. Identification and early treatment of dehydration in home parenteral nutrition and home intravenous fluid patients prevents hospital admissions. Nutrition in Clinical Practice. 2012; 27(6):802–807 [PubMed: 23069992]
- 140.
- Koopman MM, Prandoni P, Piovella F, Ockelford PA, Brandjes DP, van der Meer J et al. Treatment of venous thrombosis with intravenous unfractionated heparin administered in the hospital as compared with subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin administered at home. The Tasman Study Group. New England Journal of Medicine. 1996; 334(11):682–687 [PubMed: 8594426]
- 141.
- Kornowski R, Zeeli D, Averbuch M, Finkelstein A, Schwartz D, Moshkovitz M et al. Intensive home-care surveillance prevents hospitalization and improves morbidity rates among elderly patients with severe congestive heart failure. American Heart Journal. 1995; 129(4):762–766 [PubMed: 7900629]
- 142.
- Kortke H, Stromeyer H, Zittermann A, Buhr N, Zimmermann E, Wienecke E et al. New East-Westfalian postoperative therapy concept: a telemedicine guide for the study of ambulatory rehabilitation of patients after cardiac surgery. Telemedicine Journal and E-Health. 2006; 12(4):475–483 [PubMed: 16942420]
- 143.
- Korzeniowska-Kubacka I, Bilinska M, Dobraszkiewicz-Wasilewska B, Piotrowicz R. Comparison between hybrid and standard centre-based cardiac rehabilitation in female patients after myocardial infarction: a pilot study. Kardiologia Polska. 2014; 72(3):269–274 [PubMed: 24142752]
- 144.
- Langhorne P, Dennis MS, Kalra L, Shepperd S, Wade DT, Wolfe CD. Services for helping acute stroke patients avoid hospital admission. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2000; Issue 2:CD000444. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD000444 [PubMed: 10796366] [CrossRef]
- 145.
- Langhorne P, Taylor G, Murray G, Dennis M, Anderson C, Bautz-Holter E et al. Early supported discharge services for stroke patients: a meta-analysis of individual patients’ data. The Lancet. 2005; 365(9458):501–506 [PubMed: 15705460]
- 146.
- Lappegard O, Hjortdahl P. Acute admissions to a community hospital: experiences from Hallingdal sjukestugu. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health. 2012; 40(4):309–315 [PubMed: 22786914]
- 147.
- Larsen T, Olsen TS, Sorensen J. Early home-supported discharge of stroke patients: a health technology assessment. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2006; 22(3):313–320 [PubMed: 16984059]
- 148.
- Last S. Intermediate care. Bed spread. Health Service Journal. 2000; 110(5717):22–23 [PubMed: 11183713]
- 149.
- Lewis G. Virtual wards, real nursing. Nursing Standard. 2007; 21(43):64 [PubMed: 17695588]
- 150.
- Lewis G, Bardsley M, Vaithianathan R, Steventon A, Georghiou T, Billings J et al. Do ‘virtual wards’ reduce rates of unplanned hospital admissions, and at what cost? A research protocol using propensity matched controls. International Journal of Integrated Care. 2011; 11:e079 [PMC free article: PMC3178802] [PubMed: 21949489]
- 151.
- Lewis G, Vaithianathan R, Wright L, Brice MR, Lovell P, Rankin S et al. Integrating care for high-risk patients in England using the virtual ward model: lessons in the process of care integration from three case sites. International Journal of Integrated Care. 2013; 13:e046 [PMC free article: PMC3821539] [PubMed: 24250284]
- 152.
- Lewis G, Wright L, Vaithianathan R. Multidisciplinary case management for patients at high risk of hospitalization: comparison of virtual ward models in the United kingdom, United States, and Canada. Population Health Management. 2012; 15(5):315–321 [PubMed: 22788975]
- 153.
- Lim WK, Lambert SF, Gray LC. Effectiveness of case management and post-acute services in older people after hospital discharge. Medical Journal of Australia. Australia 2003; 178(6):262–266 [PubMed: 12633482]
- 154.
- Linertova R, Garcia-Perez L, Vazquez-Diaz JR, Lorenzo-Riera A, Sarria-Santamera A. Interventions to reduce hospital readmissions in the elderly: in-hospital or home care. A systematic review. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 2011; 17(6):1167–1175 [PubMed: 20630005]
- 155.
- Maltais F, Bourbeau J, Shapiro S, Lacasse Y, Perrault H, Baltzan M et al. Effects of home-based pulmonary rehabilitation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomized trial. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2008; 149(12):869–878 [PubMed: 19075206]
- 156.
- Marchionni N, Fattirolli F, Fumagalli S, Oldridge N, Del Lungo F, Morosi L et al. Improved exercise tolerance and quality of life with cardiac rehabilitation of older patients after myocardial infarction: results of a randomized, controlled trial. Circulation Journal. 2003; 107(17):2201–2206 [PubMed: 12707240]
- 157.
- Marks IM, Connolly J, Muijen M, Audini B, McNamee G, Lawrence RE. Home-based versus hospital-based care for people with serious mental illness. British Journal of Psychiatry. 1994; 165(2):179–194 [PubMed: 7953031]
- 158.
- Martin F, Oyewole A, Moloney A. A randomized controlled trial of a high support hospital discharge team for elderly people. Age and Ageing. 1994; 23(3):228–234 [PubMed: 8085509]
- 159.
- Mason S, Wardrope J, Perrin J. Developing a community paramedic practitioner intermediate care support scheme for older people with minor conditions. Emergency Medicine Journal. 2003; 20(2):196–198 [PMC free article: PMC1726072] [PubMed: 12642544]
- 160.
- Mather HG, Morgan DC, Pearson NG, Read KL, Shaw DB, Steed GR et al. Myocardial infarction: a comparison between home and hospital care for patients. BMJ. 1976; 1(6015):925–929 [PMC free article: PMC1639298] [PubMed: 1268490]
- 161.
- Matukaitis J, Stillman P, Wykpisz E, Ewen E. Appropriate admissions to the appropriate unit: a decision tree approach. American Journal of Medical Quality. 2005; 20(2):90–97 [PubMed: 15851387]
- 162.
- Mayhew L, Lawrence D. The costs and service implications of substituting intermediate care for acute hospital care. Health Services Management Research. 2006; 19(2):80–93 [PubMed: 16643707]
- 163.
- Mayo N, Wood-Dauphinee S, Tamblyn R, Cote R, Gayton D, Carlton J et al. There’s no place like home: a trial of early discharge and intensive home rehabilitation post stroke. Cerebrovascular Diseases. 1998; 8:(Suppl 4):94
- 164.
- Mayo NE, Wood-Dauphinee S, Cote R, Gayton D, Carlton J, Buttery J et al. There’s no place like home: an evaluation of early supported discharge for stroke. Stroke. 2000; 31(5):1016–1023 [PubMed: 10797160]
- 165.
- McNamee P, Christensen J, Soutter J, Rodgers H, Craig N, Pearson P et al. Cost analysis of early supported hospital discharge for stroke. Age and Ageing. 1998; 27(3):345–351
- 166.
- Melin AL, Bygren LO. Efficacy of the rehabilitation of elderly primary health care patients after short-stay hospital treatment. Medical Care. 1992; 30(11):1004–1015 [PubMed: 1331632]
- 167.
- Meyer RP. Consider medical care at home. Geriatrics. 2009; 64(6):9–11 [PubMed: 19572761]
- 168.
- Miller P, Gladman JR, Cunliffe AL, Husbands SL, Dewey ME, Harwood RH. Economic analysis of an early discharge rehabilitation service for older people. Age and Ageing. United Kingdom 2005; 34(3):274–280 [PubMed: 15764621]
- 169.
- Muijen M, Marks I, Connolly J, Audini B. Home based care and standard hospital care for patients with severe mental illness: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 1992; 304(6829):749–754 [PMC free article: PMC1881624] [PubMed: 1571681]
- 170.
- National Audit Office. Progress in improving stroke care: report on the findings from our modelling of stroke care provision. London. National Audit Office, 2010. Available from: http://www
.nao.org.uk /report/department-of-health-progress-in-improving-stroke-care/ - 171.
- Netten A, Curtis L. Unit costs of health and social care 2003. Canterbury: Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent; 2003. Available from: http://www
.pssru.ac.uk /project-pages/unit-costs/2003/ - 172.
- Nicholson C, Bowler S, Jackson C, Schollay D, Tweeddale M, O’Rourke P. Cost comparison of hospital- and home-based treatment models for acute chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Australian Health Review. 2001; 24(4):181–187 [PubMed: 11842709]
- 173.
- Nissen I, Jensen MS. Nurse-supported discharge of patients with exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Ugeskrift for Laeger. 2007; 169(23):2220–2223 [PubMed: 17592691]
- 174.
- Nordly M, Benthien KS, Von Der Maase H, Johansen C, Kruse M, Timm H et al. The DOMUS study protocol: a randomized clinical trial of accelerated transition from oncological treatment to specialized palliative care at home. BMC Palliative Care. 2014; 13:44 [PMC free article: PMC4169691] [PubMed: 25242890]
- 175.
- Nyatanga B. Extending virtual wards to palliative care delivered in the community. British Journal of Community Nursing. 2014; 19(7):328–329 [PubMed: 25039340]
- 176.
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Purchasing power parities (PPP), 2007. Available from: http://www
.oecd.org/std/ppp - 177.
- Ozdemir F, Birtane M, Tabatabaei R, Kokino S, Ekuklu G. Comparing stroke rehabilitation outcomes between acute inpatient and nonintense home settings. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2001; 82(10):1375–1379 [PubMed: 11588740]
- 178.
- Pace A, Villani V, Di Pasquale A, Benincasa D, Guariglia L, Ieraci S et al. Home care for brain tumor patients. Neuro-Oncology Practice. 2014; 1(1):8–12 [PMC free article: PMC4369701] [PubMed: 26034609]
- 179.
- Palmer Hill S, Flynn J, Crawford EJP. Early discharge following total knee replacement -- a trial of patient satisfaction and outcomes using an orthopaedic outreach team. Journal of Orthopaedic Nursing. 2000; 4(3):121–126
- 180.
- Pandian JD. A multicentre, randomized, blinded outcome assessor, controlled trial, whether a family-led caregiver-delivered home-based rehabilitation intervention versus usual care is an effective, affordable Early Support Discharge strategy for those with disabling stroke in India. 2013. Available from: http://www
.ctri.nic.in /Clinicaltrials/pmaindet2 .php?trialid=6195 [Last accessed: 29 December 14 A.D.] - 181.
- Pandian JD, Felix C, Kaur P, Sharma D, Julia L, Toor G et al. FAmily-led rehabiliTaTion aftEr stroke in INDia: the ATTEND pilot study. International Journal of Stroke. 2015; 10(4):609–614 [PubMed: 25753445]
- 182.
- Patel A, Knapp M, Perez I, Evans A, Kalra L. Alternative strategies for stroke care: cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses from a prospective randomized controlled trial. Stroke. 2004; 35(1):196–203 [PubMed: 14684783]
- 183.
- Penque S, Petersen B, Arom K, Ratner E, Halm M. Early discharge with home health care in the coronary artery bypass patient. Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing. 1999; 18(6):40–48 [PubMed: 10640054]
- 184.
- Piotrowicz E, Baranowski R, Bilinska M, Stepnowska M, Piotrowska M, Wojcik A et al. A new model of home-based telemonitored cardiac rehabilitation in patients with heart failure: effectiveness, quality of life, and adherence. European Journal of Heart Failure. 2010; 12(2):164–171 [PubMed: 20042423]
- 185.
- Pittiglio LI, Harris MA, Mili F. Development and evaluation of a three-dimensional virtual hospital unit: VI-MED. Computers, Informatics, Nursing. 2011; 29(5):267–271 [PubMed: 21633205]
- 186.
- Plochg T, Delnoij DMJ, van der Kruk TF, Janmaat TACM, Klazinga NS. Intermediate care: for better or worse? Process evaluation of an intermediate care model between a university hospital and a residential home. BMC Health Services Research. 2005; 5:38 [PMC free article: PMC1168893] [PubMed: 15910689]
- 187.
- Pozzilli C, Brunetti M, Amicosante AMV, Gasperini C, Ristori G, Palmisano L et al. Home based management in multiple sclerosis: results of a randomised controlled trial. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry. 2002; 73(3):250–255 [PMC free article: PMC1738043] [PubMed: 12185154]
- 188.
- Pradella CO, Belmonte GM, Maia MN, Delgado CS, Luise APT, Nascimento OA et al. Home-based pulmonary rehabilitation for subjects with COPD: a randomized study. Respiratory Care. 2015; 60(4):526–532 [PubMed: 25269680]
- 189.
- Prior MK, Bahret BA, Allen RI, Pasupuleti S. The efficacy of a senior outreach program in the reduction of hospital readmissions and emergency department visits among chronically ill seniors. Social Work in Health Care. 2012; 51(4):345–360 [PubMed: 22489558]
- 190.
- Puig-Junoy J, Casas A, Font-Planells J, Escarrabill J, Hernandez C, Alonso J et al. The impact of home hospitalization on healthcare costs of exacerbations in COPD patients. European Journal of Health Economics. 2007; 8(4):325–332 [PubMed: 17221178]
- 191.
- Rasmussen RS, Ostergaard A, Kjaer P, Skerris A, Skou C, Christoffersen J et al. Stroke rehabilitation at home before and after discharge reduced disability and improved quality of life: a randomised controlled trial. Clinical Rehabilitation. 2016; 30(3):225–236 [PubMed: 25758941]
- 192.
- Ricauda NA, Bo M, Molaschi M, Massaia M, Salerno D, Amati D et al. Home hospitalization service for acute uncomplicated first ischemic stroke in elderly patients: a randomized trial. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2004; 52(2):278–283 [PubMed: 14728641]
- 193.
- Ricauda NA, Tibaldi V, Marinello R, Bo M, Isaia G, Scarafiotti C et al. Acute ischemic stroke in elderly patients treated in Hospital at Home: a cost minimization analysis. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2005; 53(8):1442–1443 [PubMed: 16078983]
- 194.
- Richards SH. Correction: randomised controlled trial comparing effectiveness and acceptability of an early discharge, hospital at home scheme with acute hospital care (British Medical Journal (1998) 13 June (1796-1801)). BMJ. 1998; 317(7161):786 [PMC free article: PMC28580] [PubMed: 9624070]
- 195.
- Richards SH, Coast J, Gunnell DJ, Peters TJ, Pounsford J, Darlow MA. Randomised controlled trial comparing effectiveness and acceptability of an early discharge, hospital at home scheme with acute hospital care. BMJ. 1998; 316(7147):1796–1801 [PMC free article: PMC28580] [PubMed: 9624070]
- 196.
- Richardson G, Griffiths P, Wilson-Barnett J, Spilsbury K, Batehup L. Economic evaluation of a nursing-led intermediate care unit. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2001; 17(3):442–450 [PubMed: 11495387]
- 197.
