ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Hospital-at-home (HaH) care has been proposed as an alternative to inpatient care for patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Previous reports were hospital-led and involved patients triaged at the hospitals. To reduce the burden on hospitals, we constructed a novel HaH care model organized by a team of local primary care clinics. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre retrospective cohort study of the COVID-19 patients who received our HaH care from 1 January to 31 March 2022. Patients who were not able to be triaged for the need for hospitalization by the Health Center solely responsible for the management of COVID-19 patients in Osaka city were included. The primary outcome was receiving medical care beyond the HaH care defined as a composite outcome of any medical consultation, hospitalization, or death within 30 days from the initial treatment. RESULTS: Of 382 eligible patients, 34 (9%) were triaged for hospitalization immediately after the initial visit. Of the remaining 348 patients followed up, 37 (11%) developed the primary outcome, while none died. Obesity, fever, and gastrointestinal symptoms at baseline were independently associated with an increased risk of needing medical care beyond the HaH care. A further 129 (37%) patients were managed online alone without home visit, and 170 (50%) required only 1 home visit in addition to online treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The HaH care model with a team of primary care clinics was able to triage patients with COVID-19 who needed immediate hospitalization without involving hospitals, and treated most of the remaining patients at home.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Primary care has played a central role in the community response to the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. The use of the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) has been advocated as a tool to guide escalation decisions in the community. The performance of this tool applied in this context is unclear. AIM: To evaluate the process of escalation of care to the hospital within a primary care assessment centre (PCAC) designed to assess patients with suspected COVID-19 in the community. DESIGN AND SETTING: A retrospective service evaluation of all adult patients assessed between 30 March and 22 April 2020 within a COVID-19 primary care assessment centre within Sandwell West Birmingham CCG. METHOD: A database of patient demographics, healthcare interactions and physiological observations was constructed. NEWS2 and CRB65 scores were calculated retrospectively. The proportion of patients escalated was within risk groups defined by NHSE guidelines in place during the evaluation period was determined. RESULTS: A total of 150 patients were identified. Following assessment 13.3% (n = 20) patients were deemed to require escalation. The proportion of patients escalated with a NEWS2 greater than or equal to 3 was 46.9% (95% CI 30.8-63.6%). The proportion of patients escalated to secondary care using NHSE defined risk thresholds was 0% in the green group, 22% (n = 4) in the amber group, and 81.3% (n = 13) in the red group. CONCLUSION: Clinical decisions to escalate care to the hospital did not follow initial guidance written for the COVID-19 outbreak but were demonstrated to be safe.
In most cases, coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is a mild illness that resolves on its own. Some patients develop severe disease requiring hospital treatment. Identifying which patients are likely to need hospital treatment is a challenge. Many GP practices have developed specific services designed to assess patients with suspected COVID-19 and establish whether hospital treatment is necessary. We evaluated a service providing this function in Birmingham. We examined the care pathway of 150 patients assessed within the service to established factors associated with the need for hospital assessment. We found a national decision tool designed to aid the process was a poor descriptor of what happened in practice.