RESUMO
ObjectivesTo assess the short run successes and challenges of the implementation of a digitally supported accelerated acute hospital discharge scheme for patients admitted with Covid-19. DesignAnalysis of the safety, resource use and health outcomes within the virtual service for the first 65 patients that have been discharged from a virtual respiratory ward. SettingCommunity based intervention using digital technology and a multi-disciplinary team of specialist clinicians to monitor patients at home. Participants65 patients discharged from hospital followed until discharge from the virtual ward. Results24.6% of 65 patients had symptoms that were coded red (urgent response required) in CliniTouch Vie in the first day after hospital discharge falling to 7.7% on their final day on the virtual ward; p=0.049. Reductions in red days decreased significantly over time, from 33.8% of patients in their first three days to 10.8% in their final three days; all patients p=0.002. Four patients were re-admitted to hospital, all for clotting disorders. There was one death within this group, which following senior clinical review was deemed to be unrelated to infection with Covid-19. The most important gain for Glenfield hospital was in expediting the rapid discharge of patients admitted with Covid-19 into a supported environment and the freeing up of beds. On 15th January, 48% of beds were taken up with patients admitted with Covid-19 symptoms. In November 2020, immediately prior to the launch of the virtual ward, the mean length of stay for patients who did not access high dependency care or oxygen was 5.5 (+/-1.3) days. The mean length of stay in patients discharged into the virtual ward thereafter was 3.3 (+/-0.4) days; relative reduction, 40.3% (p<0.001). The cost of care provision in the virtual ward was 8,662 UK Pounds in total and 133.26 UK pounds per patient. The estimated overall savings were 68,052 UK Pounds and the mean saving per patient was estimated at {pound}1,047 UK Pounds. ConclusionsThe virtual ward appeared to assist with earlier discharges, had a low rate of clinically necessary re-admissions, the safety of patients was not compromised and whilst cost savings were not the primary objective, it seemed to also reduce overall resource use and costs.