Causes of death among homeless people: a population-based cross-sectional study of linked hospitalisation and mortality data in England. [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]

Background: Homelessness has increased by 165% since 2010 in England, with evidence from many settings that those affected experience high levels of mortality. In this paper we examine the contribution of different causes of death to overall mortality in homeless people recently admitted to hospitals in England with specialist integrated homeless health and care (SIHHC) schemes.  Methods: We undertook an analysis of linked hospital admission records and mortality data for people attending any one of 17 SIHHC schemes between 1st November 2013 and 30th November 2016. Our primary outcome was death, which we analysed in subgroups of 10th version international classification of disease (ICD-10) specific deaths; and deaths from amenable causes. We compared our results to a sample of people living in areas of high social deprivation (IMD5 group). Results: We collected data on 3,882 individual homeless hospital admissions that were linked to 600 deaths. The median age of death was 51.6 years (interquartile range 42.7-60.2) for SIHHC and 71.5 for the IMD5 (60.67-79.0).  The top three underlying causes of death by ICD-10 chapter in the SIHHC group were external causes of death (21.7%; 130/600), cancer (19.0%; 114/600) and digestive disease (19.0%; 114/600).  The percentage of deaths due to an amenable cause after age and sex weighting was 30.2% in the homeless SIHHC group (181/600) compared to 23.0% in the IMD5 group (578/2,512). Conclusion: Nearly one in three homeless deaths were due to causes amenable to timely and effective health care. The high burden of amenable deaths highlights the extreme health harms of homelessness and the need for greater emphasis on prevention of homelessness and early healthcare interventions

Outcomes of specialist discharge coordination and intermediate care schemes for patients who are homeless: analysis protocol for a population-based historical cohort

Introduction People who are homeless often experience poor hospital discharge arrangements, reflecting ongoing care and housing needs. Specialist integrated homeless health and care provision (SIHHC) schemes have been developed and implemented to facilitate the safe and timely discharge of homeless patients from hospital. Our study aims to investigate the health outcomes of patients who were homeless and seen by a selection of SIHHC services. Methods and analysis Our study will employ a historical population-based cohort in England. We will examine health outcomes among three groups of adults: (1) homeless patients seen by specialist discharge schemes during their hospital admission; (2) homeless patients not seen by a specialist scheme and (3)admitted patients who live in deprived neighbourhoods and were not recorded as being homeless. Primary outcomes will be: time from discharge to next hospital inpatient admission; time from discharge to next accident and emergency attendance and 28-day emergency readmission. Outcome data will be generated through linkage to hospital admissions data (Hospital Episode Statistics) and mortality data for November 2013 to November 2016. Multivariable regression will be used to model the relationship between the study comparison groups and each of the outcomes. Ethics and dissemination Approval has been obtained from the National Health Service (NHS) Confidentiality Advisory Group (reference 16/CAG/0021) to undertake this work using unconsented identifiable data. Health Research Authority Research Ethics approval (REC 16/EE/0018) has been obtained in addition to local research and development approvals for data collection at NHS sites. We will feedback the results of our study to our advisory group of people who have lived experience of homelessness and seek their suggestions on ways to improve or take this work further for their benefit. We will disseminate our findings to SIHHC schemes through a series of regional workshops

Homelessness and integrated care: an application of integrated care knowledge to understanding services for wicked issues

Purpose: People experiencing homelessness often have complex needs requiring a range of support. These may include health problems (physical illness, mental health and/or substance misuse) as well as social, financial and housing needs. Addressing these issues requires a high degree of coordination amongst services. It is, thus, an example of a wicked policy issue. The purpose of this paper is to examine the challenge of integrating care in this context using evidence from an evaluation of English hospital discharge services for people experiencing homelessness. Design/methodology/approach: The paper undertakes secondary analysis of qualitative data from a mixed methods evaluation of hospital discharge schemes and uses an established framework for understanding integrated care, the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care (RMIC), to help examine the complexities of integration in this area. Findings: Supporting people experiencing homelessness to have a good discharge from hospital was confirmed as a wicked policy issue. The RMIC provided a strong framework for exploring the concept of integration, demonstrating how intertwined the elements of the framework are and, hence, that solutions need to be holistically organised across the RMIC. Limitations to integration were also highlighted, such as shortages of suitable accommodation and the impacts of policies in aligned areas of the welfare state. Research limitations/implications: The data for this secondary analysis were not specifically focussed on integration which meant the themes in the RMIC could not be explored directly nor in as much depth. However, important issues raised in the data directly related to integration of support, and the RMIC emerged as a helpful organising framework for understanding integration in this wicked policy context. Practical implications: Integration is happening in services directly concerned with the discharge from hospital of people experiencing homelessness. Key challenges to this integration are reported in terms of the RMIC, which would be a helpful framework for planning better integrated care for this area of practice. Social implications: Addressing homelessness not only requires careful planning of integration of services at specific pathway points, such as hospital discharge, but also integration across wider systems. A complex set of challenges are discussed to help with planning the better integration desired, and the RMIC was seen as a helpful framework for thinking about key issues and their interactions. Originality/value: This paper examines an application of integrated care knowledge to a key complex, or wicked policy issue

Improving hospital discharge arrangements for people who are homeless: a realist synthesis of the intermediate care literature

