Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Readmission”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

7 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2026

Frequent readmissions after hospitalization for alcohol withdrawal: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol use disorder and alcohol withdrawal syndrome impose substantial clinical and economic burdens, with repeated hospitalizations being common. We aimed to systematically review readmission rates following inpatient detoxification, assess variation across study designs and hospital settings, and identify key risk and protective factors. METHODS: We performed a literature search in Embase and Pubmed on 10/04/2026 focusing on studies assessing in hospital alcohol detoxification. Exclusion criteria included studies on substance use other than alcohol and outpatient or residential treatment. Main outcome was rehospitalization, and meta-analysis was performed to estimate pooled readmission proportions. Secondary outcomes were risk factors and protective factors influencing the rate of rehospitalization. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies were included. The pooled proportion of readmissions following alcohol detoxification was estimated at 17% (95% CI: 14%-21%; 13 studies, n = 287,896) within 1 month, increasing to 44% (95% CI: 36%-52%; 8 studies, n = 2,877) at 1 year. Substantial between-study heterogeneity was observed. Subgroup analyses found no significant differences by hospital setting or time period. Findings for study aim and study design were mixed and based on limited data A small number of studies suggested associations with housing stability, employment, and treatment engagement. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that approximately one in six patients are readmitted within 1 month and nearly half within 1 year after inpatient alcohol detoxification. However, readmission rates varied considerably across settings and populations. Future research should evaluate targeted interventions to reduce readmissions among high-risk patient groups.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Machine learning-based prediction of unplanned readmission and construction of an online calculator for elderly patients with mild ischemic stroke.

OBJECTIVE: To screen for independent risk factors for unplanned readmission in elderly patients with mild ischemic stroke, and to construct and validate an online risk prediction calculator based on an interpretable machine learning model, thereby providing a promising practical tool for accurate clinical assessment of 30&#x2011;day all&#x2011;cause unplanned readmission risk in this population. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted, including 1050 patients aged&#xa0;&#x2265;&#xa0;60&#xa0;years with mild ischemic stroke admitted between August 2023 and September 2024. Participants were randomly divided into a training set (840 cases) and a test set (210 cases) at a ratio of 8:2. Risk factors were screened by univariate analysis and multivariable Logistic regression. Four machine learning models, namely LightGBM, XGBoost, Random Forest, and K&#x2011;Nearest Neighbors (KNN), were developed and their performance was evaluated using AUC, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity as metrics. The SHAP framework was used for interpretability analysis, and an online calculator was subsequently developed based on the optimal model. RESULTS: Univariate analysis showed significant differences (P&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.05) in 13 factors including age, smoking, AIP, TyG index, HALP score, etc. Multivariable Logistic regression identified age (OR&#xa0;=&#xa0;9.752), smoking (OR&#xa0;=&#xa0;5.171), AIP (OR&#xa0;=&#xa0;6.691), TyG index (OR&#xa0;=&#xa0;4.393), HALP score (OR&#xa0;=&#xa0;2.831), and&#xa0;&#x2265;&#xa0;2 comorbidities (OR&#xa0;=&#xa0;3.664) as independent risk factors. All four machine learning models demonstrated good predictive performance. Based on a comprehensive evaluation of multiple metrics and computational efficiency, the LightGBM model exhibited the best predictive performance (AUC&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.884, accuracy&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.829, sensitivity&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.812, specificity&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.875). SHAP analysis showed that age, AIP, TyG index, smoking, and HALP score were key predictors. An online calculator developed based on this model enables individualized risk predictions. CONCLUSION: Key risk factors associated with 30&#x2011;day unplanned readmission in elderly patients with mild ischemic stroke were identified. The LightGBM model demonstrated high predictive accuracy, and together with the interpretability analysis and online calculator, offers a practical tool to support clinical risk assessment. However, this tool requires future external validation.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Comparative effectiveness of torsemide vs furosemide in the management of heart failure patients: Win-ratio reanalysis of the TRANSFORM-HF trial.