- Robinson J. Facilitating earlier transfer of care from acute stroke services into the community. Nursing Times. 2009; 105(12):12–13 [PubMed: 19363928]
- 198.
- Roderick P, Low J, Day R, Peasgood T, Mullee MA, Turnbull JC et al. Stroke rehabilitation after hospital discharge: a randomized trial comparing domiciliary and day-hospital care. Age and Ageing. 2001; 30(4):303–310 [PubMed: 11509308]
- 199.
- Rodgers H, Soutter J, Kaiser W, Pearson P, Dobson R, Skilbeck C et al. Early supported hospital discharge following acute stroke: pilot study results. Clinical Rehabilitation. 1997; 11(4):280–287 [PubMed: 9408667]
- 200.
- Rodriguez-Cerrillo M, Poza-Montoro A, Fernandez-Diaz E, Inurrieta-Romero A, Matesanz-David M. Home treatment of patients with acute cholecystitis. European Journal of Internal Medicine. 2012; 23(1):e10–e13 [PubMed: 22153541]
- 201.
- Rodriguez-Cerrillo M, Poza-Montoro A, Fernandez-Diaz E, Romero AI. Patients with uncomplicated diverticulitis and comorbidity can be treated at home. European Journal of Internal Medicine. 2010; 21(6):553–554 [PubMed: 21111943]
- 202.
- Ronning OM, Guldvog B. Outcome of subacute stroke rehabilitation: a randomized controlled trial. Stroke. 1998; 29(4):779–784 [PubMed: 9550511]
- 203.
- Rosbotham-Williams A. Integrating health care services for older people. Nursing Times. 2002; 98(32):40–41 [PubMed: 12211912]
- 204.
- Round A, Crabb T, Buckingham K, Mejzner R, Pearce V, Ayres R et al. Six month outcomes after emergency admission of elderly patients to a community or a district general hospital. Family Practice. 2004; 21(2):173–179 [PubMed: 15020387]
- 205.
- Rout A, Ashby S, Maslin-Prothero S, Masterson A, Priest H, Beach M et al. A literature review of interprofessional working and intermediate care in the UK. Journal of Clinical Nursing. 2011; 20(5-6):775–783 [PubMed: 20662994]
- 206.
- Rowley JM, Hampton JR, Mitchell JR. Home care for patients with suspected myocardial infarction: use made by general practitioners of a hospital team for initial management. BMJ. 1984; 289(6442):403–406 [PMC free article: PMC1442427] [PubMed: 6432118]
- 207.
- Ruckley CV, Cuthbertson C, Fenwick N, Prescott RJ, Garraway WM. Day care after operations for hernia or varicose veins: a controlled trial. British Journal of Surgery. 1978; 65(7):456–459 [PubMed: 352473]
- 208.
- Rudd AG, Wolfe CD, Tilling K, Beech R. Randomised controlled trial to evaluate early discharge scheme for patients with stroke. BMJ. 1997; 315(7115):1039–1044 [PMC free article: PMC2127677] [PubMed: 9366727]
- 209.
- Rudkin ST, Harrison S, Harvey I, White RJ. A randomised trial of hospital v home rehabilitation in severe chronic ostructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Thorax. 1997; 52:(Suppl 6):A11
- 210.
- Saka O, Serra V, Samyshkin Y, McGuire A, Wolfe CCDA. Cost-effectiveness of stroke unit care followed by early supported discharge. Stroke. 2009; 40(1):24–29 [PubMed: 19008473]
- 211.
- Santana S, Rente J, Neves C, Redondo P, Szczygiel N, Larsen T et al. Early home-supported discharge for patients with stroke in Portugal: a randomised controlled trial. Clinical Rehabilitation. 2017; 31(2):197–206 [PMC free article: PMC5302124] [PubMed: 26837431]
- 212.
- Sartain SA, Maxwell MJ, Todd PJ, Jones KH, Bagust A, Haycox A et al. Randomised controlled trial comparing an acute paediatric hospital at home scheme with conventional hospital care. Archives of Disease in Childhood. 2002; 87(5):371–375 [PMC free article: PMC1763073] [PubMed: 12390903]
- 213.
- Saysell E, Routley C. Pilot project of an intermediate palliative care unit within a registered care home. International Journal of Palliative Nursing. 2004; 10(8):393–398 [PubMed: 15365494]
- 214.
- Schachter ME, Bargman JM, Copland M, Hladunewich M, Tennankore KK, Levin A et al. Rationale for a home dialysis virtual ward: design and implementation. BMC Nephrology. 2014; 15:33 [PMC free article: PMC3930556] [PubMed: 24528505]
- 215.
- Scheinberg L, Koren MJ, Bluestone M, McDowell FH. Effects of early hospital discharge to home care on the costs and outcome of care of stroke patients: a randomised trial in progress. Cerebrovascular Diseases. 1986; 1:289–296
- 216.
- Schneller K. Intermediate care for homeless people: results of a pilot project. Emergency Nurse. 2012; 20(6):20–24 [PubMed: 23167008]
- 217.
- Schou L, Ostergaard B, Rasmussen LS, Rydahl-Hansen S, Jakobsen AS, Emme C et al. Telemedicine-based treatment versus hospitalization in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and exacerbation: effect on cognitive function. A randomized clinical trial. Telemedicine Journal and E-Health. 2014; 20(7):640–646 [PubMed: 24820535]
- 218.
- Scott IA. Public hospital bed crisis: too few or too misused? Australian Health Review. 2010; 34(3):317–324 [PubMed: 20797364]
- 219.
- Senaratne MP, Irwin ME, Shaben S, Griffiths J, Nagendran J, Kasza L et al. Feasibility of direct discharge from the coronary/intermediate care unit after acute myocardial infarction. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 1999; 33(4):1040–1046 [PubMed: 10091833]
- 220.
- Shepperd S. Hospital at home: the evidence is not compelling. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2005; 143(11):840–841 [PubMed: 16330798]
- 221.
- Shepperd S, Harwood D, Gray A, Vessey M, Morgan P. Randomised controlled trial comparing hospital at home care with inpatient hospital care. II: cost minimisation analysis. BMJ. 1998; 316(7147):1791–1796 [PMC free article: PMC28579] [PubMed: 9624069]
- 222.
- Shepperd S, Iliffe S. The effectiveness of hospital at home compared with in-patient hospital care: a systematic review. Journal of Public Health Medicine. 1998; 20(3):344–350 [PubMed: 9793901]
- 223.
- Shepperd S, Doll H, Angus RM, Clarke MJ, Iliffe S, Kalra L et al. Hospital at home admission avoidance. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2008; Issue 4:CD007491. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD007491 [PMC free article: PMC4033791] [PubMed: 18843751] [CrossRef]
- 224.
- Shepperd S, Doll H, Angus RM, Clarke MJ, Iliffe S, Kalra L et al. Avoiding hospital admission through provision of hospital care at home: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data. CMAJ Canadian Medical Association Journal. 2009; 180(2):175–182 [PMC free article: PMC2621299] [PubMed: 19153394]
- 225.
- Shepperd S, Doll H, Broad J, Gladman J, Iliffe S, Langhorne P et al. Early discharge hospital at home. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2009; Issue 1:CD000356. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD000356.pub3 [PMC free article: PMC4175532] [PubMed: 19160179] [CrossRef]
- 226.
- Shepperd S, Iliffe S, Doll HA, Clarke MJ, Kalra L, Wilson AD et al. Admission avoidance hospital at home. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016; Issue 9:CD007491. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD007491.pub2 [PMC free article: PMC6457791] [PubMed: 27583824] [CrossRef]
- 227.
