• Trials · Oct 2018

    Comparative Study

    A protocol for the process evaluation of a multi-centre randomised trial to compare the effectiveness of geriatrician-led admission avoidance hospital at home versus inpatient admission.

    • Petra Mäkelä, Mary Godfrey, Andrea Cradduck-Bamford, Graham Ellis, and Sasha Shepperd.
    • Nuffield Department of Population Health, Richard Doll Building, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK. p.makela@nhs.net.
    • Trials. 2018 Oct 19; 19 (1): 569.

    BackgroundAttempts to design services to support the delivery of healthcare closer to home have taken various forms as countries respond to an increase in hospital admission rates for older people, who are at risk of hospital-acquired morbidity, prolonged lengths of stay and readmission. Evidence to support the development of these services is limited. We are conducting a process evaluation, alongside a UK multi-site randomised trial, to understand the contexts and practices of implementing geriatrician-led admission avoidance hospital at home services and to explore ways that the intervention might be effective, under what conditions, for whom, and how it differs from inpatient care.MethodsWe are interviewing patients and their caregivers, from sites that are purposively sampled from participating National Health Service (NHS) trusts across the UK. We are also visiting sites to observe local processes and discuss the establishment and running of services with a range of multidisciplinary staff, managers, commissioners, primary care and social services representatives. We aim to interview approximately 36 patients and their caregivers with experience of hospital at home or inpatient services; 12 at each of three sites. We will use a content analysis approach to explore data across participants, services and sites.DiscussionThis process evaluation will enable evaluation of implementation processes prior to knowing trial outcomes. We encompass domains of reach, delivery, change, context and response to the intervention by patients, their carers, health professionals and the health system.Trial RegistrationISRCTN60477865 . Registered on 10 March 2014. Trial sponsor: University of Oxford. Version 3.1, registered on 14 June 2016.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.