Day hospital rehabilitation--effectiveness and cost in the elderly: a randomised controlled trial. Outcomes of elderly stroke patients. Day hospital versus conventional medical management. Are day hospitals effective for acutely ill psychiatric patients? A European multicenter randomized controlled trial. Effectiveness of a geriatric day hospital. A randomized trial of geriatric liaison intervention in elderly medical inpatients. A negative trial of inpatient geriatric consultation. Lessons learned and recommendations for future research. Comprehensive discharge planning for the hospitalized elderly. A randomized clinical trial. Chronic care clinics: a randomized controlled trial of a new model of primary care for frail older adults. Stroke rehabilitation after hospital discharge: a randomized trial comparing domiciliary and day-hospital care.
The effectiveness and cost of day hospital care in rehabilitation were studied in a randomised controlled trial in 120 elderly patients who were assessed at referral and six weeks and five months later in activities of daily living skills and mood. Day hospital patients were compared with a control group, who were managed as they would have been before the availability of day hospital care. Day hospital patients showed a significant improvement in performance of activities of daily living at six weeks but not at five months; however, they had a sustained improvement in mood. The cost of day hospital rehabilitation was one third greater than that of rehabilitation by alternative means. In its current form the geriatric day hospital is not a cheap alternative to other means of rehabilitation. Expensive components of the day hospital should be critically re-examined and renewed emphasis placed on sufficient inpatient beds, domiciliary services, and day care centres. Much controversy exists over the value of geriatric day hospitals in the rehabilitation of elderly patients, and cerebrovascular accident is a particularly common diagnosis among patients referred to these day hospitals. We carried out a prospective, randomized study to compare the outcomes of elderly stroke patients managed by a geriatric team using a day hospital facility versus conventional medical management.
                One hundred twenty elderly patients with acute stroke were randomized to inpatient care on a stroke ward under the care of either a neurologist or a geriatric team. Those under the care of neurologists were hospitalized until the attending physician felt that the patients had reached full rehabilitation potential. Patients under the care of the geriatric team were discharged home as soon as the team felt they were able to cope and given follow-up rehabilitation at the day hospital. Family or community support was arranged when necessary for both treatment groups. On recruitment, patient demographics, medical history, clinical features related to stroke, and functional ability as measured by the Barthel Index were noted. Subjects were reviewed at 3 and 6 months to assess functional level, hospital and outpatient services received, general well-being, mood, and level of satisfaction. Costs of treatment of the two groups were also compared.
                Functional improvement (Barthel Index score) was greater in the group managed by the geriatricians with a day hospital facility compared with the conventional group at 3 months (P = .03). There were also fewer outpatient visits among the day hospital patients at 6 months (P = .03). No significant difference was found in costs between the two treatment groups.
                Compared with conventional medical management, care in the geriatric day hospital hastened functional recovery and reduced outpatient visits in elderly stroke patients without additional cost. Acute psychiatric day care has been proposed as an alternative to conventional inpatient care, yet the evidence of its effectiveness is inconsistent and based only on single-site studies in 3 countries. The aim of this multicenter randomized controlled trial was to establish the effectiveness of acute day hospital care in a large sample across a range of mental health care systems.
                The trial was conducted from December 2000 to September 2003 in 5 European countries, with a sample of 1117 voluntarily admitted patients. Immediately before or very shortly after admission to the participating psychiatric facilities, patients were randomly allocated to treatment in a day hospital or an inpatient ward. Psychopathology, treatment satisfaction, subjective quality of life, and social disabilities were assessed at admission, at discharge, and 3 and 12 months after discharge. An intention-to-treat analysis was conducted using fixed-effects linear models with structured error covariance matrices and covariates.
                Day hospital care was as effective as conventional inpatient care with respect to psychopathologic symptoms, treatment satisfaction, and quality of life. It was more effective on social functioning at discharge and at the 3- and 12-month follow-up assessments.
                This study, which has more than doubled the existing evidence base, has shown that day hospital care is as effective on clinical outcomes as conventional inpatient care and more effective on social outcomes.
                ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00153959. To determine whether there is a difference in the quality of life between elderly patients managed in a day hospital and those receiving conventional care.
                Randomized controlled trial; assessment upon entry to study and at 3, 6 and 12 months afterward.
                Geriatrician referral-based secondary care.
                A total of 113 consecutively referred elderly patients with deteriorating functional status believed to have rehabilitation potential; 55 were assessed and treated by an interdisciplinary team in a day hospital (treatment group), and 58 were assessed in an inpatient unit or an outpatient clinic or were discharged early with appropriate community services (control group).
                Barthel Index, Rand Questionnaire, Global Health Question and Geriatric Quality of Life Questionnaire (GQLQ).
                Eight study subjects and four control subjects died; the difference was insignificant. Functional status deteriorated over time in the two groups; although the difference was not significant there was less deterioration in the control group. The GQLQ scores indicated no significant difference between the two groups in the ability to perform daily living activities and in the alleviation of symptoms over time but did show a trend favouring the control group. The GQLQ scores did indicate a significant difference in favour of the control group in the effect of treatment on emotions (p = 0.009).
                The care received at the day hospital did not improve functional status or quality of life of elderly patients as compared with the otherwise excellent geriatric outpatient care. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of psychogeriatric intervention in a group of elderly medical inpatients over 75 years of age. In addition to usual care, intervention consisted of multidisciplinary joint treatment by a psychogeriatric team. The main purpose of intervention was to obtain the optimal level of physical functioning.
                In a prospective randomized trial the effect of the intervention (N = 140) compared with usual care (N = 97) was estimated for physical functioning, length of stay, and nursing home placement within 12 months of discharge.
                Substantially more patients assigned to the intervention group improved in their physical functioning, and fewer became worse. The mean length of stay was 5 days shorter for the intervention group. There were more readmissions to hospital in the usual care group (29.9%) compared with the intervention group (17.4%). Of the patients assigned to the intervention treatment, 18% were admitted to a nursing home. In the usual care group this was 27%. The effects of intervention remained statistically significant for all the outcome variables after controlling for possible confounding baseline characteristics.
                The intervention we studied had clinically relevant effects on important outcome variables. Psychiatric co-morbidity was an important risk factor for the outcome of the patients in our study. By combining elements from a psychiatric and geriatric consultation service with elements from a unit-driven service, we were able to improve health care for the elderly in our hospital in a feasible and cost-effective way. To determine the effectiveness of inpatient interdisciplinary geriatric consultation provided during hospitalization to frail, elderly subjects. SUBJECTS AND SITE: Admission cohort of 197 men admitted from 1985 through 1989, aged 65 years or more, meeting proxy criteria for frailty, living within follow-up area, without terminal illness, and without prolonged nursing home residence.
                Randomized controlled trial of inpatient geriatric consultation at a tertiary care Veterans Affairs hospital. Differences were determined between groups in the Physical Self-Maintenance Scale, Instrumental Activities of Daily Living, Mini-Mental State Examination, Morale Scale, and nursing home and health care utilization.
                No differences were seen between groups in any measure after the intervention or during 1 year of follow-up. Intervention implementation may have been incomplete due to compliance and resource availability.
                This trial is not definitive in determining whether geriatric consultation is effective or ineffective. Lessons learned from this research indicate that future studies should target frail subjects, include intervention-specific measures, and be conducted with direct control of comprehensive resources. To study the effects of a comprehensive discharge planning protocol, designed specifically for the elderly and implemented by nurse specialists, on patient and caregiver outcomes and cost of care.
                Randomized clinical trial.
                Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania.
                276 patients and 125 caregivers. Patients were 70 years and older and were placed in selected medical and surgical cardiac diagnostic-related groups.
                Group differences in patient outcomes (length of initial hospital stay, length of time between initial hospital discharge and readmission, and rehospitalization rates) and charges for care (charges for initial hospitalization, rehospitalizations, health services after discharge, and nurse specialist services) were measured 2, 6, and 12 weeks after discharge.