- Sindhwani G, Verma A, Biswas D, Srivastava M, Rawat J. A pilot study on domiciliary pulmonary rehabilitation programme in the management of severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Singapore Medical Journal. 2011; 52(9):689–693 [PubMed: 21947149]
- 228.
- Smith KM, Arthur HM, McKelvie RS, Kodis J. Differences in sustainability of exercise and health-related quality of life outcomes following home or hospital-based cardiac rehabilitation. European Journal of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation. 2004; 11(4):313–319 [PubMed: 15292765]
- 229.
- Smith KM, McKelvie RS, Thorpe KE, Arthur HM. Six-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial examining hospital versus home-based exercise training after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Heart. 2011; 97(14):1169–1174 [PubMed: 21561899]
- 230.
- Standen PJ, Threapleton K, Richardson A, Connell L, Brown DJ, Battersby S et al. A low cost virtual reality system for home based rehabilitation of the arm following stroke: a randomised controlled feasibility trial. Clinical Rehabilitation. 2016; [PMC free article: PMC5349317] [PubMed: 27029939]
- 231.
- Stephenson AE, Chetwynd SJ. A method of analysing general practioner decision making concerning home or hospital coronary care. Community Health Studies. 1984; 8(3):297–300 [PubMed: 6518748]
- 232.
- Steventon A, Bardsley M, Billings J, Georghiou T, Lewis GH. The role of matched controls in building an evidence base for hospital-avoidance schemes: a retrospective evaluation. Health Services Research. 2012; 47(4):1679–1698 [PMC free article: PMC3401405] [PubMed: 22224902]
- 233.
- Stewart S, Marley JE, Horowitz JD. Effects of a multidisciplinary, home-based intervention on unplanned readmissions and survival among patients with chronic congestive heart failure: a randomised controlled study. The Lancet. 1999; 354(9184):1077–1083 [PubMed: 10509499]
- 234.
- Stromberg A, Martensson J, Fridlund B, Levin LA, Karlsson JE, Dahlstrom U. Nurse-led heart failure clinics improve survival and self-care behaviour in patients with heart failure: results from a prospective, randomised trial. European Heart Journal. 2003; 24(11):1014–1023 [PubMed: 12788301]
- 235.
- Subirana Serrate R, Ferrer-Roca O, Gonzalez-Davila E. A cost-minimization analysis of oncology home care versus hospital care. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare. 2001; 7(4):226–232 [PubMed: 11506758]
- 236.
- Suijker JJ, van Rijn M, Buurman BM, Ter Riet G, Moll van Charante EP, de Rooij SE. Effects of nurse-led multifactorial care to prevent disability in community-living older people: cluster randomized trial. PloS One. 2016; 11(7):e0158714 [PMC free article: PMC4961429] [PubMed: 27459349]
- 237.
- Suwanwela NC, Phanthumchinda K, Limtongkul S, Suvanprakorn P. Comparison of short (3-day) hospitalization followed by home care treatment and conventional (10-day) hospitalization for acute ischemic stroke. Cerebrovascular Diseases. 2002; 13(4):267–271 [PubMed: 12011552]
- 238.
- Taylor RS, Watt A, Dalal HM, Evans PH, Campbell JL, Read KLQ et al. Home-based cardiac rehabilitation versus hospital-based rehabilitation: a cost effectiveness analysis. International Journal of Cardiology. 2007; 119(2):196–201 [PubMed: 17084927]
- 239.
- Taylor RS, Dalal H, Jolly K, Zawada A, Dean SG, Cowie A et al. Home-based versus centre-based cardiac rehabilitation. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2015; Issue 8:CD007130. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD007130.pub3 [PubMed: 26282071] [CrossRef]
- 240.
- Teasell RW, Foley NC, Bhogal SK, Speechley MR. Early supported discharge in stroke rehabilitation. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation. 2003; 10(2):19–33 [PubMed: 13680516]
- 241.
- Teng J, Mayo NE, Latimer E, Hanley J, Wood-Dauphinee S, Cote R et al. Costs and caregiver consequences of early supported discharge for stroke patients. Stroke. 2003; 34(2):528–536 [PubMed: 12574571]
- 242.
- Thorne D, Jeffery S. Intermediate care. Homeward bound. Health Service Journal. 2001; 111(5785):28–29 [PubMed: 11810755]
- 243.
- Thorsen AM, Holmqvist LW, de Pedro-Cuesta J, von Koch L. A randomized controlled trial of early supported discharge and continued rehabilitation at home after stroke: five-year follow-up of patient outcome. Stroke. 2005; 36(2):297–303 [PubMed: 15618441]
- 244.
- Thorsen AM, Widen Holmqvist L, von Koch L. Early supported discharge and continued rehabilitation at home after stroke: 5-year follow-up of resource use. Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases. 2006; 15(4):139–143 [PubMed: 17904066]
- 245.
- Tibaldi V, Aimonino N, Ponzetto M, Stasi MF, Amati D, Raspo S et al. A randomized controlled trial of a home hospital intervention for frail elderly demented patients: behavioral disturbances and caregiver’s stress. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics. 2004; 2004(9):431–436 [PubMed: 15207444]
- 246.
- Trappes-Lomax T, Ellis A, Fox M, Taylor R, Power M, Stead J et al. Buying time I: a prospective, controlled trial of a joint health/social care residential rehabilitation unit for older people on discharge from hospital. Health and Social Care in the Community. 2006; 14(1):49–62 [PubMed: 16324187]
- 247.
- Tuntland H, Aaslund MK, Espehaug B, Forland O, Kjeken I. Reablement in community-dwelling older adults: a randomised controlled trial. BMC Geriatrics. 2015; 15:145 [PMC free article: PMC4634595] [PubMed: 26537789]
- 248.
- Upton S, Culshaw M, Stephenson J. An observational study to identify factors associated with hospital readmission and to evaluate the impact of mandating validation of discharge prescriptions on readmission rate. International Journal of Pharmacy Practice. 2014; 22:45–46
- 249.
- Utens CMA, Goossens LMA, Smeenk FWJM, van Schayck OCP, van Litsenburg W, Janssen A et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of early assisted discharge for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations: the design of a randomised controlled trial. BMC Public Health. 2010; 10:618 [PMC free article: PMC2965725] [PubMed: 20955582]
- 250.
- Vester-Andersen M, Waldau T, Wetterslev J, Moller MH, Rosenberg J, Jorgensen LN et al. Randomized multicentre feasibility trial of intermediate care versus standard ward care after emergency abdominal surgery (InCare trial). British Journal of Surgery. 2015; 102(6):619–629 [PubMed: 25789827]
- 251.
- von Koch L, de Pedro-Cuesta J, Kostulas V, Almazan J, Widen HL. Randomized controlled trial of rehabilitation at home after stroke: one-year follow-up of patient outcome, resource use and cost. Cerebrovascular Diseases. 2001; 12(2):131–138 [PubMed: 11490107]
- 252.
- von Koch L, Holmqvist LW, Kostulas V, Almazan J, de Pedro-Cuesta J. A randomized controlled trial of rehabilitation at home after stroke in Southwest Stockholm: outcome at six months. Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine. 2000; 32(2):80–86 [PubMed: 10853722]
- 253.
- Wakefield BJ, Ward MM, Holman JE, Ray A, Scherubel M, Burns TL et al. Evaluation of home telehealth following hospitalization for heart failure: a randomized trial. Telemedicine Journal and E-Health. 2008; 14(8):753–761 [PubMed: 18954244]
- 254.
- Widen Holmqvist L, de Pedro-Cuesta J, Holm M, Kostulas V. Intervention design for rehabilitation at home after stroke. A pilot feasibility study. Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine. 1995; 27(1):43–50 [PubMed: 7792549]
- 255.
