Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, Ontario Ministry of Research, Innovation and Science, UK National Institute of Academic Anaesthesia, UK Clinical Research Collaboration, Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists, and Monash University.

Background From late February 2020, English care homes rapidly adapted their practices in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to accommodating new guidelines and policies, staff had to adjust to rapid reconfiguration of services external to the home that they would normally depend upon for support. This study examined the complex interdependencies of support as staff responded to COVID-19. The aim was to inform more effective responses to the ongoing pandemic, and to improve understanding of how to work with care home staff and organisations after the pandemic has passed. Methods Ten managers of registered care homes in the East Midlands of England were interviewed by videoconference or phone about their experiences of the crisis from a structured organisational perspective. Analysis used an adapted organisational framework analysis approach with a focus on social ties and interdependencies between organisations and individuals. Results Three key groups of interdependencies were identified: care processes and practice; resources; and governance. Care home staff had to deliver care in innovative ways, making high stakes decisions in circumstances defined by: fluid ties to organisations outside the care home; multiple, sometimes conflicting, sources of expertise and information; and a sense of deprioritisation by authorities. Organisational responses to the pandemic by central government resulted in resource constraints and additional work, and sometimes impaired the ability of staff and managers to make decisions. Local communities, including businesses, third-sector organisations and individuals, were key in helping care homes overcome challenges. Care homes, rather than competing, were found to work together to provide mutual support. Resilience in the system was a consequence of dedicated and resourceful staff using existing local networks, or forging new ones, to overcome barriers to care. Conclusions This study identified how interdependency between care home organisations, the surrounding community, and key statutory and non-statutory organisations beyond their locality, shaped decision making and care delivery during the pandemic. Recognising these interdependencies, and the expertise shown by care home managers and staff as they navigate them, is key to providing effective healthcare in care homes as the pandemic progresses, and as the sector recovers afterwards.

BackgroundHospital discharge is a vulnerable stage in the patient pathway. Research highlights communication failures and the problems of co-ordination as resulting in delayed, poorly timed and unsafe discharges. The complexity of hospital discharge exemplifies the threats to patient safety found ‘between’ care processes and organisations. In developing this perspective, safe discharge is seen as relying upon enhanced knowledge sharing and collaboration between stakeholders, which can mitigate system complexity and promote safety.AimTo identify interventions and practices that support knowledge sharing and collaboration in the processes of discharge planning and care transition.SettingThe study was undertaken between 2011 and 2013 in two English health-care systems, each comprising an acute health-care provider, community and primary care providers, local authority social services and social care agencies. The study sites were selected to reflect known variations in local population demographics as well as in the size and composition of the care systems. The study compared the experiences of stroke and hip fracture patients as exemplars of acute care with complex discharge pathways.DesignThe study involved in-depth ethnographic research in the two sites. This combined (a) over 180 hours of observations of discharge processes and knowledge-sharing activities in various care settings; (b) focused ‘patient tracking’ to trace and understand discharge activities across the entire patient journey; and (c) qualitative interviews with 169 individuals working in health, social and voluntary care sectors.FindingsThe study reinforces the view of hospital discharge as a complex system involving dynamic and multidirectional patterns of knowledge sharing between multiple groups. The study shows that discharge planning and care transitions develop through a series of linked ‘situations’ or opportunities for knowledge sharing. It also shows variations in these situations, in terms of the range of actors, forms of knowledge shared, and media and resources used, and the wider culture and organisation of discharge. The study also describes the threats to patient safety associated with hospital discharge, as perceived by participants and stakeholders. These related to falls, medicines, infection, clinical procedures, equipment, timing and scheduling of discharge, and communication. Each of these identified risks are analysed and explained with reference to the observed patterns of knowledge sharing to elaborate how variations in knowledge sharing can hinder or promote safe discharge.ConclusionsThe study supports the view of hospital discharge as a complex system involving tightly coupled and interdependent patterns of interaction between multiple health and social care agencies. Knowledge sharing can help to mitigate system complexity through supporting collaboration and co-ordination. The study suggests four areas of change that might enhance knowledge sharing, reduce system complexity and promote safety. First, knowledge brokers in the form of discharge co-ordinators can facilitate knowledge sharing and co-ordination; second, colocation and functional proximity of stakeholders can support knowledge sharing and mutual appreciation and alignment of divergent practices; third, local cultures should prioritise and value collaboration; and finally, organisational resources, procedures and leadership should be aligned to fostering knowledge sharing and collaborative working. These learning points provide insight for future interventions to enhance discharge planning and care transition. Future research might consider the implementation of interviews to mediate system complexity through fostering enhanced knowledge sharing across occupational and organisational boundaries. Research might also consider in more detail the underlying complexity of both health and social care systems and how opportunities for knowledge sharing might be engendered to promote patient safety in other areas.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Objective: Safe hospital discharge relies upon communication and coordination across multiple occupational and organizational boundaries. Our aim was to understand how these boundaries can exacerbate health system complexity and represent latent sociocultural threats to safe discharge. Methods: An ethnographic study was conducted in two local health and social care systems (health economies) in England, focusing on two clinical areas: stroke and hip fracture patients. Data collection involved 345 hours of observations and 220 semi-structured interviews with health and social care professionals, patients and their lay carers. Results: Hospital discharge involves a dynamic network of interactions between heterogeneous health and social care actors, each characterized by divergent ways of organizing discharge activities; cultures of collaboration and interaction and understanding of what discharge involves and how it contributes to patient recovery. These interrelated dimensions elaborate the occupational and organisational boundaries that can influence communication and coordination in hospital discharge. Conclusions: Hospital discharge relies upon the coordination of multiple actors working across occupational and organizational boundaries. Attention to the sociocultural boundaries that influence communication and coordination can help inform interventions that might support enhanced discharge safety.

