Objective: To evaluate the benefits of coordinating community services through the Post-Acute Care (PAC) program in older patients after discharge from hospital.
Design: Prospective multicentre, randomised controlled trial with six months of follow-up with blinded outcome measurement.
Setting: Four university-affiliated metropolitan general hospitals in Victoria.
Participants: All patients aged 65 years and over who were discharged between August 1998 and October 1999 and required community services after discharge.
Interventions: Participants were randomly allocated to receive services of a Post-Acute Care (PAC) coordinator (intervention) versus usual discharge planning (control).
Main outcome measures: Comparison of quality of life and carer stress at one-month post-discharge, mortality, hospital readmissions, use of community services and community and hospital costs over the six months post-discharge.
Results: 654 patients were randomised, and 598 were included in the analysis (311 in the PAC group and 287 in the control group). There was no difference in mortality between the groups (both 6%), but significantly greater overall quality-of-life scores at one-month follow-up in the PAC group. There was no difference in unplanned readmissions, but PAC patients used significantly fewer hospital bed-days in the six months after discharge (mean, 3.0 days; 95% CI, 2.1–3.9) than control patients (5.2 days; 95% CI, 3.8–6.7). Total costs (including hospitalisation, community services and the intervention) were lower in the PAC than the control group (mean difference, $1545; 95% CI, $11–$3078).
Conclusions: The PAC program is beneficial in the transition from hospital to the community in older patients.
- 1. Rich MW, Beckham V, Wittenberg C, et al. A multidisciplinary intervention to prevent the readmission of elderly patients with congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med 1995; 333: 1190-1195.
- 2. Stewart S, Pearson S, Luke C, et al. Effects of home based intervention on unplanned readmissions and out-of-hospital deaths. J Am Geriatr Soc 1998; 46: 174-180.
- 3. Naylor MD, Brooten D, Campbell R, et al. Comprehensive discharge planning and home follow-up of hospitalized elders: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 1999; 281: 613-620.
- 4. Naylor M, Brooten D, Jones R, et al. Comprehensive discharge planning for the hospitalized elderly: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Intern Med 1994; 120: 999-1006.
- 5. Weinberger M, Oddone EZ, Henderson WG. Does increased access to primary care reduce hospital readmissions? N Engl J Med 1996; 334: 1441-1447.
- 6. Evans RL, Hendricks RD. Evaluating hospital discharge planning: a randomized clinical trial. Med Care 1993; 31: 358-370.
- 7. Siu AL, Kravitz RL, Keeler E, et al. Postdischarge geriatric assessment of hospitalized frail elderly patients. Arch Intern Med 1996; 156: 76-81.
- 8. Townsend J, Piper M, Frank AO, et al. Reduction in hospital readmission stay of elderly patients by a community based hospital discharge scheme: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ 1988; 297: 544-547.
- 9. Hansen FR, Spedtsberg K, Schroll M. Geriatric follow-up by home visits after discharge from hospital: a randomized controlled trial. Age Ageing 1992; 21: 445-450.
- 10. Smith DM, Weinberger M, Katz BP, et al. Postdischarge care and readmissions. Med Care 1988; 26: 699-708.
- 11. Fitzgerald JF, Smith DM, Martin DK, et al. A case manager intervention to reduce readmissions. Arch Intern Med 1994; 154: 1721-1729.
- 12. Bours GJ, Ketelaars CA, Corry AJ, et al. The effects of aftercare on chronic patients and frail elderly patients when discharged from hospital: a systematic review. J Adv Nursing 1998; 27: 1076-1086.
- 13. Hawthorne G, Richardson J, Osborne R. The Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) instrument, a psychometric measure of health-related quality of life. Qual Life Res 1999; 8: 209-224.
- 14. Robinson BC. Validation of a caregiver strain index. J Gerontol 1983; 38: 344-348.
- 15. SPSS software, version 9.0 for Windows. Chicago, Ill: SPSS Inc, 1999.
Publication of your online response is subject to the Medical Journal of Australia's editorial discretion. You will be notified by email within five working days should your response be accepted.