- Widen HL, de Pedro-Cuesta J, Moller G, Holm M, Siden A. A pilot study of rehabilitation at home after stroke: a health-economic appraisal. Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine. 1996; 28(1):9–18 [PubMed: 8701237]
- 256.
- Winkel A, Ekdahl C, Gard G. Early discharge to therapy-based rehabilitation at home in patients with stroke: a systematic review. Physical Therapy Reviews. 2008; 13(3):167–187
- 257.
- Wolfe CD, Tilling K, Rudd AG. The effectiveness of community-based rehabilitation for stroke patients who remain at home: a pilot randomized trial. Clinical Rehabilitation. 2000; 14(6):563–569 [PubMed: 11128729]
- 258.
- Woodend AK, Sherrard H, Fraser M, Stuewe L, Cheung T, Struthers C. Telehome monitoring in patients with cardiac disease who are at high risk of readmission. Heart and Lung: Journal of Acute and Critical Care. 2008; 37(1):36–45 [PubMed: 18206525]
- 259.
- Woodhams V, de Lusignan S, Mughal S, Head G, Debar S, Desombre T et al. Triumph of hope over experience: learning from interventions to reduce avoidable hospital admissions identified through an Academic Health and Social Care Network. BMC Health Services Research. 2012; 12:153 [PMC free article: PMC3476394] [PubMed: 22682525]
- 260.
- Wu YT, Chien CL, Chou NK, Wang SS, Lai JS, Wu YW. Efficacy of a home-based exercise program for orthotopic heart transplant recipients. Cardiology. 2008; 111(2):87–93 [PubMed: 18376119]
- 261.
- Young J, Green J. Effects of delays in transfer on independence outcomes for older people requiring postacute care in community hospitals in England. Journal of Clinical Gerontology and Geriatrics. 2010; 1(2):48–52
- 262.
- Young J, Sharan U. Medical assessment and direct admissions to a community hospital. Clinical Governance. 2003; 8(3):213–217
- 263.
- Young JB, Robinson M, Chell S, Sanderson D, Chaplin S, Burns E et al. A whole system study of intermediate care services for older people. Age and Ageing. 2005; 34(6):577–583 [PubMed: 16267182]
- 264.
- Ytterberg C, Thorsen AM, Liljedahl M, Holmqvist LW, von Koch L. Changes in perceived health between one and five years after stroke: a randomized controlled trial of early supported discharge with continued rehabilitation at home versus conventional rehabilitation. Journal of the Neurological Sciences. 2010; 294(1-2):86–88 [PubMed: 20447654]
- 265.
- Zhong L, Mahmoudi E, Giladi AM, Shauver M, Chung KC, Waljee JF. Utilization of post-acute care following distal radius fracture among Medicare beneficiaries. Journal of Hand Surgery. 2015; 40(12):2401–2409 [PMC free article: PMC5079469] [PubMed: 26527599]
- 266.
- Zwisler A-D, Norton RJ, Dean SG, Dalal H, Tang LH, Wingham J et al. Home-based cardiac rehabilitation for people with heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Cardiology. 2016; 221:963–969 [PubMed: 27441476]
Appendices
Appendix A. Review protocol
Table 9Review protocol: community rehabilitation
Review question: Does the provision of community-based rehabilitation services following acute medical illness improve patient outcomes? | |
---|---|
Objective | To determine if wider provision of community-based rehabilitation prevents people staying in hospitals longer than necessary while not impacting on patient and carer outcomes. |
Rationale | Community-based healthcare services are vital to prevent unnecessary hospital admission and to facilitate early hospital discharge. It is also likely that these resources are less costly than hospital care. |
Population | Adults and young people (16 years and over) with a suspected or confirmed AME presenting to an acute medical unit. |
Intervention | Community-based rehabilitation services. |
Comparison | Hospital-based rehabilitation services. |
Outcomes |
|
Search criteria |
The databases to be searched are: Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library Date limits for search: None Language: English only |
The review strategy | Systematic reviews (SRs) of RCTs, RCTs, observational studies only to be included if no relevant SRs or RCTs are identified. |
Analysis |
Data synthesis of RCT data. Meta-analysis where appropriate will be conducted. Studies in the following subgroup populations will be included:
|
Appendix B. Clinical article selection
Appendix C. Forest plots
C.1. Community versus hospital rehabilitation – Admission avoidance
C.2. Community versus hospital rehabilitation - Early discharge
Appendix D. Clinical evidence tables
Cochrane reviews
Download PDF (360K)
Randomised controlled trials
Download PDF (1.0M)
Appendix E. Economic evidence tables
A. Stroke rehabilitation
Download PDF (494K)
B. Geriatric rehabilitation
Download PDF (383K)
c. Cardiac rehabilitation
Download PDF (426K)
Appendix F. GRADE tables
Table 13Clinical evidence profile: Community versus hospital for after acute medical emergencies (admission avoidance)
Quality assessment | No of patients | Effect | Quality | Importance | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
No of studies | Design | Risk of bias | Inconsistency | Indirectness | Imprecision | Other considerations | Community (admission avoidance) versus hospital | Control | Relative (95% CI) | Absolute | ||
Mortality 6-12 months | ||||||||||||
2 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | serious2 | none |
42/204 (20.6%) | 31.4% | RR 0.74 (0.52 to 1.04) | 82 fewer per 1000 (from 151 fewer to 13 more) |
⨁⨁◯◯ LOW | CRITICAL |
Length of treatment (Better indicated by lower values) | ||||||||||||
1 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | serious2 | none | 60 | 60 | - | MD 15.9 higher (8.1 to 23.7 higher) |
⨁⨁◯◯ LOW | CRITICAL |
Quality of life-SF 36 physical component summary (follow-up 8 weeks; Better indicated by higher values) | ||||||||||||
1 | randomised trials | no serious risk of bias | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | very serious2 | None | 20 | 20 | - | MD 0.18 higher (6.35 lower to 6.71 higher) |
⨁⨁◯◯ LOW | CRITICAL |
Quality of life-SF 36 mental component summary (follow-up 8 weeks; Better indicated by higher values) | ||||||||||||
1 | randomised trials | no serious risk of bias | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | serious2 | None | 20 | 20 | - | MD 3.81 lower (11.08 lower to 3.46 higher) |
⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE | CRITICAL |
- 1
Downgraded by 1 increment if the majority of the evidence was at high risk of bias, and downgraded by 2 increments if the majority of the evidence was at very high risk of bias
- 2
Downgraded by 1 increment if the confidence interval crossed 1 MID or by 2 increments if the confidence interval crossed both MIDs.
