Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Oshana Hermiz a School of Community
Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney 2052, Australia, b Liverpool Health Service, Sydney,
Australia, c Macarthur Health Service, South Western Sydney
Area Health Service, Sydney, Australia
Correspondence to: M
Harris m.f.harris{at}unsw.edu.au
Objectives:
To evaluate usefulness of limited
community based care for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary
disease after discharge from hospital.
What is already known on this topic
Home based care programmes provide viable alternatives to hospital
admission for some patients at lower cost What this study adds
Additional interventions or interventions earlier in the disease
process may be required to reduce hospitalisations
Design:
Randomised controlled trial.
Setting:
Liverpool Health Service and Macarthur
Health Service in outer metropolitan Sydney between September 1999 and July 2000.
Participants:
177 patients randomised into an
intervention group (84 patients) and a control group (93 patients)
which received current usual care.
Interventions:
Home visits by community nurse at one
and four weeks after discharge and preventive general practitioner care.
Main outcome measures:
Frequency of patients'
presentation and admission to hospital; changes in patients'
disease-specific quality of life, measured with St George's
respiratory questionnaire, over three months after discharge;
patients' knowledge of illness, self management, and satisfaction with
care at discharge and three months later; frequency of general
practitioner and nurse visits and their satisfaction with care.
Results:
Intervention and control groups showed no differences in presentation or admission to hospital or in overall functional status. However, the intervention group improved their activity scores and the control group worsened their symptom scores. While intervention group patients received more visits from community nurses and were more satisfied with their care, involvement of general
practitioners was much less (with only 31% (22) remembering receiving
a care plan). Patients in the intervention group had higher knowledge
scores and were more satisfied. There were no differences in general
practitioner visits or management.
Conclusions:
This brief intervention after acute care
improved patients' knowledge and some aspects of quality of life.
However, it failed to prevent presentation and readmission to hospital.
Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease often require
hospital care and have impaired quality of life
A brief, home based nurse intervention after acute care improved
patients' knowledge but failed to reduce subsequent presentations or
admissions to hospital