                From the initial hospital discharge to 6 weeks after discharge, patients in the medical intervention group had fewer readmissions, fewer total days rehospitalized, lower readmission charges, and lower charges for health care services after discharge. No differences in these outcomes were found between the surgical intervention and control groups during this period.
                Study findings support the need for comprehensive discharge planning designed for the elderly and implemented by nurse specialists to improve their outcomes after hospital discharge and to achieve cost savings. The findings also suggest that this intervention had its greatest effect in delaying or preventing rehospitalization of patients in the medical intervention group during the first 6 weeks after discharge. To determine whether a new model of primary care, Chronic Care Clinics, can improve outcomes of common geriatric syndromes (urinary incontinence, falls, depressive symptoms, high risk medications, functional impairment) in frail older adults.
                Randomized controlled trial with 24 months of follow-up. Physician practices were randomized either to the Chronic Care Clinics intervention or to usual care.
                Nine primary care physician practices that comprise an ambulatory clinic in a large staff-model HMO in western Washington State.
                Those patients aged 65 and older in each practice with the highest risk for being hospitalized or experiencing functional decline.
                Intervention practices (5 physicians, 96 patients) held half-day Chronic Care Clinics every 3 to 4 months. These clinics included an extended visit with the physician and nurse dedicated to planning chronic disease management; a pharmacist visit that emphasized reduction of polypharmacy and high-risk medications; and a patient self-management/support group. Control practices (4 physicians, 73 patients) received usual care.
                Changes in self-reported urinary incontinence, frequency of falls, depressive symptoms, physical function, and satisfaction were analyzed using an intention-to-treat analysis adjusted for baseline differences, covariates, and practice-level variation. Prescriptions for high-risk medications and cost/utilization data obtained from administrative data were similarly analyzed.
                After 24 months, no significant improvements in frequency of incontinence, proportion with falls, depression scores, physical function scores, or prescriptions for high risk medications were demonstrated. Costs of medical care including frequency of hospitalization, hospital days, emergency and ambulatory visits, and total costs of care were not significantly different between intervention and control groups. A higher proportion of intervention patients rated the overall quality of their medical care as excellent compared with control patients (40.0% vs 25.3%, P = .10).
                Although intervention patients expressed high levels of satisfaction with Chronic Care Clinics, improved outcomes for selected geriatric syndromes were not demonstrated. These findings suggest the need for developing greater system-wide support for managing geriatric syndromes in primary care and illustrate the challenges of conducting practice improvement research in a rapidly changing delivery system. To compare the effectiveness and costs of a new domiciliary rehabilitation service for elderly stroke patients with geriatric day-hospital care.
                Randomized controlled trial.
                Stroke patients aged 55+ who required further rehabilitation after hospital discharge or after referral to geriatricians from the community.
                Poole area, East Dorset, a mixed urban/rural area on the south coast of England.
                Primary-changes between hospital discharge and 6-month follow-up in physical function as measured by Barthel index. Secondary-changes over this period in Rivermead Mobility Index and mental state (Philadelphia Geriatric Centre Morale Scale) and differences in social activity (Frenchay Activities Index) and generic health status (SF-36). Health service and social service cost per patient were compared for the two groups.
                180 patients were eligible and 140 (78%) were randomized. The groups were well balanced for age, sex, social class and initial Barthel index. We achieved follow-up in 88% of subjects who were alive at 6 months. We detected no significant differences in patient outcomes, although there was a non-significant improvement in measures of physical function and social activity in the domiciliary group. Domiciliary patients had more physiotherapy time per session and more district nurse time, and made greater use of social service day centres and home helps. Total cost per patient did not differ significantly between the two groups, with reduced health service costs in the domiciliary arm offset by higher social service costs.
                No significant differences were detected in the effectiveness of the two services. Neither service influenced patients' mental state, and their social activity remained low. Total costs were similar. A mixed model of day-hospital and domiciliary care may be most cost-effective for community stroke rehabilitation, but this requires further evaluation.
Medical day hospital care for the elderly appears to be more effective than no intervention but may have no clear advantage over other forms of comprehensive elderly medical services.