Table 14Clinical evidence profile: Early Supported Discharge for after acute medical emergencies versus continued hospital treatment
Quality assessment | No of patients | Effect | Quality | Importance | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
No of studies | Design | Risk of bias | Inconsistency | Indirectness | Imprecision | Other considerations | Community Rehabilitation | Hospital Rehabilitation | Relative (95% CI) | Absolute | ||
Mortality (follow-up 3 months - 6 years) | ||||||||||||
20 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | no serious imprecision | None |
229/1768 (13%) | 9.1% | RR 1.013 (0.84 to 1.25) | 1 more per 1000 (from 15 fewer to 23 more) |
⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE | CRITICAL |
Mortality (follow-up median 6 months) | ||||||||||||
8 | randomised trials | serious1 | serious2 | no serious indirectness | very serious3 | None |
64/628 (10.2%) | 9.1% | RR 1.26 (0.79 to 2.03) | 24 more per 1000 (from 19 fewer to 94 more) |
⨁◯◯◯ VERY LOW | CRITICAL |
Mortality (follow-up 1 years) | ||||||||||||
6 | randomised trials | serious1 | serious2 | no serious indirectness | serious3 | None |
61/518 (11.8%) | 16.3% | RR 0.86 (0.63 to 1.18) | 23 fewer per 1000 (from 60 fewer to 29 more) |
⨁◯◯◯ VERY LOW | CRITICAL |
Mortality (follow-up 2-6 years) | ||||||||||||
6 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | no serious imprecision | None |
104/622 (16.7%) | 1.61% | RR 0.97 (0.78 to 1.20) | 3 fewer per 1000 (from 26 fewer to 23 more) |
⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE | CRITICAL |
Adverse events (follow-up 9 weeks - 6 years) | ||||||||||||
5 | randomised trials | serious1 | serious2 | no serious indirectness | serious3 | None |
100/258 (38.8%) | 32.5% | RR 1.20 (0.85 to 1.68) | 73 more per 1000 (from 55 fewer to 250 more) |
⨁◯◯◯ VERY LOW | CRITICAL |
Quality of life (follow-up median 7 months; measured with: SF-36 Physical component summary score; Better indicated by lower values) | ||||||||||||
5 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | no serious imprecision | None | 311 | 312 | - | MD 1.04 higher (0.99 lower to 3.07 higher) |
⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE | CRITICAL |
Quality of life (follow-up median 7 months; measured with: SF-36 Mental component summary scores; Better indicated by lower values) | ||||||||||||
5 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | no serious imprecision | None | 311 | 312 | - | MD 0.86 higher (1.04 lower to 2.77 higher) |
⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE | CRITICAL |
Quality of life (follow-up 12 months; measured with: St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire; Better indicated by higher values) | ||||||||||||
1 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | no serious imprecision | None | 89 | 95 | - | MD 1 lower (4.14 lower to 2.14 higher) |
⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE | CRITICAL |
Quality of life (follow-up 12 months; measured with: Life Satisfaction; Better indicated by higher values) | ||||||||||||
1 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | no serious imprecision | None | 42 | 43 | - | MD 0.3 higher (4.06 lower to 4.66 higher) |
⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE | CRITICAL |
Quality of life (follow-up 8 weeks; measured with MacNew-Global; Better indicated by higher values)) | ||||||||||||
1 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | no serious imprecision | None | 60 | 44 | - | MD 0.07 lower (0.51 lower to 0.37 higher) |
⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE | CRITICAL |
Patient satisfaction (follow-up median 6 months; Better indicated by higher values) | ||||||||||||
4 | randomised trials | very serious1 | serious2 | no serious indirectness | serious3 | None | 268 | 146 | - | MD 0.32 higher (0.18 lower to 0.82 higher) |
⨁◯◯◯ VERY LOW | IMPORTANT |
Patient satisfaction (follow-up 6-12 months) | ||||||||||||
2 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | serious3 | None |
89/178 (50%) | 51.2% | RR 1.15 (0.93 to 1.43) | 77 more per 1000 (from 36 fewer to 220 more) |
⨁⨁◯◯ LOW | IMPORTANT |
Carer satisfaction (follow-up 6 months; Better indicated by higher values) | ||||||||||||
1 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | serious3 | None | 70 | 34 | - | MD 0.39 higher (0.01 lower to 0.79 higher) |
⨁⨁◯◯ LOW | IMPORTANT |
Carer satisfaction (follow-up 12 months) | ||||||||||||
1 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | no serious imprecision | None |
68/82 (82.9%) | 82.5% | RR 1 (0.86 to 1.17) | 0 fewer per 1000 (from 115 fewer to 140 more) |
⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE | CRITICAL |
Carer satisfaction (follow-up median 12 months; measured with: Caregiver Strain Index; Better indicated by lower values) | ||||||||||||
5 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | no serious imprecision | None | 282 | 250 | - | SMD 0.16 higher (0.01 lower to 0.34 higher) |
⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE | IMPORTANT |
Length of stay in hospital (follow-up in-hospital; Better indicated by lower values) | ||||||||||||
8 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | no serious imprecision | None | 745 | 644 | - | MD 1.38 lower (2.47 to 0.3 lower) |
⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE | CRITICAL |
Length of stay in hospital and programme (follow-up 6 months - 3 years; Better indicated by lower values) | ||||||||||||
3 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | no serious imprecision | None | 261 | 225 | - | MD 7.74 lower (14.2 to 1.28 lower) |
⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE | CRITICAL |
Admissions to hospital (follow-up 3 months - 6 years) | ||||||||||||
13 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | no serious imprecision | None |
246/890 (27.6%) | 24.3% | RR 0.98 (0.86 to 1.11) | 5 fewer per 1000 (from 34 fewer to 27 more) |
⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE | CRITICAL |
Admissions to hospital (follow-up 6 months) | ||||||||||||
5 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | very serious3 | None |
43/244 (17.6%) | 22.4% | RR 0.9 (0.61 to 1.33) | 22 fewer per 1000 (from 87 fewer to 74 more) |
⨁◯◯◯ VERY LOW | CRITICAL |
Admissions to hospital (follow-up 12 months) | ||||||||||||
7 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | no serious imprecision | None |
168/576 (29.2%) | 25.3% | RR 1.03 (0.88 to 1.20) | 8 more per 1000 (from 30 fewer to 51 more) |
⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE | CRITICAL |
Admissions to hospital (follow-up 6 years) | ||||||||||||
1 | randomised trials | very serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | serious3 | None |
35/70 (50%) | 62.2% | RR 0.8 (0.6 to 1.08) | 124 fewer per 1000 (from 249 fewer to 50 more) |
⨁◯◯◯ VERY LOW | CRITICAL |
GP presentations (follow-up 6 months - 5 years) | ||||||||||||
2 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | no serious imprecision | None |
74/84 (88.1%) | 93.3% | RR 0.94 (0.86 to 1.04) | 56 fewer per 1000 (from 131 fewer to 37 more) |
⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE | IMPORTANT |
Quality of life (follow-up 6 months; measured withSF12 - PCS; Better indicated by higher values) | ||||||||||||
1 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | no serious imprecision | None | 263 | 262 | - | MD 0.28 lower (2.14 lower to 1.58 higher) |
⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE | CRITICAL |
Quality of life (follow-up 6 months; measured withSF12 - MCS; Better indicated by higher values) | ||||||||||||
1 | randomised trials | serious1 | no serious inconsistency | no serious indirectness | no serious imprecision | None | 263 | 262 | - | MD 1.14 lower (2.83 lower to 0.55 higher) |
⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE | CRITICAL |
- 1
Downgraded by 1 increment if the majority of the evidence was at high risk of bias, and downgraded by 2 increments if the majority of the evidence was at very high risk of bias.
- 2
The point estimate varies widely across studies, unexplained by subgroup analysis.
- 3
Downgraded by 1 increment if the confidence interval crossed 1 MID or by 2 increments if the confidence interval crossed both MIDs.
