Key result
A systematic review of heart failure rehospitalisation identified 62 predictive elements, which were predominantly clinical factors rather than provider or health care system factors.
Why the study?
What patient, provider, and system factors predict rehospitalisation in adults with heart failure?
Systematic Review
What patient, provider, and system factors predict rehospitalisation in adults with heart failure?
Clinical factors are the predominant identified predictors of HF rehospitalisation, highlighting a gap in understanding provider and system-level risk factors.
Clinical factors should guide HF rehospitalization risk assessment; extends evidence by quantifying the gap in provider and system-level predictors.
OBJECTIVES: To identify patient, provider and system factors predicting rehospitalisation in adults with heart failure (HF). METHOD: The electronic data bases MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Embase and PsychInfo were searched from 1996-2008 to identify studies identifying predictors of rehospitalisation from which the factors of patient, provider and systems were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 62 elements were identified. These elements were then sorted into patient, provider and system categories. Risk factors identified for rehospitalisation were predominantly related to clinical factors. There were less factors identifying risk from the perspective of provider and health care systems. CONCLUSIONS: In people with HF it is likely that non-clinical factors including provider and system play an important role in rehospitalisation. There is a need to identify individuals at risk of rehospitalisation and tailor disease management programmes accordingly.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Betihavas et al. (2013) conducted a systematic review in Heart failure. Patient, provider and system factors was evaluated on Predictors of rehospitalisation. A systematic review of heart failure rehospitalisation identified 62 predictive elements, which were predominantly clinical factors rather than provider or health care system factors.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: