Health mediation does not reduce the readmission rate of frequent users of emergency departments living in precarious conditions: what lessons can be learned from this randomised controlled trial?

BACKGROUND: Severe overcrowding of emergency departments (EDs) affects the quality of healthcare. One factor of overcrowding is precariousness, but it has rarely been considered a key factor in designing interventions to improve ED care. Health mediation (HM) aims to facilitate access to rights, prevention, and care for the most vulnerable persons and to raise awareness among healthcare providers about obstacles in accessing healthcare. The primary aim was to determine whether HM intervention for frequent users of EDs (FUED) living in precarious conditions could reduce the readmission rate at 90 days. METHODS: Between February 2019 and May 2022, we enrolled and interviewed 726 FUED in four EDs of southeastern France in this randomised controlled trial. The HM intervention started in the ED and lasted 90 days. In addition to the primary endpoint (first readmission at 90 days), secondary endpoints (readmission at 30 and 180 days, number of hospitalisations at 30, 90, 180 days, admissions for the same reasons as the first admission) were also studied. The outcomes were measured in the ED information systems. Statistical methods included an intention-to-treat analysis and a per-protocol analysis. Comparisons were adjusted for gender, age, ED, and health mediator. RESULTS: 46% of patients reported attending the ED because they felt their life was in danger, and 42% had been referred to the ED by the emergency medical dispatch centre or their GP; 40% of patients were considered to be in a serious condition by ED physicians. The proportion of patients who were readmitted at 90 days was high but did not differ between the control and the HM intervention groups (31.7% vs. 36.3%, p = 0.23). There was no significant difference in any of the secondary outcome measures between the control and HM intervention groups. Per-protocol analysis also showed no significant difference for the primary and secondary endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: This randomised controlled trial did not show that our health mediation intervention was effective in reducing the use of emergency services by FUED living in precarious conditions. Some limitations are discussed: the duration of the intervention (90 days), the long-term effects (> 6 months), the involvement of the ED staff. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered on clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03660215 on 4th September 2018.

Health mediation: an intervention mode for improving emergency department care and support for patients living in precarious conditions.

BACKGROUND: Severe overcrowding of emergency departments (EDs) impacts the quality of healthcare. One factor of this overcrowding is precariousness, but it has rarely been considered a key factor in designing interventions to improve ED care. Health mediation (HM) aims to facilitate access to rights, prevention, and care for the most vulnerable persons and to raise awareness among healthcare providers about obstacles in accessing healthcare. We here present the results of an ancillary qualitative study to explore the prospects regarding a health mediation intervention implemented in EDs for deprived persons who are frequent ED users, from professionals' and patients' perspectives. METHODS: Design, data collection, and data analysis were done according to a psychosocial approach, based on thematic content analysis and semi-structured interviews of 16 frequent ED users and deprived patients exposed to HM and of 14 professionals in 4 EDs of South-eastern France. RESULTS: All patients reported multifactorial distress. Most of them expressed experiencing isolation and powerlessness, and lacking personal resources to cope with healthcare. They mentioned the use of ED as a way of quickly meeting a professional to respond to their suffering, and recognized the trustworthy alliance with health mediators (HMrs) as a means to put them back in a healthcare pathway. The presence of HMrs in EDs was appreciated by ED professionals because HMrs responded to requests they were not able to access and were perceived as an efficient support for caring for deprived persons in emergency contexts. CONCLUSIONS: Our results are in favour of health mediation in EDs as a promising solution, requested by patients and ED professionals, to cope with frequent ED users and deprived patients. Our results could also be used to adapt other strategies for the most vulnerable populations to reduce the frequency of ED readmissions. At the interface of the patients' health experience and the medico-social sector, HM could complete the immediate responses to medical needs given in EDs and contribute in alleviating the social inequalities of health.

Impact of a health literacy intervention combining general practitioner training and a consumer facing intervention to improve colorectal cancer screening in underserved areas: protocol for a multicentric cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer burden worldwide. In France, it is the second most common cause of cancer death after lung cancer. Systematic uptake of CRC screening can improve survival rates. However, people with limited health literacy (HL) and lower socioeconomic position rarely participate. Our aim is to assess the impact of an intervention combining HL and CRC screening training for general practitioners (GPs) with a pictorial brochure and video targeting eligible patients, to increase CRC screening and other secondary outcomes, after 1 year, in several underserved geographic areas in France. METHODS: We will use a two-arm multicentric randomized controlled cluster trial with 32 GPs primarily serving underserved populations across four regions in France with 1024 patients recruited. GPs practicing in underserved areas (identified using the European Deprivation Index) will be block-randomized to: 1) a combined intervention (HL and CRC training + brochure and video for eligible patients), or 2) usual care. Patients will be included if they are between 50 and 74 years old, eligible for CRC screening, and present to recruited GPs. The primary outcome is CRC screening uptake after 1 year. Secondary outcomes include increasing knowledge and patient activation. After trial recruitment, we will conduct semi-structured interviews with up to 24 GPs (up to 8 in each region) and up to 48 patients (6 to 12 per region) based on data saturation. We will explore strategies that promote the intervention's sustained use and rapid implementation using Normalization Process Theory. We will follow a community-based participatory research approach throughout the trial. For the analyses, we will adopt a regression framework for all quantitative data. We will also use exploratory mediation analyses. We will analyze all qualitative data using a framework analysis guided by Normalization Process Theory. DISCUSSION: Limited HL and its impact on the general population is a growing public health and policy challenge worldwide. It has received limited attention in France. A combined HL intervention could reduce disparities in CRC screening, increase screening rates among the most vulnerable populations, and increase knowledge and activation (beneficial in the context of repeated screening). TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 2020-A01687-32 . Date of registration: 17th November 2020.