Appendix G. Excluded clinical studies
Table 15Studies excluded from the clinical review
Reference | Reason for exclusion |
---|---|
Adler 19782 | Not relevant: patients following elective surgery |
Aimonino 20013 | Patients not treated for acute medical emergency (advanced dementia patients) - please note not linked to Tibaldi 2004245 |
Aimonino 20004 | Conference abstract; later published as Ricauda 2004192 |
Allen 19995 | Not RCT; description of a website |
Anderson 201610 | Systematic review is not relevant to review question or unclear PICO. Exercise training versus usual care |
Anderson 2000A6 | Conference abstract of protocol only |
Anderson 2002A9 | No clinical outcomes; Costs only |
Anderson 2002B8 | Not RCT; Systematic review |
Anonymous 1982B1 | Not relevant comparison |
Anon 200081 | Systematic review: eligible papers ordered |
Armstrong 2008B11 | Not RCT; Retrospective single arm study |
Arrigo 200812 | No hospital-based comparison |
Askim 201014 | Incorrect interventions. Hospital and community components |
Aujesky 201116 | RCT but no community care (self- administered injections) |
Bakken 201217 | Not RCT; not relevant |
Barnes 200318 | Not RCT; review |
Beech 200420 | Not RCT; service evaluation |
Bernhaut 200221 | Not RCT, service evaluation |
Bethell 199022 | Not substitute for usual care; control group received no intervention, only advice what exercises they could do by themselves |
Beynon 200923 | Not RCT; literature review |
Blackburn 200024 | Not RCT; not relevant; costs only |
Blair 201125 | Not RCT; systematic review |
Board 200026 | Not relevant; costs only |
Booth 200427 | Not relevant; patients following bypass surgery |
Boston 200128 | Not RCT; prospective non-randomised comparative study |
Bowman 199829 | Not RCT; review |
Boxall 200530 | Inappropriate comparison. not hospital-based care |
Brooks 200231 | Not RCT; retrospective case study |
Brooks 200332 | Not RCT; retrospective documentary analysis |
Brunner 200833 | Not RCT; other experimental design |
Bryan 201034 | Not RCT; literature review |
Buckingham 201635 | Cochrane review – relevant references ordered |
Buus 201336 | Protocol only; no study data |
Campbell 200137 | No clinical outcomes; costs only |
Caplan 200441 | Comparison is not hospital-based care |
Caplan 200639 | Not RCT; service evaluation |
Caplan 201240 | Not RCT; systematic review- screened for relevant references |
Carroll 200542 | Not RCT; review |
Chaiyawat 201043 | Conference abstract |
Chaiyawat 201044 | Conference abstract |
Chang 201545 | No hospital-based comparison. Not review population. Psychiatric |
Chappell 199346 | Not relevant; retrospective cost analysis |
Chard 200647 | Not RCT; review |
Chen 2012A48 | Not relevant; costs associated with acquired brain injury |
Coast 49 | Not relevant; majority of patients with trauma and elective surgery |
Cobelli 199650 | Not RCT; review |
Coburn 198951 | Not RCT; quasi-experimental; cost |
Cohen 199452 | Not RCT; review |
Colprim 201254 | Not RCT; quasi-experimental study |
Colprim 201453 | Not RCT; prospective cohort study |
Cowie 201455 | Not RCT; economic analysis |
Craig 201457 | Not RCT; review |
Crawford-Faucher 201058 | Not RCT; systematic review - screened for relevant references |
Crotty 200060 | Not RCT; audit of trauma patients |
Crotty 2000A59 | RCT but not relevant as trauma patients only (hip fracture) |
Crotty 200262 | RCT but not relevant as trauma patients only (hip fracture) |
Crotty 200361 | RCT but not relevant as trauma patients only |
Cunliffe 200263 | Not RCT; qualitative study; abstract only |
Dalal 200366 | Not RCT; non-randomised prospective study |
Daskapan 200567 | No extractable outcomes |
Deutsch 200668 | Not RCT; retrospective study |
Dias 2013 69 | RCT but not relevant (does not compare to inpatient rehabilitation) |
Dolansky 201070 | Not RCT |
Dombi 200971 | Not RCT; commentary on costs |
Donaldson 198272 | Not RCT; retrospective study |
Donath 200173 | Not RCT; Commentary |
Donlevy 1996A74 | Not relevant; article is on cross-training to provide care at home on discharge |
Donnelly 200275 | Not RCT; not relevant; questionnaire survey |
Dorney-Smith 201177 | Not RCT; case study of the cost of nurse-led hostels for the homeless |
Dow 200478 | Not RCT; case study |
Dow 200779 | Not RCT; qualitative study |
Duffy 201080 | RCT but wrong comparison (control group not in hospital) |
Early supported discharge trialists 200582 | Systematic review: all eligible papers ordered |
Eldar 2000A83 | Not RCT; review |
Elder 200184 | Not RCT; literature review |
Emme 201485 | RCT; but no relevant outcomes |
Emme 2014A86 | RCT; but no relevant outcomes |
Eron 200487 | Not RCT; no data |
Feltner 201489 | Not RCT; systematic review- screened for relevant references |
Gaspoz 199494 | Not RCT; prospective cohort study |
Glasby 200897 | Not RCT; qualitative study |
Glick 199898 | Not relevant – observing outcome of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage |
Gobbi 200499 | Not RCT; and not relevant |
Gracey 1992100 | Not RCT; case studies |
Graham 2013101 | Not RCT; description of organisation of rehabilitation services |
Grande 2004102 | RCT on bereavement. Not relevant. |
Gregory 2009104 | Not RCT; retrospective study |
Gregory 2010103 | Not RCT; Cross-sectional study |
Griffiths 2000107 | Not RCT; exploratory analyses |
Griffiths 2000A108 | RCT but not relevant comparison (in-patients only) |
Griffiths 2001106 | RCT but not relevant comparison; both arms in-patient care (nurse led versus consultant managed) |
Griffiths 2005111 | Not RCT; systematic review-screened for relevant references |
Griffiths 2004109 |
Systematic review is not relevant to review question or unclear PICO. hospital-based care |
Griffiths 2006110 | Not RCT; review |
Griffiths 2006A105 | Not RCT; review |
Gunnell 2000112 | Not relevant; majority of patients with trauma and elective surgery |
Hannan 2003114 | Not RCT |
Hansen 1992115 | Cochrane excluded list: Hospital at home early discharge (study did not evaluate hospital at home, but a model for follow-up visits at home after discharge from hospital) |
Hardy 2001116 | Not RCT; description of a service; and mainly trauma patients |
Hauser 1991117 | Not RCT; retrospective study |
Heseltine 2001118 | Not RCT; review on cost |
Higgins 2001119 | Inappropriate comparison. No hospital-based comparison |
Hill 1978120 | RCT but not relevant to today’s approach of managing MI as thrombolytic therapy made admission necessary (Cochrane) |
Hoenig 2010121 | Conference abstract |
Hughes 1990123 | RCT but has wrong comparison (not in hospital) |
Ince 2014124 | Incorrect interventions. Hospital at home |
Indredavik 1999125 | Not RCT and compares stroke unit rehabilitation with general medical ward treatment |
Indredavik 2008127 | RCT but no relevant outcomes |
Jakobsen 2013128 | Methodology of RCT only |
Jolly 2005129 | RCT but study aborted prematurely due to language barriers with participants. No data |
Jones 1999132 | Costs only |
Jones 2014133 | Not RCT; case study with little data |
Karapolat 2008135 | No outcomes of interest |
Kehusmaa 2010136 | The outpatient group did not include community rehabilitation. |
Kenny 2002137 | Not RCT and not relevant |
Knapp 1994138 | Not review population. psychiatric. comparison to a psychiatric hospital-based care |
Konrad 2012139 | Not RCT; retrospective study |
Koopman 1996140 | RCT but excluded as home care was self-administered |
Kornowski 1995141 | Not RCT; observational study |
Kortke 2006142 | Not RCT; open clinical study (non-randomised) |
Korzeniowska-Kubacka 2014143 | Not RCT; prospective observational study |
Langhorne 2000144 | Cochrane systematic review withdrawn from publication and superseded by Shepperd 2008223 |
