Comparing patient preference between at-home and in-hospital settings: systematic review and meta-analysis on injectable medications
MetadataShow full item record
AbstractOut-of-hospital self-care in patients receiving injectable antibiotics or biologically derived medicines (biologics) is reported to significantly improve quality of life and reduce hospitalizations, but unexpected complications produce some negative outcomes and patient experience. This study aimed to compare patients' experience with long-term injectable therapies, in and out of the hospital setting. Two systematic reviews and meta-analyses were carried out using the most common out-of-hospital self-administered long-term injectable antibiotic and biologic therapies for patients diagnosed with infections or IBD, RA, or psoriasis. The first review investigated patient preference for self-administering subcutaneous injections at home (intervention) vs. intravenous injections in a hospital inpatient or outpatient setting. There was a statistically significant difference between the homecare (intervention) and hospital (control) group (p = 0.05) favoring the intervention. The second review was on injectable antibiotics. The results demonstrated that the use of injectable antibiotics, at home (intervention) or in hospital (control) produced similar benefits (p = 0.30 cure and p = 0.90 treatment failure) and harm (hospital admission after and during treatment p = 0.64, p = 0.99 respectively, disease complications p = 0.77 and medications side effects p = 0.15). This research found no substantial differences in patient outcomes based on the setting. Home care is an important option to support patient autonomy and well-being. The recent global COVID-19 pandemic further highlighted the importance of an option to continue long-term disease management without hospitalization.
CitationEbhabha, V., Morrissey, H., & Ball, P. (2023) Comparing patient preference between at-home and in-hospital settings: systematic review and meta-analysis on injectable medications. Archives of Pharmacy Practice, 14(3), pp. 98-111. https://doi.org/10.51847/VKorxlT0tX
PublisherArchives of Global Professionals
JournalArchives of Pharmacy Practice
Description© 2023 Archives of Pharmacy Practice. This article is published under a Creative Commons licence and can be accessed on the publisher's website: https://doi.org/10.51847/VKorxlT0tX
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/