BACKGROUND: Loop diuretics are widely used for managing congestion in patients with heart failure (HF). The TRANSFORM-HF trial is a multicenter randomized study that enrolled heart failure patients, comparing a strategy of torsemide vs furosemide. The time-to-event analysis demonstrated neutral effects on all-cause death at 30 months and the composite of all-cause death and first rehospitalization at 12 months. We evaluated whether a hierarchical win-ratio (WR) framework integrating mortality, recurrent hospitalization, and patient-reported health status provides additional interpretive insight. METHODS: This study is a secondary analysis of the pragmatic, multicenter, open-label, randomized TRANSFORM-HF trial, conducted across 60 US hospitals that randomized 2,859 patients hospitalized with HF to torsemide or furosemide. The primary 12-month hierarchical composite outcome was defined as (1) all-cause mortality, (2) recurrent all-cause hospitalizations, and (3) lack of improvement in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score (KCCQ-CSS). The primary statistical method was a WR analysis adjusting covariates via inverse probability weighting. Subgroup analyses evaluated potential heterogeneity across patient demographics and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: In the primary 12-month intention-to-treat analysis, the adjusted WR was 1.07 (95% CI, 0.98-1.16; P = .13), indicating no significant difference between torsemide and furosemide. A supplementary 30-month analysis with extended mortality follow-up yielded a similar estimate (adjusted WR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.98-1.16; P = .14); hospitalization and KCCQ-CSS components were assessed through 12 months. As-treated sensitivity analyses were consistent with the neutral primary findings. Exploratory subgroup analyses were not adjusted for multiplicity and should be considered hypothesis-generating. CONCLUSIONS: The overall WR comparison between torsemide and furosemide showed no statistically significant difference in the primary 12-month analysis. The WR framework provided an interpretive decomposition across outcome domains but did not establish superiority of either loop diuretic strategy. All findings should be considered exploratory. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03296813, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03296813.

Aged↗
PubMed2026

Comparing the efficacy of chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine for surgical site disinfection: a systematic review and meta-analysis from randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials report conflicting evidence on the efficacy of different skin disinfectants for preventing surgical site infection (SSI). METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase for RCTs published up to February 2025 comparing preoperative skin disinfection with povidone-iodine (PVI) versus chlorhexidine (CH). Primary outcomes were overall, superficial, deep, and organ/space SSI rates. Secondary outcomes included hospital stay, readmission, and reoperation. RESULTS: CH was superior to PVI in preventing overall SSI (26 studies, n = 29,356; RR: 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.80 to 0.99). The overall SSI incidence rate in the CH group was 7.1% (1,045/14,677), compared with 7.8% (1,152/14,679) in the PVI group, equating to an 11% reduction in relative risk and a 0.7% reduction in absolute risk. The number needed to treat to prevent one SSI was 143. CH demonstrated superiority over PVI in preventing superficial SSI (13 studies, n = 16,867; RR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.64 to 0.92), but not for deep SSI (11 studies, n = 15,842; RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.77 to 1.29) or organ SSI (9 studies, n = 9,471; RR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.53). No significant differences were found in hospital stay, readmission, or reoperation rates between the two groups. CONCLUSION: CH demonstrates statistical superiority over PVI in preventing overall and superficial SSI, though the absolute clinical benefit is modest. No significant differences were observed for deep or organ/space SSI, nor for secondary outcomes including hospital length of stay, readmission, or reoperation rates.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Early mobilization within 24 to 48&#xa0;h improves postoperative clinical outcomes in older adults with hip fracture: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hip fracture is a major public health concern among older adults, often resulting in prolonged disability, institutionalization, and increased healthcare burden. Early mobilization has been widely recommended to enhance postoperative recovery; however, there is a lack of consolidated evidence quantifying its impact on clinical and functional outcomes. This study aimed to synthesize and evaluate the impact of early mobilization following hip fracture surgery in older adults and to explore potential sources of heterogeneity to better inform clinical and nursing practice. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across seven databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Library, and Emcare) from inception to June 15, 2025. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials and observational cohort studies comparing early mobilization (defined as ambulation within 24 to 48&#xa0;h postoperatively) to delayed or usual mobilization in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. Primary outcomes included mortality, discharge destination, and length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, functional recovery, and readmission. Risk of bias was assessed using funnel plots and Egger's test. RESULTS: Twenty-six studies involving 297,435 patients were included. Compared with delayed mobilization, early mobilization significantly reduced 30-day mortality (relative risk&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.40, 95% confidence interval: 0.25-0.64) and 1-year mortality (relative risk&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.57, 95% confidence interval: 0.40-0.80) (both p&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.05). In regional analyses of pooled mortality, similar reductions were observed across Asia-Pacific, North America, and Europe. Patients receiving early mobilization were more likely to be discharged home and had shorter hospital stays. Early mobilization also resulted in a reduced risk of postoperative complications (relative risk&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.79, 95% confidence interval: 0.74-0.84, p&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.05), with specific improvements in pneumonia and thromboembolism rates. Functional independence was significantly improved, as shown by higher Barthel Index scores and increased odds of achieving Functional Independence Measure &#x2265;5 at discharge. No significant difference was observed in readmission rates. CONCLUSIONS: lization within 24 to 48&#xa0;h following hip fracture surgery was associated with favorable outcomes, including reduced mortality, improved functional independence, higher rates of discharge to home, shorter hospital length of stay, and fewer postoperative complications. Although heterogeneity across studies and the predominance of observational evidence warrant cautious interpretation, these findings support current recommendations for early mobilization and highight the potential value of structured and standardized mobilization protocols in routine postoperative hip fracture care.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Safety of early discharge and abbreviated nimodipine course in patients with good-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage.

Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) remains a devastating cerebrovascular emergency associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Current guidelines recommend 14-21&#xa0;days of inpatient monitoring and a 21-day course of nimodipine following aSAH. This retrospective study evaluates early outcomes early discharge (&#x2264;14&#xa0;days post-ictus) and an abbreviated nimodipine course in highly selected patients with good-grade aSAH managed under a standardized institutional protocol. Consecutive patients enrolled in the Vancouver Ruptured Aneurysm Database (VRAD) at Vancouver General Hospital between 2022 and 2025 were included. Inclusion criteria were good-grade aSAH (WFNS Grade I-III) and discharge home within 14&#xa0;days of ictus. The primary outcome was re-presentation to emergency care within 30&#xa0;days of discharge; secondary outcomes included hospital readmission and need for additional treatment. Of 333 total patients in VRAD, 49 patients met inclusion criteria. All patients received&#xa0;&#x2264;&#xa0;14&#xa0;days of nimodipine therapy. Forty-two patients (85.7%) were WFNS Grade I on presentation, 3 (6.1%) were WFNS Grade II, and 4 (8.2%) were WFNS Grade III. Radiographic vasospasm was reported in 18 cases (36.7%). No patients developed DCI or clinical vasospasm. Four patients (8.2%) re-presented to emergency care within 30&#xa0;days of discharge, and only one patient (2%) required hospital re-admission within 30&#xa0;days. While radiographic vasospasm was seen in over one third of patients, none developed clinical sequelae, supporting the premise that radiographic vasospasm alone may be insufficient to preclude early discharge in select good-grade patients.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Effects of hospital planning reforms on access, costs, efficiency, and quality of care in OECD countries: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Many OECD countries have implemented hospital planning reforms to rising healthcare costs, demographic changes, and concerns about access, efficiency, and quality of care. Despite broad implementation, evidence on effectiveness remains fragmented and country-specific. OBJECTIVE: To synthesize evidence on the effects of hospital planning reforms aross four outcome domains: access, costs, efficiency, and quality of care. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review following Cochrane methodology, searching PubMed and Web of Science (January 2000 - September 2025). Studies were categorized into four intervention types - centralization, minimum volume requirements (MVR), performance-based targets, and governance and ownership restructuring. Risk of bias was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for quasi-experimental designs. Where data permitted, random-effects meta-analyses pooled standardized mean differences (SMD) for access and efficiency and risk differences (RD) for quality outcomes. RESULTS: 26 studies from 12 countries were included. Centralization increased patient travel distances and reduced length of stay (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.17 to -0.01) and complications (RD -14.52 pp, -25.95 to -3.09), and, jointly with performance-based targets, 30-day readmissions (RD -0.43 pp, -0.65 to -0.22). Mortality effects varied by timepoint and intervention: short-term endpoints were largely non-significant, whereas 90-day mortality was reduced under centralization (RD -0.80 pp, -1.25 to -0.35) and 60-day mortality under MVR (RD -2.00 pp, -2.82 to -1.18). Survival was non-significant throughout. No study examined costs. CONCLUSION: The absence of cost evidence is a critical gap. Substantial heterogeneity reflects variation in reform design and context, underscoring the need to interpret findings by intervention and country conditions.

Humans↗