Langhorne 2005145 | Not RCT; review |
Lappegard 2012146 | Not RCT; retrospective study |
Last 2000148 | Not RCT, service description |
Lewis 2007149 | Not RCT; commentary |
Lewis 2011150 | Not RCT; research protocol only |
Lewis 2012152 | Not RCT; commentary/conceptual paper |
Lewis 2013151 | Not RCT; case studies without data |
Lim 2003153 | RCT but not relevant comparison |
Linertova 2011154 | Not RCT; Systematic review |
Marks 1994157 | Not review population. admission for serious mental illness |
Marchionni 2003156 | No extractable outcomes |
Martin 1994158 | RCT but wrong comparison (control group not in hospital) |
Mason 2003159 | Not RCT; description of a service |
Mather 1976160 | No description of the type of service patients at home received (excluded by Cochrane too) |
Matukaitis 2005161 | Not RCT. Pilot study and no comparison study |
Mayhew 2006162 | Not RCT; health economics only |
Mayo 1998163 | Conference abstract of study protocol only; duplicate of full paper Mayo 2000164 |
McNamee 1998165 | Health economic evaluation |
Melin 1992166 | Not relevant: patients with long-term care needs were recruited. Hospital at Home was substitute for long-term care and not necessarily in-hospital |
Meyer 2009167 | Not RCT; case studies |
Muijen 1992169 | RCT but patients treated for acute, severe mental illness (psychiatric ward versus home); not relevant to AME guideline |
Nicholson 2001172 | Health economics only |
Nissen 2007173 | Not in English (Danish) |
Nordly 2014174 | Protocol only; no study data |
Nyatanga 2014175 | Not RCT; commentary/conceptual paper |
Pace 2014178 | No comparator |
Palmer Hill 2000179 | Not relevant: patients recovering from knee replacement |
Pandian 2013180 | Trial register only; no data |
Pandian 2015181 | No extractable outcomes |
Patel 2004182 | Health economic evaluation |
Penque 1999183 | Not RCT; retrospective study |
Pittiglio 2011185 | Not RCT; not relevant |
Piotrowicz 2010184 | Incorrect comparison- home based- telemonitored cardiac rehab versus home based standard cardiac rehab |
Plochg 2005186 | Not RCT; process evaluation |
Pozzilli 2002187 | RCT BUT not relevant (Multiple Sclerosis patients) |
Pradella 2015188 | No hospital-based comparison |
Prior 2012 189 | Not RCT |
Puig-Junoy 2007190 | Health economic evaluation |
Richards 1998 195 | Not relevant; majority of patients with trauma and elective surgery |
Richards 1998A194 | Not relevant; correction to excluded trial with majority of patients with trauma and elective surgery |
Richardson 196 | Health economic evaluation |
Robinson 2009197 | Not RCT; description of new model of acute care |
Rodriguez-Cerrillo 2010201 | Not RCT; Non-randomised prospective study |
Rodriguez-Cerrillo 2012A200 | Not RCT; no comparison group to home treatment |
Rosbotham-Williams 2002203 | Not RCT; review |
Round 2004204 | Not RCT; prospective cohort study |
Rout 2011205 | Not RCT; review |
Rowley 1984206 | Not RCT. No comparison group |
Ruckley 1978207 | Not relevant: patients following elective surgery |
Rudkin 1997209 | No service provided in community |
Sartain 2002212 | Paediatric patient population |
Saysell 2004213 | Not RCT; pilot study of intermediate palliative care in care home |
Schachter 2014214 | Not RCT; study protocol only |
Scheinberg 1986215 | RCT but does not state what the control group intervention is |
Schneller 2012216 | Not RCT; case study |
Schou 2014217 | RCT; but no relevant outcomes |
Scott 2010218 | Not RCT; literature review |
Senaratne 1999219 | Cost evaluation |
Shepperd 2016226 | Cochrane review- already included in the hospital at home evidence review |
Shepperd 1998222 | Not RCT; systematic review |
Shepperd 1998A221 | Costs only; no clinical outcomes |
Shepperd 2005A220 | Not RCT; editorial |
Shepperd 2009A224 | Not RCT; systematic review |
Sindhwani 2011227 | Incorrect study design. cohort study |
Standen 2016230 | Inappropriate intervention –virtual reality system for home based rehabilitation of the arm following stroke |
Stephenson 1984231 | Not RCT; conceptual paper |
Steventon 2012232 | Not RCT; retrospective analysis |
Stewart 1999233 | RCT but control group not in hospital. |
Stromberg 2003234 | RCT but only nurse-led follow up appointments in hospital. No actual community care given |
Subirana Serrate 2001235 | Not RCT; health economics evaluation |
SUIJKER 2016236 | Study to be considered for inclusion in the community nurse review |
Suwanwela 2002237 | RCT but excluded because intervention was managed by Red Cross volunteers and family members. |
Taylor 2015239 | Systematic review: all eligible papers ordered |
Teasell 2003240 | Systematic review: all eligible papers ordered |
Teng 2003241 | Health economic evaluation |
Thorne 2001242 | Not RCT; service description |
Tibaldi 2004245 | RCT but no relevant outcomes (carer stress data incomplete) |
Trappes-Lomax 2006246 | RCT but comparison group not appropriate; did not receive ‘usual’ hospital care. |
Tuntland 2015247 | No hospital-based comparison |
Upton 2014248 | Not RCT; not relevant |
Utens 2010249 | Study protocol of RCT only |
Wakefield 2008253 | RCT but all self-care; wrong comparison |
Widen Holmqvist 1995254 | Not RCT; observational study |
Widen Holmqvist 1996255 | Health economic evaluation |
Winkel 2008256 | Not RCT; systematic review |
Wolfe 2000257 | RCT but excluded from Cochrane because intervention does not substitute for inpatient care; not valid comparison |
Woodend 2008258 | RCT but wrong control group; both at home with no actual care provided. |
Woodhams 2012259 | Not RCT; literature review |
Young 2003B262 | Not RCT; audit |
Young 2005B263 | Not RCT; quasi-experimental study |
Young 2010B261 | RCT but not relevant outcomes |
Ytterberg 2010264 | No outcomes of interest |
Vester-andersen 2015250 | All components were hospital-based |
Wu 2008260 | No hospital-based comparison |
Zhong 2015265 | Incorrect study design. retrospective cohort |
Zwisler 2016266 | Systematic review- checked and ordered relevant references. |
Appendix H. Excluded economic studies
Table 16Studies excluded from the economic review
Reference | Reason for exclusion |
---|---|
Larsen 2006147 | This study was assessed as not applicable because the resource use was from non-UK studies pre 2005. The study is primarily a cost minimisation analysis under the assumption that the intervention is more effective. However, the only clinical outcome that is assessed is ‘poor outcomes’. This clinical outcome is not all encompassing and therefore cannot definitively conclude whether total health outcomes are better for the intervention. Likewise the cost analysis only looks at intervention cost, bed day costs and nursing home costs. This doesn’t fully capture total costs and likewise costing nursing home costs can be difficult as not all nursing home costs fall on the NHS. For these reasons the study was selectively excluded. |
Saka 2009210 | This study was assessed as partially applicable with very serious limitations. The reporting in the study is quite unclear and it is not clear how early supported discharge (ESD) is costed and what drives the increased costs with ESD. |
Miller 2005168 | This study was assessed as partially applicable with very serious limitations. The study is described as a cost-utility analysis but no QALY data reported. |
Aimonino Ricauda 2005193 | This study was assessed as not applicable as it relies on unit costs from 1995. |
- Community rehabilitation - Emergency and acute medical care in over 16s: service...Community rehabilitation - Emergency and acute medical care in over 16s: service delivery and organisation
Your browsing activity is empty.
Activity recording is turned off.
See more...