SynthesisJournal of general internal medicine2026
Virtual Wards for Acute Care Patients: A Scoping Review.
Synthesis 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIncreasing capacity pressures and overcrowding in hospitals and emergency departments (EDs) have led to a global surge in the adoption of technology-enabled hospital-at-home programs, also known as virtual wards (VWs). These models provide hospital-level care in patients' homes supported by remote monitoring, aiming to shorten or avoid hospital admission. While substantial evidence supports the feasibility of VWs for chronic care, evidence for use in patients with acute conditions remains limited. This scoping review aimed to map existing evidence on VWs for acute medical patients within acute care settings.
methodsIn February 2025, multiple databases were searched to identify studies evaluating VWs for adult acute care populations. Outcomes included clinical and safety variables, length of stay, functional outcomes, cost and resource use, barriers and facilitators to implementation, user experiences, and qualitative analyses.
resultsTwenty-two studies were included (RCTs n = 3, case-controls n = 9, cohort n = 7, qualitative n = 3), with substantial heterogeneity in VW models and telemonitoring approaches. The most common indication was infection (e.g. pneumonia, urinary tract). Results of this narrative synthesis suggest care delivered in VWs may be similar to hospital care for rates of ED visits, readmission, short-term mortality, and adverse events. Length of stay in the hospital tended to be shorter. Functional outcomes may be better in VWs. Cost analyses were limited and showed mixed results. Surveys and qualitative analyses indicated high acceptability and generally positive experiences among patients, carers, and healthcare staff. DISCUSSION: Evidence from the predominantly non-randomized studies included in this review suggests that VWs may be a feasible alternative for selected acute care patients, with outcomes broadly similar to standard hospital care. Substantial heterogeneity in study designs, alongside the descriptive nature of this synthesis, limits the evaluation of evidence strength and comparability. Robust randomized trials and comprehensive cost-effectiveness analyses are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42870180What 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.