Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Aug 16;7(3):ooae079.
doi: 10.1093/jamiaopen/ooae079. eCollection 2024 Oct.

Incorporating patient, caregiver, and provider perspectives in the co-design of an app to guide Hospital at Home admission decisions: a qualitative analysis

Affiliations

Incorporating patient, caregiver, and provider perspectives in the co-design of an app to guide Hospital at Home admission decisions: a qualitative analysis

Marc Kowalkowski et al. JAMIA Open. .

Abstract

Objective: Hospital at Home (HaH) programs currently lack decision support tools to help efficiently navigate the complex decision-making process surrounding HaH as a care option. We assessed user needs and perspectives to guide early prototyping and co-creation of 4PACS (Partnering Patients and Providers for Personalized Acute Care Selection), a decision support app to help patients make an informed decision when presented with discrete hospitalization options.

Methods: From December 2021 to January 2022, we conducted semi-structured interviews via telephone with patients and caregivers recruited from Atrium Health's HaH program and physicians and a nurse with experience referring patients to HaH. Interviews were evaluated using thematic analysis. The findings were synthesized to create illustrative user descriptions to aid 4PACS development.

Results: In total, 12 stakeholders participated (3 patients, 2 caregivers, 7 providers [physicians/nurse]). We identified 4 primary themes: attitudes about HaH; 4PACS app content and information needs; barriers to 4PACS implementation; and facilitators to 4PACS implementation. We characterized 3 user descriptions (one per stakeholder group) to support 4PACS design decisions. User needs included patient selection criteria, clear program details, and descriptions of HaH components to inform care expectations. Implementation barriers included conflict between app recommendations and clinical judgement, inability to adequately represent patient-risk profile, and provider burden. Implementation facilitators included ease of use, auto-populating features, and appropriate health literacy.

Conclusions: The findings indicate important information gaps and user needs to help inform 4PACS design and barriers and facilitators to implementing 4PACS in the decision-making process of choosing between hospital-level care options.

Keywords: Hospital at Home; clinical reasoning; decision aid; digital health; shared decision making.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

M.K., T.E., A.M., and K.W.R. report receiving grant support from the National Institutes of Health outside of the submitted work. S.M. reports receiving salary support from Medically Home Group, Inc. currently but not at the time the study was completed. At the time of study data collection and analysis, A.A. was employed at Atrium Health. All other authors have no conflicts to disclose.

Similar articles

References

    1. Leff B. Defining and disseminating the hospital-at-home model. CMAJ. 2009;180(2):156-157. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ritchie C, Leff B.. Home-based care reimagined: a full-fledged health care delivery ecosystem without walls. Health Aff (Millwood). 2022;41(5):689-695. - PubMed
    1. Shepperd S, Iliffe S, Doll HA, et al.Admission avoidance hospital at home. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;9(9):CD007491. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Goncalves-Bradley DC, Iliffe S, Doll HA, et al.Early discharge hospital at home. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;6(6):CD000356. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Leong MQ, Lim CW, Lai YF.. Comparison of Hospital-at-Home models: a systematic review of reviews. BMJ Open. 2021;11(1):e043285. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources