Key result
Hospitalisation at home for acute heart failure significantly improved MLHFQ and SF-36 quality of life scores at 6 months compared to in-patient care, with no significant differences by 12 months.
Why the study?
Does hospital-at-home care improve functional status and quality of life compared to conventional in-patient admission in older patients with acute decompensation of chronic heart failure?
RCT (n=71)
Randomised
Does hospital-at-home care improve functional status and quality of life compared to conventional in-patient admission in older patients with acute decompensation of chronic heart failure?
Hospital-at-home care for acute decompensated heart failure provides greater early improvements in quality of life and functional status up to 6 months compared to conventional ward admission, though these benefits attenuate by 12 months.
Supports hospital-at-home for acute HF to improve early QoL; extends RCT evidence on home care but leaves long-term durability open.
AIMS: Hospitalisation at home (HaH) achieves comparable health outcomes to conventional in-patient care, in terms of cost-effectiveness and quality of life. Our objective was to assess the impact of episodes of acute decompensation of heart failure (ADCHF) on functional status and quality of life, in patients under HaH care compared with a matched group receiving conventional in-patient care at a Cardiology ward (CW). Methods: Randomised clinical trial in 71 patients with ADCHF attending the Emergency Department. Patients were either admitted to the hospital’s CW or to the HaH service. The functional status and health related quality of life (HRQOL) were assessed using the Barthel Index (BI) and the EQ-5D, Short Form-36 (SF-36) and Minnessota Living with Heart Failure (MLHFQ) questionnaires, administered at admission and, depending on the test, at discharge and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after discharge. Results: MLHFQ and SF-36 experienced significant improvement in most domains with respect to the initial values at discharge and 6 months after only in the HaH group; though by 12-months there were no significant differences. Barthel Index and EQ-5D value scores showed improvement with respect to initial values in both arms. The improvement could be appreciated in more components and for longer among the HaH patients. Conclusions: Functional independence and quality of life improve at discharge compared to admission, after both home-based and in-patient hospitalisation, outcomes being better in various respects over the first year of follow-up after hospital-at-home care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
García-Soleto et al. (2013) conducted an RCT in Acute decompensation of chronic heart failure (ADCHF) (n=71). Hospitalisation at home (HaH) vs. Conventional in-patient care at a Cardiology ward was evaluated on Functional status and health related quality of life (assessed via Barthel Index, EQ-5D, SF-36, and MLHFQ). Hospitalisation at home for acute heart failure significantly improved MLHFQ and SF-36 quality of life scores at 6 months compared to in-patient care, with no significant differences by 12 months.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: