Effect of Early Follow-Up After Hospital Discharge on Outcomes in Patients With Heart Failure or Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transitions in care can increase patients' vulnerability to adverse events. In particular, patients admitted for heart failure or chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD) have high rates of readmission and return emergency department visits. Heart failure patients have the highest 30-day readmission rates in Canada, and COPD patients comprise the highest volume of readmissions. Combined, these two conditions account for the largest number of emergency department returns. Prompt follow-up of discharged patients has been linked with reduced rates of readmission, emergency department use, and death. This systematic review evaluated the clinical effectiveness of early follow-up, within either 7 days or 30 days after hospital discharge, compared with usual care or a different time to follow-up, in reducing readmissions, emergency department visits, and mortality in patients with heart failure or COPD. METHODS: We performed a literature search to identify studies published in English up to May 25, 2016, on early follow-up after discharge from hospital in patients with heart failure or COPD. A single reviewer screened the titles and abstracts and obtained full-text articles for studies meeting the eligibility criteria. The risk of bias in the studies was evaluated according to ROBINS-I and EPOC criteria, and the quality of the body of evidence for each outcome was examined according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria. RESULTS: From a total of 3,228 unique citations, we identified 10 eligible studies: one randomized controlled trial, two nonrandomized controlled trials, and seven observational studies. Four studies were specifically on 7-day follow-up and 30-day health outcomes. The other six studies were on 30-day follow-up and more variable time to health outcomes. Follow-up was conducted by general and specialist physicians, nurses, and pharmacists in clinics, by telephone, and by home visit. Risk of bias was moderate for most of the studies. Having follow-up within either 7 days or 30 days after hospitalization for heart failure or COPD was associated with lower all-cause readmissions, emergency department visits, and mortality, even after accounting for confounders such as age, sex, socioeconomic status, and disease severity (GRADE: Very low to low). However, the evidence was inconsistent. We did not find a difference in effectiveness between studies using a 7-day versus a 30-day follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Based on low- and very low-quality evidence, follow-up within 7 days and within 30 days of discharge from hospitalization for heart failure or COPD-compared with usual care or no follow-up-were both associated with a reduced risk of all-cause readmission, emergency department visits, and mortality. Overall, there is a lack of large, methodologically robust studies specifically focusing on the effectiveness of 7-day follow-up after discharge in improving patient outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".