Inclusion criteria
Types of participants
This review will consider studies that include hospitalized patients, aged 18 years or more, who had been diagnosed with COPD and was admitted to hospital due to AECOPD
Types of intervention(s)
This review will consider studies that evaluate discharge interventions including discharge preparation (pre-discharge) and discharge support/after care (post-discharge).
Examples of interventions include:
* screening patients with a high risk of post-discharge problems
* intensive in-hospital discharge preparation
* discharge rounds
* written information leaflets
* implementation of liaison nurses and discharge coordinators
* case management
* home visits prior to discharge
* preventive home visits of district nurses after discharge
* post-hospital support programs
* telephone follow-up after discharge
* discharge planning protocols
* ameliorated communication between hospital and primary care providers
* telehealth.
Comparator
Studies that compared discharge interventions as mentioned in the examples with normal care will be included. "Normal care" will in this case include contacting the GP via letter, phoning district nurses, dispensing of prescriptions and other tasks which are done for all patients in the department in order to prepare for discharge.
Types of outcomes
This review will consider studies that include the following outcome measures: readmission and "time- to -COPD hospitalization". Those outcomes will be measured in days or months.
Types of studies
This review will consider any experimental study design, including randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental, or before and after studies, for inclusion
Search strategy
The search strategy aims to find both published and unpublished studies. A three-step search strategy will be utilized in this review. An initial limited search of MEDLINE and CINAHL will be undertaken followed by analysis of the text words contained in the title and abstract, and of the index terms used to describe article. A second search using all identified keywords and index terms will then be undertaken across all included databases. Thirdly, the reference list of all identified reports and articles will be searched for additional studies. Studies published in English or Scandinavian will be considered for inclusion in this review. Studies published from 1990 to 2014 will be considered for inclusion in this review. The rather short period is chosen because a review by Hansen et al.11 only included one study in the period of 1975-1990, and the study did not focus on patients with COPD, Beside this the attitude towards the patient group has changed heavily in the last 20 years from a rather passive attitude to a more active and patient centred approach.
The search strategy will be constructed and carried out together with a research librarian.
The databases to be searched include:
MEDLINE, CIHAHL, EMBASE, PEDro, Scopus and Web of Science.
In the databases we will identify the specific keywords via the thesaurus; "Mesh", "CINAHL headings" and "Emtree" and others and we will also conduct a block search.
Initial keywords to be used will be:
discharge intervention, patient discharge, discharge, transition, case management, follow up, discharge planning, discharge preparation, pulmonary disease, chronic obstructive, pulmonary disease, chronic obstructive, copd, readmission, admission, patient readmission, rehospitalization, rehospitalisation.
Afterward we will search in the following databases:
* The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease;
* National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE);
* Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network (SIGN);
* American Thoracic Society/American Association for Respiratory Care;
* European Respiratory Society.
The search for unpublished studies will include:
Mednar (only theses and dissertations studies will be selected for this study)
Reference from the included studies will be used for flower picking.
Assessment of methodological quality
Papers selected for retrieval will be assessed by two independent reviewers for methodological validity prior to inclusion in the review using standardized critical appraisal instruments from the Joanna Briggs Institute Meta Analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument (JBI-MAStARI) (Appendix I). Any disagreements that arise between the reviewers will be resolved through discussion, or with a third reviewer.
Data collection
Data will be extracted from papers included in the review using the standardized data extraction tool from JBI-MAStARI (Appendix II). The data extracted will include specific details about the interventions, populations, study methods and outcomes of significance to the review question and specific objectives.
Data synthesis
Quantitative data will, where possible, be pooled in statistical meta-analysis using JBI-MAStARI. All results will be subject to double data entry. Heterogeneity will be assessed statistically using the standard Chi-square. Where statistical pooling is not possible the findings will be presented in narrative form including tables and figures to aid in data presentation where appropriate.
Conflicts of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
References