ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2026
A Multidisciplinary Hospital-at-Home Program in a Tertiary Singapore Hospital: A Comparative Study.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHospital-at-home (HaH) is an alternative care model that delivers acute, inpatient-level care in patients' homes and is well-established in Western countries. Given the unique challenges facing Asian healthcare systems, there is a need to evaluate the impact of HaH in this context.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis comparing a HaH program with conventional inpatient care at a tertiary hospital in Singapore. The intervention group received hospital-level care at home. Outcomes measured include total and in-hospital length of stay (LOS), mortality, cost, and readmission, and emergency department (ED) visits within 30 and 90 days post discharge.
resultsIn total, 143 HaH patients and 147 control patients were included in the study. HaH patients showed significantly shorter in-hospital LOS (-40%, 5 days) despite longer total LOS (+ 28%, 2 days) compared to usual care. No increase in mortality was observed in the HaH group. There was no significant difference between groups in terms of 30- and 90-day post-discharge urgent readmissions (IRR 1.16, 95% CI 0.73-1.84 and IRR 1.21, 95% CI 0.83-1.78 respectively) or 30-day post-discharge ED visits (IRR 3.16, 95% CI 0.77-13.03). However, HaH patients were 78 percentage points less likely to have no ED visits in the 90 days after discharge (95% CI, -113.22 to -43.57). Cost of care remained comparable between groups (cost ratio 1.06, 95% CI 0.82-1.41).
conclusionsHaH care in an Asian tertiary hospital setting was associated with shorter in-hospital LOS, comparable mortality, readmission rates, and overall cost compared to usual care, but a higher likelihood of post-discharge ED utilization. Overall, these findings support the feasibility of HaH in similar settings, providing evidence to guide policymakers in adopting home-based acute care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.