Skip to main content

Table 2 Readmissions, contacts with general practitioner and deaths at 8, 30 and 180 days

From: Effect of single follow-up home visit on readmission in a group of frail elderly patients – a Danish randomized clinical trial

 

Intervention (n = 270)

Control(n = 267)

Pa

Adjusted OR (95%CI)b

Adjusted β (95%CI)c

Number of patients readmitted, n (%)

 8 days after discharge

31 (11)

27 (10)

0.61

1.16 (0.67;2.00)

 30 days after discharge

80 (30)

70 (26)

0.38

1.18 (0.81;1;73)

 180 days after discharge

150 (56)

144 (54)

0.71

1.07 (0.75;1.51)

Total number of readmissions, sum

 8 days after discharge

32

32

0.97

0.00 (−0.06;0.06)

 30 days after discharge

92

87

0.77

0.01 (−0.09;0.11)

 180 days after discharge

274

293

0.49

−0.09 (− 0.32;0.14)

Total number of days in the hospital, sum

 8 days after discharge

81

55

0.28

0.09 (−0.08;0.26)

 30 days after discharge

545

440

0.30

0.36 (−0.34;1.06)

 180 days after discharge

1660

1830

0.48

−0.76 (−2.70;1.18)

Number of GP services, sum

 28 days after discharge

1344

1393

0.52

−0.26 (− 0.97;0.46)

 180 days after discharge

5209

5730

0.10

−2.17 (−4.77;0.42)

Number of visits to GP on duty, sum

 28 days after discharge

275

267

0.56

0.12 (−0.25;0.49)

 180 days after discharge

874

845

0.86

0.09 (−0.70;0.88)

Death, n (%)

 8 days after discharge

6 (2)

6 (2)

0.98

1.04 (0.33;3.30)

 30 days after discharge

23 (9)

16 (6)

0.26

1.49 (0.77;2.89)

 180 days after discharge

63 (23)

58 (22)

0.66

1.11 (0.73;1.66)

  1. aChi-square test for difference in proportions between the intervention and control groups and t-test for mean differences between the intervention and control groups
  2. bLogistic regression of binary outcomes adjusted for discharging department and municipality, odds ratio for intervention compared to control group
  3. cLinear regression of continuous outcomes adjusted for discharging department and municipality, β coefficient for intervention compared to control group