Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34185069›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2021

Association of Costs and Days at Home With Transfer Hospital in Home.

Shubing Cai, Orna Intrator, Caitlin Chan, Laurence Buxbaum, Mary Ann Haggerty, Ciaran S Phibbs, Edna Schwab, Bruce Kinosian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. The association between social risks and days at home for older veterans.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Shubing CaiGeriatrics and Extended Care Data Analysis Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Orna IntratorGeriatrics and Extended Care Data Analysis Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Caitlin ChanGeriatrics and Extended Care Data Analysis Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Laurence BuxbaumCpl Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Mary Ann HaggertyPenn Medicine at Home, University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia.
Ciaran S PhibbsGeriatrics and Extended Care Data Analysis Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Edna SchwabCpl Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Bruce KinosianGeriatrics and Extended Care Data Analysis Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: New Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services waivers created a payment mechanism for hospital at home services. Although it is well established that direct admission to hospital at home from the community as a substitute for hospital care provides superior outcomes and lower cost, the effectiveness of transfer hospital at home-that is, completing hospitalization at home-is unclear. Objective: To evaluate the outcomes of the transfer component of a Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital in Home program (T-HIH), taking advantage of natural geographical limitations in a program's service area. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this quality improvement study, T-HIH was offered to veterans residing in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and their outcomes were compared with those of propensity-matched veterans residing in adjacent Camden, New Jersey, who were admitted to the VA hospital from 2012 to 2018. Data analysis was performed from October 2019 to May 2020. Intervention: Enrollment in the T-HIH program. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were hospital length of stay, 30-day and 90-day readmissions, VA direct costs, combined VA and Medicare costs, mortality, 90-day nursing home use, and days at home after hospital discharge. An intent-to-treat analysis of cost and utilization was performed. Results: A total of 405 veterans (mean [SD] age, 66.7 [0.83] years; 399 men [98.5%]) with medically complex conditions, primarily congestive heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations (mean [SD] hierarchical condition categories score, 3.54 [0.16]), were enrolled. Ten participants could not be matched, so analyses were performed for 395 veterans (all of whom were men), 98 in the T-HIH group and 297 in the control group. For patients in the T-HIH group compared with the control group, length of stay was 20% lower (6.1 vs 7.7 days; difference, 1.6 days; 95% CI, -3.77 to 0.61 days), VA costs were 20% lower (-$5910; 95% CI, -$13 049 to $1229), combined VA and Medicare costs were 22% lower (-$7002; 95% CI, -$14 314 to $309), readmission rates were similar (23.7% vs 23.0%), the numbers of nursing home days were significantly fewer (0.92 vs 7.45 days; difference, -6.5 days; 95% CI, -12.1 to -0.96 days; P = .02), and the number of days at home was 18% higher (81.4 vs 68.8 days; difference, 12.6 days; 95% CI, 3.12 to 22.08 days; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, T-HIH was significantly associated with increased days at home and less nursing home use but was not associated with increased health care system costs.

Indexed as

Time FactorsAgedFemaleHealth Care CostsHome Care ServicesHospitalizationHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient TransferPhiladelphiaQuality ImprovementVeterans

Identifiers

PMID34185069
PMCPMC8243231

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.