Tools
Tools
Sahota, Opinder, Pulikottil-Jacob, Ruth, Marshall, Fiona, Montgomery, Alan, Tan, Wei, Sach, Tracey 
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8098-9220, Logan, Pip, Kendrick, Denise, Watson, Alison, Walker, Maria and Waring, Justin
(2017)
The Community In-reach Rehabilitation and Care Transition (CIRACT) clinical and cost-effectiveness randomisation controlled trial in older people admitted to hospital as an acute medical emergency.
Age and Ageing, 46 (1).
pp. 26-32.
ISSN 0002-0729
Preview |
PDF (Published manuscript)
- Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives. Download (143kB) | Preview |
Abstract
Objective: to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a Community In-reach Rehabilitation and Care Transition (CIRACT) service with the traditional hospital-based rehabilitation (THB-Rehab) service. Design: pragmatic randomised controlled trial with an integral health economic study. Settings: large UK teaching hospital, with community follow-up. Subjects: frail older people aged 70 years and older admitted to hospital as an acute medical emergency. Measurements: Primary outcome: hospital length of stay; secondary outcomes: readmission, day 91-super spell bed days, functional ability, co-morbidity and health-related quality of life; cost-effectiveness analysis. Results: a total of 250 participants were randomised. There was no significant difference in length of stay between the CIRACT and THB-Rehab service (median 8 versus 9 days; geometric mean 7.8 versus 8.7 days, mean ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74–1.10). Of the participants who were discharged from hospital, 17% and 13% were readmitted within 28 days from the CIRACT and THB-Rehab services, respectively (risk difference 3.8%, 95% CI −5.8% to 13.4%). There were no other significant differences in any of the other secondary outcomes between the two groups. The mean costs (including NHS and personal social service) of the CIRACT and THB-Rehab service were £3,744 and £3,603, respectively (mean cost difference £144; 95% CI −1,645 to 1,934). Conclusion: the CIRACT service does not reduce major hospital length of stay nor reduce short-term readmission rates, compared to the standard THB-Rehab service; however, a modest (<2.3 days) effect cannot be excluded. Further studies are necessary powered with larger sample sizes and cluster randomisation.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Additional Information: | © The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons AttributionNonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | older people,care transition,transition coach,community rehabilitation ,in-reach,readmission,hospital length of stay,cost-effectiveness |
| Faculty \ School: | Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Norwich Medical School |
| UEA Research Groups: | Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Groups > Health Economics Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Groups > Norwich Clinical Trials Unit Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Groups > Public Health and Health Services Research (former - to 2023) |
| Related URLs: | |
| Depositing User: | Pure Connector |
| Date Deposited: | 13 Oct 2016 15:00 |
| Last Modified: | 22 Oct 2022 01:45 |
| URI: | https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/60924 |
| DOI: | 10.1093/ageing/afw149 |
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |