We have located links that may give you full text access.
Aiming to Improve Readmissions Through InteGrated Hospital Transitions (AIRTIGHT): a Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.
Journal of General Internal Medicine 2018 August 15
BACKGROUND: Despite years of intense focus, inpatient and observation readmission rates remain high and largely unchanged. Hospitals have little, robust evidence to guide the selection of interventions effective at reducing 30-day readmissions in real-world settings.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if implementation of recent recommendations for hospital transition programs is effective at reducing 30-day readmissions in a population discharged to home and at high-risk for readmission.
DESIGN: A non-blinded, pragmatic randomized controlled trial ( Clinicaltrials.gov : NCT02763202) conducted at two hospitals in Charlotte, North Carolina.
PATIENTS: A total of 1876 adult patients, under the care of a hospitalist, and at high risk for readmissions.
INTERVENTION: Random allocation to a Transition Services (TS) program (n = 935) that bridges inpatient, outpatient, and home settings, providing patients virtual and in-person access to a dedicated multidisciplinary team for 30-days, or usual care (n = 941).
MAIN MEASURE: Thirty-day, unplanned, inpatient, or observation readmission rate.
KEY RESULTS: The 30-day readmission rate was 15.2% in the TS group and 16.3% in the usual care group (RR 0.93; 95% [CI, 0.76 to 1.15]; P = 0.52). There were no significant differences in readmissions at 60 and 90 days or in 30-day Emergency Department visit rates. Patients, who were referred to TS and readmitted, had less Intensive Care Unit admissions 15.5% vs. 26.8% (RR 0.74; 95% [CI, 0.59 to 0.93]; P = 0.02).
CONCLUSIONS: An intervention inclusive of contemporary recommendations does not reduce a high-risk population's 30-day readmission rate. The high crossover to usual care (74.8%) reflects the challenge of non-participation that is ubiquitous in the real-world implementation of population health interventions.
TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov ; registration ID number: NCT02763202, URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02763202.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if implementation of recent recommendations for hospital transition programs is effective at reducing 30-day readmissions in a population discharged to home and at high-risk for readmission.
DESIGN: A non-blinded, pragmatic randomized controlled trial ( Clinicaltrials.gov : NCT02763202) conducted at two hospitals in Charlotte, North Carolina.
PATIENTS: A total of 1876 adult patients, under the care of a hospitalist, and at high risk for readmissions.
INTERVENTION: Random allocation to a Transition Services (TS) program (n = 935) that bridges inpatient, outpatient, and home settings, providing patients virtual and in-person access to a dedicated multidisciplinary team for 30-days, or usual care (n = 941).
MAIN MEASURE: Thirty-day, unplanned, inpatient, or observation readmission rate.
KEY RESULTS: The 30-day readmission rate was 15.2% in the TS group and 16.3% in the usual care group (RR 0.93; 95% [CI, 0.76 to 1.15]; P = 0.52). There were no significant differences in readmissions at 60 and 90 days or in 30-day Emergency Department visit rates. Patients, who were referred to TS and readmitted, had less Intensive Care Unit admissions 15.5% vs. 26.8% (RR 0.74; 95% [CI, 0.59 to 0.93]; P = 0.02).
CONCLUSIONS: An intervention inclusive of contemporary recommendations does not reduce a high-risk population's 30-day readmission rate. The high crossover to usual care (74.8%) reflects the challenge of non-participation that is ubiquitous in the real-world implementation of population health interventions.
TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov ; registration ID number: NCT02763202, URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02763202.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app