Interventions for frequently hospitalized patients and their effect on outcomes: A systematic review

Alexandra Goodwin*, Bruce Lowell Henschen, Linda O'Dwyer, Natasha Lloyd Nichols, Kevin John O'Leary

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A small subset of patients account for a substantial proportion of hospital readmissions. Programs to reduce utilization among this subset of frequently hospitalized patients have the potential to improve health and reduce unnecessary spending. PURPOSE: To conduct a systematic review of interventions targeting frequently hospitalized patients. DATA SOURCES: PubMed MEDLINE; Embase (embase. com); and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, January 1, 1980 to January 1, 2018. STUDY SELECTION: Four physicians screened 4762 titles and abstracts for inclusion. Authors reviewed 116 full-text studies and included 9 meeting criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Study characteristics, outcomes, and details regarding interventions were extracted. Risk of bias was assessed by the Downs and Black Scale. DATA SYNTHESIS: Out of the nine included studies, three were randomized controlled trials, three were controlled retrospective cohort studies, and three were uncontrolled pre-post studies. Inclusion criteria, interventions used, and outcomes assessed varied across studies. While all nine studies demonstrated reduced utilization, studies with lower risk of bias generally found similar reductions in utilization between intervention and control groups. Interventions commonly consisted of interdisciplinary teams interacting with patients across health care settings. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions targeting high need, high-cost patients are heterogeneous, with many studies observing a regression to the mean. More rigorous studies, using multifaceted interventions which can adapt to patients’ unique needs should be conducted to assess the effect on outcomes relevant to both providers and patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)853-859
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of hospital medicine
Volume13
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Patient Readmission
PubMed
MEDLINE
Cohort Studies
Randomized Controlled Trials
Retrospective Studies
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Delivery of Health Care
Physicians
Costs and Cost Analysis
Control Groups
Health

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Leadership and Management
  • Fundamentals and skills
  • Health Policy
  • Care Planning
  • Assessment and Diagnosis

Cite this

@article{5c4a1f1dc4284bde88157cd0758c0361,
title = "Interventions for frequently hospitalized patients and their effect on outcomes: A systematic review",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: A small subset of patients account for a substantial proportion of hospital readmissions. Programs to reduce utilization among this subset of frequently hospitalized patients have the potential to improve health and reduce unnecessary spending. PURPOSE: To conduct a systematic review of interventions targeting frequently hospitalized patients. DATA SOURCES: PubMed MEDLINE; Embase (embase. com); and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, January 1, 1980 to January 1, 2018. STUDY SELECTION: Four physicians screened 4762 titles and abstracts for inclusion. Authors reviewed 116 full-text studies and included 9 meeting criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Study characteristics, outcomes, and details regarding interventions were extracted. Risk of bias was assessed by the Downs and Black Scale. DATA SYNTHESIS: Out of the nine included studies, three were randomized controlled trials, three were controlled retrospective cohort studies, and three were uncontrolled pre-post studies. Inclusion criteria, interventions used, and outcomes assessed varied across studies. While all nine studies demonstrated reduced utilization, studies with lower risk of bias generally found similar reductions in utilization between intervention and control groups. Interventions commonly consisted of interdisciplinary teams interacting with patients across health care settings. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions targeting high need, high-cost patients are heterogeneous, with many studies observing a regression to the mean. More rigorous studies, using multifaceted interventions which can adapt to patients’ unique needs should be conducted to assess the effect on outcomes relevant to both providers and patients.",
author = "Alexandra Goodwin and Henschen, {Bruce Lowell} and Linda O'Dwyer and Nichols, {Natasha Lloyd} and O'Leary, {Kevin John}",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.12788/jhm.3090",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "853--859",
journal = "Journal of hospital medicine (Online)",
issn = "1553-5606",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Interventions for frequently hospitalized patients and their effect on outcomes

T2 - A systematic review

AU - Goodwin, Alexandra

AU - Henschen, Bruce Lowell

AU - O'Dwyer, Linda

AU - Nichols, Natasha Lloyd

AU - O'Leary, Kevin John

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - BACKGROUND: A small subset of patients account for a substantial proportion of hospital readmissions. Programs to reduce utilization among this subset of frequently hospitalized patients have the potential to improve health and reduce unnecessary spending. PURPOSE: To conduct a systematic review of interventions targeting frequently hospitalized patients. DATA SOURCES: PubMed MEDLINE; Embase (embase. com); and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, January 1, 1980 to January 1, 2018. STUDY SELECTION: Four physicians screened 4762 titles and abstracts for inclusion. Authors reviewed 116 full-text studies and included 9 meeting criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Study characteristics, outcomes, and details regarding interventions were extracted. Risk of bias was assessed by the Downs and Black Scale. DATA SYNTHESIS: Out of the nine included studies, three were randomized controlled trials, three were controlled retrospective cohort studies, and three were uncontrolled pre-post studies. Inclusion criteria, interventions used, and outcomes assessed varied across studies. While all nine studies demonstrated reduced utilization, studies with lower risk of bias generally found similar reductions in utilization between intervention and control groups. Interventions commonly consisted of interdisciplinary teams interacting with patients across health care settings. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions targeting high need, high-cost patients are heterogeneous, with many studies observing a regression to the mean. More rigorous studies, using multifaceted interventions which can adapt to patients’ unique needs should be conducted to assess the effect on outcomes relevant to both providers and patients.

AB - BACKGROUND: A small subset of patients account for a substantial proportion of hospital readmissions. Programs to reduce utilization among this subset of frequently hospitalized patients have the potential to improve health and reduce unnecessary spending. PURPOSE: To conduct a systematic review of interventions targeting frequently hospitalized patients. DATA SOURCES: PubMed MEDLINE; Embase (embase. com); and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, January 1, 1980 to January 1, 2018. STUDY SELECTION: Four physicians screened 4762 titles and abstracts for inclusion. Authors reviewed 116 full-text studies and included 9 meeting criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Study characteristics, outcomes, and details regarding interventions were extracted. Risk of bias was assessed by the Downs and Black Scale. DATA SYNTHESIS: Out of the nine included studies, three were randomized controlled trials, three were controlled retrospective cohort studies, and three were uncontrolled pre-post studies. Inclusion criteria, interventions used, and outcomes assessed varied across studies. While all nine studies demonstrated reduced utilization, studies with lower risk of bias generally found similar reductions in utilization between intervention and control groups. Interventions commonly consisted of interdisciplinary teams interacting with patients across health care settings. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions targeting high need, high-cost patients are heterogeneous, with many studies observing a regression to the mean. More rigorous studies, using multifaceted interventions which can adapt to patients’ unique needs should be conducted to assess the effect on outcomes relevant to both providers and patients.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85057543237&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85057543237&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.12788/jhm.3090

DO - 10.12788/jhm.3090

M3 - Review article

C2 - 30379144

AN - SCOPUS:85057543237

VL - 13

SP - 853

EP - 859

JO - Journal of hospital medicine (Online)

JF - Journal of hospital medicine (Online)

SN - 1553-5606

IS - 12

ER -