Suppr超能文献

在一家为无家可归者提供医疗服务的诊所,为患有多种疾病的患者提供门诊强化护理:SUMMIT 随机临床试验。

Ambulatory Intensive Care for Medically Complex Patients at a Health Care Clinic for Individuals Experiencing Homelessness: The SUMMIT Randomized Clinical Trial.

机构信息

Section of Addiction Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.

Central City Concern, Portland, Oregon.

出版信息

JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Nov 1;6(11):e2342012. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.42012.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Intensive primary care interventions have been promoted to reduce hospitalization rates and improve health outcomes for medically complex patients, but evidence of their efficacy is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of a multidisciplinary ambulatory intensive care unit (A-ICU) intervention on health care utilization and patient-reported outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Streamlined Unified Meaningfully Managed Interdisciplinary Team (SUMMIT) randomized clinical trial used a wait-list control design and was conducted at a health care clinic for patients experiencing homelessness in Portland, Oregon. The first patient was enrolled in August 2016, and the last patient was enrolled in November 2019. Included patients had 1 or more hospitalizations in the prior 6 months and 2 or more chronic medical conditions, substance use disorder, or mental illness. Data analysis was performed between March and May 2021.

INTERVENTION

The A-ICU included a team manager, a pharmacist, a nurse, care coordinators, social workers, and physicians. Activities included comprehensive 90-minute intake, transitional care coordination, and flexible appointments, with reduced panel size. Enhanced usual care (EUC), consisting of team-based primary care with access to community health workers and mental health, addiction treatment, and pharmacy services, served as the comparator. Participants who received EUC joined the A-ICU intervention after 6 months.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome was the difference in rates of hospitalization (primary outcome), emergency department (ED) visits, and primary care physician (PCP) visits per person over 6 months (vs the prior 6 months). Patient-reported outcomes included changes in patient activation, experience, health-related quality of life, and self-rated health at 6 months (vs baseline). We performed an intention-to-treat analysis using a linear mixed-effects model with a random intercept for each patient to examine the association between study group and outcomes.

RESULTS

This study randomized 159 participants (mean [SD] age, 54.9 [9.8] years) to the A-ICU SUMMIT intervention (n = 80) or to EUC (n = 79). The majority of participants were men (102 [65.8%]) and most were White (121 [76.1%]). A total of 64 participants (41.0%) reported having unstable housing at baseline. Six-month hospitalizations decreased in both the A-ICU and EUC groups, with no difference between them (mean [SE], -0.6 [0.5] vs -0.9 [0.5]; difference, 0.3 [95% CI, -1.0 to 1.5]). Emergency department use did not differ between groups (mean [SE], -2.0 [1.0] vs 0.9 [1.0] visits per person; difference, -1.1 [95% CI, -3.7 to 1.6]). Primary care physician visits increased in the A-ICU group (mean [SE], 4.2 [1.6] vs -2.0 [1.6] per person; difference, 6.1 [95% CI, 1.8 to 10.4]). Patients in the A-ICU group reported improved social functioning (mean [SE], 4.7 [2.0] vs -1.1 [2.0]; difference, 5.8 [95% CI, 0.3 to 11.2]) and self-rated health (mean [SE], 0.7 [0.3] vs -0.2 [0.3]; difference, 1.0 [95% CI, 0.1 to 1.8]) compared with patients in the EUC group. No differences in patient activation or experience were observed.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The A-ICU intervention did not change hospital or ED utilization at 6 months but increased PCP visits and improved patient well-being. Longer-term studies are needed to evaluate whether these observed improvements lead to eventual changes in acute care utilization.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03224858.

摘要

重要性

强化初级保健干预措施已被推广用于降低医疗复杂患者的住院率和改善健康结果,但关于其疗效的证据有限。

目的

评估多学科门诊强化护理单元 (A-ICU) 干预对医疗保健利用和患者报告结果的疗效。

设计、地点和参与者:简化统一有意义管理的跨学科团队 (SUMMIT) 随机临床试验采用候补名单对照设计,在俄勒冈州波特兰市为无家可归者提供医疗服务的诊所进行。第一名患者于 2016 年 8 月入组,最后一名患者于 2019 年 11 月入组。纳入的患者在过去 6 个月中有 1 次或多次住院和 2 种或更多慢性疾病、物质使用障碍或精神疾病。数据分析于 2021 年 3 月至 5 月进行。

干预措施

A-ICU 包括一名团队经理、一名药剂师、一名护士、护理协调员、社会工作者和医生。活动包括全面的 90 分钟的入组、过渡性护理协调和灵活的预约,减少了小组规模。增强的常规护理 (EUC),包括以团队为基础的初级保健,可获得社区卫生工作者、心理健康、成瘾治疗和药学服务,作为对照组。接受 EUC 的参与者在 6 个月后加入 A-ICU 干预。

主要结果和测量

主要结果是在 6 个月内(与前 6 个月相比)的住院率(主要结果)、急诊部 (ED) 就诊和初级保健医生 (PCP) 就诊率的差异。患者报告的结果包括 6 个月时(与基线相比)患者激活、体验、健康相关生活质量和自我报告健康状况的变化。我们使用线性混合效应模型进行意向治疗分析,对每个患者进行随机截距,以检查研究组与结果之间的关联。

结果

这项研究随机分配了 159 名参与者(平均[SD]年龄,54.9[9.8]岁)到 A-ICU SUMMIT 干预组(n=80)或 EUC 组(n=79)。大多数参与者是男性(102[65.8%]),大多数是白人(121[76.1%])。基线时有 64 名参与者(41.0%)报告不稳定住房。A-ICU 和 EUC 组的 6 个月住院率均下降,两组之间无差异(平均[SE],-0.6[0.5]比-0.9[0.5];差异,0.3[95%CI,-1.0 至 1.5])。急诊就诊次数在两组之间没有差异(平均[SE],-2.0[1.0]比 0.9[1.0]人次;差异,-1.1[95%CI,-3.7 至 1.6])。A-ICU 组的初级保健医生就诊次数增加(平均[SE],4.2[1.6]比-2.0[1.6]人次;差异,6.1[95%CI,1.8 至 10.4])。与 EUC 组相比,A-ICU 组患者的社会功能(平均[SE],4.7[2.0]比-1.1[2.0];差异,5.8[95%CI,0.3 至 11.2])和自我报告健康(平均[SE],0.7[0.3]比-0.2[0.3];差异,1.0[95%CI,0.1 至 1.8])均有所改善。未观察到患者激活或体验的差异。

结论和相关性

A-ICU 干预措施在 6 个月时并未改变住院或 ED 利用率,但增加了 PCP 就诊次数,并改善了患者的健康状况。需要进行更长期的研究来评估这些观察到的改善是否会导致急性护理利用率的最终变化。

试验注册

ClinicalTrials.gov 标识符:NCT03224858。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7662/10638646/f9176c103acc/jamanetwopen-e2342012-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验