Evaluation of 'care bundles' for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): a multisite study in the UK.
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Disease Progression
Emergency Service, Hospital
/ economics
England
Female
Health Care Costs
/ statistics & numerical data
Health Plan Implementation
/ organization & administration
Humans
Length of Stay
/ economics
Male
Middle Aged
Patient Care Bundles
/ economics
Patient Discharge
/ statistics & numerical data
Patient Readmission
/ statistics & numerical data
Program Evaluation
Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
/ economics
Qualitative Research
Quality of Life
Wales
copd exacerbations
Journal
BMJ open respiratory research
ISSN: 2052-4439
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open Respir Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101638061
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
07
03
2019
revised:
05
04
2019
accepted:
08
05
2019
entrez:
2
7
2019
pubmed:
2
7
2019
medline:
2
7
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) accounts for 10% of emergency hospital admissions in the UK annually. Nearly 33% of patients are readmitted within 28 days of discharge. We evaluated the effectiveness of implementing standardised packages of care called 'care bundles' on COPD readmission, emergency department (ED) attendance, mortality, costs and process of care. This is a mixed-methods, controlled before-and-after study with nested case studies. 31 acute hospitals in England and Wales which introduced COPD care bundles (implementation sites) or provided usual care (comparator sites) were recruited and provided monthly aggregate data. 14 sites provided additional individual patient data. Participants were adults admitted with an acute exacerbation of COPD. There was no evidence that care bundles reduced 28-day COPD readmission rates: OR=1.02 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.26). However, the rate of ED attendance was reduced in implementation sites over and above that in comparator sites (implementation: IRR=0.63 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.71); comparator: IRR=1.12 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.24); group-time interaction p<0.001). At implementation sites, delivery of all bundle elements was higher but was only achieved in 2.2% (admissions bundle) and 7.6% (discharge bundle) of cases. There was no evidence of cost-effectiveness. Staff viewed bundles positively, believing they help standardise practice and facilitate communication between clinicians. However, they lacked skills in change management, leading to inconsistent implementation. COPD care bundles were not effectively implemented in this study. They were associated with a reduced number of subsequent ED attendances, but not with change in readmissions, mortality or reduced costs. This is unsurprising given the low level of bundle uptake in implementation sites, and it remains to be determined if COPD care bundles affect patient care and outcomes when they are effectively implemented. ISRCTN13022442.
Sections du résumé
Background
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) accounts for 10% of emergency hospital admissions in the UK annually. Nearly 33% of patients are readmitted within 28 days of discharge. We evaluated the effectiveness of implementing standardised packages of care called 'care bundles' on COPD readmission, emergency department (ED) attendance, mortality, costs and process of care.
Methods
This is a mixed-methods, controlled before-and-after study with nested case studies. 31 acute hospitals in England and Wales which introduced COPD care bundles (implementation sites) or provided usual care (comparator sites) were recruited and provided monthly aggregate data. 14 sites provided additional individual patient data. Participants were adults admitted with an acute exacerbation of COPD.
Results
There was no evidence that care bundles reduced 28-day COPD readmission rates: OR=1.02 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.26). However, the rate of ED attendance was reduced in implementation sites over and above that in comparator sites (implementation: IRR=0.63 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.71); comparator: IRR=1.12 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.24); group-time interaction p<0.001). At implementation sites, delivery of all bundle elements was higher but was only achieved in 2.2% (admissions bundle) and 7.6% (discharge bundle) of cases. There was no evidence of cost-effectiveness. Staff viewed bundles positively, believing they help standardise practice and facilitate communication between clinicians. However, they lacked skills in change management, leading to inconsistent implementation.
Discussion
COPD care bundles were not effectively implemented in this study. They were associated with a reduced number of subsequent ED attendances, but not with change in readmissions, mortality or reduced costs. This is unsurprising given the low level of bundle uptake in implementation sites, and it remains to be determined if COPD care bundles affect patient care and outcomes when they are effectively implemented.
Trial registration number
ISRCTN13022442.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31258918
doi: 10.1136/bmjresp-2019-000425
pii: bmjresp-2019-000425
pmc: PMC6561386
doi:
Banques de données
ISRCTN
['ISRCTN13022442']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Observational Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Pagination
e000425Subventions
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : 12/130/53
Pays : United Kingdom
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: SP is a general practitioner, and JB and JC are hospital consultants working in the fields of emergency care and respiratory medicine, respectively. All have endeavoured to ensure that their input to the research has not been biased by their own clinical practice. JC worked with colleagues at the British Thoracic Society to design and evaluate care bundles as an intervention to improve outcomes in a number of different respiratory conditions, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia and asthma. SP is a member of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research Researcher-led Panel, from 2017 to date. WH is a member of the NIHR Health Technology Assessment Clinical Trials Board. SJ runs an independent consultancy for public and charitable sector clients, providing strategy and organisation development, leadership coaching and facilitation.
Références
Implement Sci. 2013 Jun 20;8:70
pubmed: 23786847
Thorax. 2015 Oct;70(10):992-4
pubmed: 26197814
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2016 Nov 14;11:2831-2838
pubmed: 27881915
BMJ. 2010 Mar 31;340:c1234
pubmed: 20360220
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2013;8:605-11
pubmed: 24348033
BMC Pulm Med. 2016 Feb 25;16:35
pubmed: 26916196
BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 Nov;26(11):908-918
pubmed: 28733370
BMJ Open Respir Res. 2014 Jun 20;1(1):e000035
pubmed: 25478183
Health Econ. 2012 Oct;21(10):1201-16
pubmed: 21905152
PLoS One. 2015 Feb 13;10(2):e0116187
pubmed: 25679218
PLoS Med. 2006 Nov;3(11):e442
pubmed: 17132052
Thorax. 2006 Oct;61(10):837-42
pubmed: 16449268
Thorax. 2017 Jan;72(1):31-39
pubmed: 27613539
Thorax. 2012 Jan;67(1):90-2
pubmed: 21846790