No abstract

BackgroundHospital discharge is a vulnerable transitional stage in patient care. This qualitative study investigated the views of healthcare professionals and patients about the threats to safe hospital discharge with aim of identifying contributory and latent factors. The study was undertaken in two regional health and social care systems in the English National Health Service, each comprising three acute hospitals, community and primary care providers and municipal social care services. The study focused on the threats to safe discharge for hip fracture and stroke patients as exemplars of complex care transitions.MethodsA qualitative study involving narrative interviews with 213 representative stakeholders and professionals involved in discharge planning and care transition activities. Narratives were analysed in line with ‘systems’ thinking to identify proximal (active) and distal (latent) factors, and the relationships between them.ResultsThree linked categories of commonly and consistently identified threat to safe discharge were identified: (1) ‘direct’ patient harms comprising falls, infection, sores and ulceration, medicines-related issues, and relapse; (2) proximal ‘contributing’ factors including completion of tests, assessment of patient, management of equipment and medicines, care plan, follow-up care and patient education; and distal ‘latent’ factors including discharge planning, referral processes, discharge timing, resources constraints, and organisational demands.ConclusionFrom the perspective of stakeholders, the study elaborates the relationship between patient harms and systemic factors in the context of hospital discharge. It supports the importance of communication and collaboration across occupational and organisational boundaries, but also the challenges to supporting such communication with the inherent complexity of the care system.

Objectiveto 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.Designpragmatic randomised controlled trial with an integral health economic study.Settingslarge UK teaching hospital, with community follow-up.Subjectsfrail older people aged 70 years and older admitted to hospital as an acute medical emergency.MeasurementsPrimary 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.Resultsa 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).Conclusionthe 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.Trial registrationISRCTN 94393315, 25th April 2013

Background: The Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) questionnaire might help incorporate self-reported functional capacity into preoperative risk assessment. Nonetheless, prognostically important thresholds in DASI scores remain unclear. We conducted a nested cohort analysis of the Measurement of Exercise Tolerance before Surgery (METS) study to characterise the association of preoperative DASI scores with postoperative death or complications. Methods: The analysis included 1546 participants (!40 yr of age) at an elevated cardiac risk who had inpatient noncardiac surgery. The primary outcome was 30-day death or myocardial injury. The secondary outcomes were 30-day death or myocardial infarction, in-hospital moderate-to-severe complications, and 1 yr death or new disability. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to characterise the adjusted association of preoperative DASI scores with outcomes. Results: The DASI score had non-linear associations with outcomes. Self-reported functional capacity better than a DASI score of 34 was associated with reduced odds of 30-day death or myocardial injury (odds ratio: 0.97 per 1 point increase above 34; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96e0.99) and 1 yr death or new disability (odds ratio: 0.96 per 1 point increase above 34; 95% CI: 0.92e0.99). Self-reported functional capacity worse than a DASI score of 34 was associated with increased odds of 30-day death or myocardial infarction (odds ratio: 1.05 per 1 point decrease below 34; 95% CI: 1.00e1.09), and moderate-to-severe complications (odds ratio: 1.03 per 1 point decrease below 34; 95% CI: 1.01e1.05). Conclusions: A DASI score of 34 represents a threshold for identifying patients at risk for myocardial injury, myocardial infarction, moderate-to-severe complications, and new disability.