This review presents a realist synthesis of “what works and why” in intermediate care for people who are homeless. The overall aim was to update an earlier synthesis of intermediate care by capturing new evidence from a recent UK government funding initiative (the “Homeless Hospital Discharge Fund”). The initiative made resources available to the charitable sector to enable partnership working with the National Health Service (NHS) in order to improve hospital discharge arrangements for people who are homeless. The synthesis adopted the RAMESES guidelines and reporting standards. Electronic searches were carried out for peer-reviewed articles published in English from 2000 to 2016. Local evaluations and the grey literature were also included. The inclusion criteria was that articles and reports should describe “interventions” that encompassed most of the key characteristics of intermediate care as previously defined in the academic literature. Searches yielded 47 articles and reports. Most of these originated in the UK or the USA and fell within the realist quality rating of “thick description”. The synthesis involved using this new evidence to interrogate the utility of earlier programme theories. Overall, the results confirmed the importance of (i) collaborative care planning, (ii) reablement and (iii) integrated working as key to effective intermediate care delivery. However, the additional evidence drawn from the field of homelessness highlighted the potential for some theory refinements. First, that “psychologically informed” approaches to relationship building may be necessary to ensure that service users are meaningfully engaged in collaborative care planning and second, that integrated working could be managed differently so that people are not “handed over” at the point at which the intermediate care episode ends. This was theorised as key to ensuring that ongoing care arrangements do not break down and that gains are not lost to the person or the system vis-à-vis the prevention of readmission to hospital

Pravastatin for early-onset pre-eclampsia:a randomised, blinded, placebo-controlled trial

Objective: Women with pre-eclampsia have elevated circulating levels of soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 (sFlt-1). Statins can reduce sFlt-1 from cultured cells and improve pregnancy outcome in animals with a pre-eclampsia-like syndrome. We investigated the effect of pravastatin on plasma sFlt-1 levels during pre-eclampsia. Design: Blinded (clinician and participant), proof of principle, placebo-controlled trial. Setting: Fifteen UK maternity units. Population: We used a minimisation algorithm to assign 62 women with early-onset pre-eclampsia (24 +0–31 +6 weeks of gestation) to receive pravastatin 40 mg daily (n = 30) or matched placebo (n = 32), from randomisation to childbirth. Primary outcome: Difference in mean plasma sFlt-1 levels over the first 3 days following randomisation. Results: The difference in the mean maternal plasma sFlt-1 levels over the first 3 days after randomisation between the pravastatin (n = 27) and placebo (n = 29) groups was 292 pg/ml (95% CI −1175 to 592; P = 0.5), and over days 1–14 was 48 pg/ml (95% CI −1009 to 913; P = 0.9). Women who received pravastatin had a similar length of pregnancy following randomisation compared with those who received placebo (hazard ratio 0.84; 95% CI 0.50–1.40; P = 0.6). The median time from randomisation to childbirth was 9 days [interquartile range (IQR) 5–14 days] for the pravastatin group and 7 days (IQR 4–11 days) for the placebo group. There were three perinatal deaths in the placebo-treated group and no deaths or serious adverse events attributable to pravastatin. Conclusions: We found no evidence that pravastatin lowered maternal plasma sFlt-1 levels once early-onset pre-eclampsia had developed. Pravastatin appears to have no adverse perinatal effects. Tweetable abstract: Pravastatin does not improve maternal plasma sFlt-1 or placental growth factor levels following a diagnosis of early preterm pre-eclampsia #clinicaltrial finds

Morbidity trends in the population of a specialised homeless primary care service

An increasing body of research demonstrates that homelessness is an independent risk factor for morbidity and premature death. This paper compares the frequency of diagnoses between 2003 and 2009 in the computerised records of a specialist practice for homeless people. The changing morbidity trends revealed offer a basis for comparison with other services and suggest benefits from collaborative working, particularly around substance misuse and mental health

Involving people with lived experience of homelessness in electronic health records research

ObjectivesWe held a public engagement workshop to involve people with lived experiences of homelessness and social exclusion, experts by experience (EBE), in our research. The purpose of the workshop was to provide context to the findings of a review series on Inclusion Health and to inform future research using electronic health records (EHRs) of homeless and socially excluded people.ApproachParticipants included 16 volunteers and one staff member from Groundswell (a registered charity that promotes inclusive solutions to homelessness), four academics, one clinical provider, and two note-takers/photographers. The full-day workshop was held at University College London. We used innovative participatory activities specifically designed for use with hidden and marginalised populations to stimulate open dialogue. Methods included general discussion, conceptual mapping, modelling, electronic voting, brainstorming, ranking, graphing, stakeholder analysis, and evaluation surveys. Activities were fast-paced and conducted in small groups, as the whole group, individually, or in pairs. The meaning of Inclusion Health, barriers that lead to exclusion, and values and actions that promote inclusion were discussed. Health statistics on homeless and other socially excluded groups were presented and informed conversations about EHR research, including data collection (new data versus collation of administrative data), data linkage, consent, anonymisation, data security, and ‘the surveillance society.’ResultsNotes from the workshop and the evaluation surveys indicated that the workshop was engaging, inclusive, and successful. When clearly explained, EBE were positive towards research using EHRs to improve Inclusion Health, including data linkage of sensitive health and social data. EBE expressed that housing, advocacy, and psychosocial therapies were the most important interventions for improving health of people who are homeless; however, we found limited evidence for these interventions in our review. Overall, findings demonstrate the value of involving the people who have been socially excluded to develop research priorities and to interpret findings.ConclusionUsing a participatory and dynamic approach to involve people with lived experience of homelessness and exclusion is an effective public engagement methodology for complex topics such as EHR research and data linkage. Information provided in the workshop was useful for interpreting findings, identifying strengths and gaps in health and social services, and developing research and practice recommendations