Systematic literature review on the effectiveness and safety of paediatric hospital-at-home care as a substitute for hospital care

Abstract

The hospital landscape is shifting to new care models to meet current challenges in demand, technology, available budgets and staffing. These challenges also apply to the paediatric population, leading to a reduction in paediatric hospital beds and occupancy rates. Paediatric hospital-at-home (HAH) care is used to substitute hospital care in an attempt to bring hospital services closer to children’s homes. In addition, these models attempt to avoid fragmentation of care between hospitals and the community. An important prerequisite for this paediatric HAH care is that it is safe and at least as effective as standard hospital care. The aim of this systematic review is to analyse the evidence on the impact of paediatric HAH care on hospital utilisation, patient outcomes and costs. Four bibliographic databases (Medline, Embase, Cinahl and Cochrane Library) were systematically searched for RCTs and pseudo-RCTs that studied the effectiveness and safety of short-term paediatric HAH care with a focus on models as an alternative to acute hospital admissions. Pseudo-RCTs are defined as observational studies that mimic the design of an RCT, but without randomisation. Outcomes of interest were the length of stay, acute (re)admissions, adverse health outcomes, therapy adherence, parental satisfaction or experience and costs. Only articles written in English, Dutch and French conducted in upper-middle and high-income countries and published between 2000 and 2021 were included. Quality assessment was carried out by two assessors using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing the risk of bias. Reporting is done in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. We identified 18 (pseudo) RCTs and 25 publications of low to very low quality. Most of the included RCTs focused on the neonatal population: phototherapy for neonatal jaundice, early discharge after birth combined with outpatient neonatal care. Other RCTs focused on chemotherapy for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia, diabetes type 1 education, oxygen therapy for acute bronchiolitis, an outpatient service for children with infectious diseases and antibiotic treatment for low-risk febrile neutropenia, cellulitis and perforated appendicitis. The identified study results show that paediatric HAH care is not associated with more adverse events or hospital readmissions. The impact of paediatric HAH care on costs is less clear.

  Conclusions: This review suggests that paediatric HAH care is not associated with more adverse events or hospital readmissions for various clinical indications compared to a standard hospital. Because of the low to very low level of evidence, it is worthwhile to further investigate safety, efficacy and cost effects under strict and well-controlled conditions. This systematic review provides guidance on the essential elements that should be included in HAH care programmes for each type of indication and/or intervention.

What is Known: • The hospital landscape is shifting new models of care to meet current challenges in demand, technology, staffing and models of care. Paediatric HAH care is one of these models. Previous literature reviews are inconclusive whether this is a safe and effective way of providing care.

What is New: • New evidence suggests that paediatric HAH care for various clinical indications is not associated with adverse events or hospital readmissions compared to a standard hospital. Current evidence is characterised by a low level of quality.  • The current review provides guidance on the essential elements that should be included in HAH care programmes for each type of indication and/or intervention.