Display options
Share it on

Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2013 Sep 01;13(4):1-72. eCollection 2013.

Discharge planning in chronic conditions: an evidence-based analysis.

Ontario health technology assessment series

K McMartin

PMID: 24167538 PMCID: PMC3804053

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Chronically ill people experience frequent changes in health status accompanied by multiple transitions between care settings and care providers. Discharge planning provides support services, follow-up activities, and other interventions that span pre-hospital discharge to post-hospital settings.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if discharge planning is effective at reducing health resource utilization and improving patient outcomes compared with standard care alone.

DATA SOURCES: A standard systematic literature search was conducted for studies published from January 1, 2004, until December 13, 2011.

REVIEW METHODS: Reports, randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses with 1 month or more of follow-up and limited to specified chronic conditions were examined. Outcomes included mortality/survival, readmissions and emergency department (ED) visits, hospital length of stay (LOS), health-related quality of life (HRQOL), and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS: One meta-analysis compared individualized discharge planning to usual care and found a significant reduction in readmissions favouring individualized discharge planning. A second meta-analysis compared comprehensive discharge planning with postdischarge support to usual care. There was a significant reduction in readmissions favouring discharge planning with postdischarge support. However, there was significant statistical heterogeneity. For both meta-analyses there was a nonsignificant reduction in mortality between the study arms.

LIMITATIONS: There was difficulty in distinguishing the relative contribution of each element within the terms "discharge planning" and "postdischarge support." For most studies, "usual care" was not explicitly described.

CONCLUSIONS: Compared with usual care, there was moderate quality evidence that individualized discharge planning is more effective at reducing readmissions or hospital LOS but not mortality, and very low quality evidence that it is more effective at improving HRQOL or patient satisfaction. Compared with usual care, there was low quality evidence that the discharge planning plus postdischarge support is more effective at reducing readmissions but not more effective at reducing hospital LOS or mortality. There was very low quality evidence that it is more effective at improving HRQOL or patient satisfaction.

References

  1. Ann Intern Med. 2009 Feb 3;150(3):178-87 - PubMed
  2. Eur J Heart Fail. 2001 Mar;3(2):209-15 - PubMed
  3. Home Health Care Serv Q. 2007;26(4):3-19 - PubMed
  4. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Apr;64(4):380-2 - PubMed
  5. J Card Fail. 2002 Jun;8(3):142-8 - PubMed
  6. JAMA. 1999 Feb 17;281(7):613-20 - PubMed
  7. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002 Oct 2;40(7):1259-66 - PubMed
  8. Ann Intern Med. 2011 Oct 18;155(8):520-8 - PubMed
  9. Home Health Care Serv Q. 2009;28(2-3):84-99 - PubMed
  10. Heart. 1998 Nov;80(5):442-6 - PubMed
  11. Age Ageing. 2001 Jan;30(1):33-40 - PubMed
  12. Ann Emerg Med. 2012 Aug;60(2):152-9 - PubMed
  13. J Hosp Med. 2009 Apr;4(4):211-8 - PubMed
  14. Arch Intern Med. 2002 Mar 25;162(6):705-12 - PubMed
  15. Int J Qual Health Care. 2005 Feb;17(1):43-51 - PubMed
  16. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1994 Fall;10(4):714-5 - PubMed
  17. Eur J Heart Fail. 2004 Aug;6(5):643-52 - PubMed
  18. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002 Jan 2;39(1):83-9 - PubMed
  19. BMC Health Serv Res. 2007 Apr 04;7:47 - PubMed
  20. J Gen Intern Med. 2008 Aug;23(8):1228-33 - PubMed
  21. Gerontologist. 1987 Oct;27(5):577-80 - PubMed
  22. Eur J Intern Med. 2009 Mar;20(2):221-5 - PubMed
  23. JAMA. 2004 Mar 17;291(11):1358-67 - PubMed
  24. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 1994 Jan-Feb;18(1):15-23 - PubMed
  25. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2004 Aug;52(8):1240-6 - PubMed
  26. Am J Med. 2005 Oct;118(10):1148-53 - PubMed
  27. Am J Med. 2001 Dec 21;111(9B):26S-30S - PubMed
  28. Eff Clin Pract. 1999 Sep-Oct;2(5):201-9 - PubMed
  29. Aust Health Rev. 2010 Nov;34(4):445-51 - PubMed
  30. Lancet. 1999 Sep 25;354(9184):1077-83 - PubMed
  31. Eur Heart J. 1999 May;20(9):673-82 - PubMed
  32. Aust Health Rev. 2007 Feb;31(1):34-48 - PubMed
  33. N Engl J Med. 1995 Nov 2;333(18):1190-5 - PubMed
  34. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2002 Apr;81(4):247-52 - PubMed
  35. Clin Invest Med. 1994 Apr;17(2):88-96 - PubMed
  36. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2004 May;52(5):675-84 - PubMed
  37. BMJ. 2001 Sep 29;323(7315):715-8 - PubMed
  38. J Gen Intern Med. 1993 Nov;8(11):585-90 - PubMed
  39. J Adv Nurs. 2008 Jun;62(5):585-95 - PubMed
  40. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011 Apr;30(4):746-54 - PubMed
  41. Med Care. 2002 Apr;40(4):271-82 - PubMed
  42. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jan 20;(1):CD000313 - PubMed
  43. Arch Intern Med. 1998 May 25;158(10):1067-72 - PubMed
  44. Ugeskr Laeger. 1989 Jun 12;151(24):1531-4 - PubMed
  45. Arch Intern Med. 2006 Sep 25;166(17):1822-8 - PubMed
  46. J Clin Nurs. 2008 Jan;17(1):109-17 - PubMed
  47. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1999 Jul 1;56(13):1339-42 - PubMed
  48. J Clin Nurs. 2009 Sep;18(17):2444-55 - PubMed
  49. Ann Intern Med. 1994 Jun 15;120(12):999-1006 - PubMed
  50. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1994 Oct;42(10):1045-9 - PubMed
  51. N Engl J Med. 1996 May 30;334(22):1441-7 - PubMed
  52. Med Care. 1993 Apr;31(4):358-70 - PubMed
  53. Arch Intern Med. 2003 Apr 14;163(7):809-17 - PubMed
  54. CMAJ. 1992 Feb 15;146(4):511-5 - PubMed
  55. Pharm World Sci. 2004 Apr;26(2):114-20 - PubMed
  56. Stroke. 2000 Aug;31(8):1929-34 - PubMed

MeSH terms

Publication Types