AIM: To gather evidence to support the implementation of standard six of the National Service Framework for Children, Young People and Maternity Services (Department of Health and Department for Education and Skills 2004), which states that care should be provided as close to home as possible. METHODS: A mixed methods study comprising of a systematic review, a national survey of provision of care closer to home (CCTH), four in-depth, qualitative case studies and a cost analysis. FINDINGS: The systematic review suggests that CCTH is no less clinically effective than hospital care. Services identified by the survey fall into three distinct models of provision. Case study data show that families preferred CCTH, but staff face difficulties at organisational and practice levels. Cost analysis suggests there can be cost savings with CCTH, but several factors influence these. CONCLUSION: CCTH may be an effective and feasible option for children and young people who are ill.
AIM: To gather evidence to support the implementation of standard six of the National Service Framework for Children, Young People and Maternity Services (Department of Health and Department for Education and Skills 2004), which states that care should be provided as close to home as possible. METHODS: A mixed methods study comprising of a systematic review, a national survey of provision of care closer to home (CCTH), four in-depth, qualitative case studies and a cost analysis. FINDINGS: The systematic review suggests that CCTH is no less clinically effective than hospital care. Services identified by the survey fall into three distinct models of provision. Case study data show that families preferred CCTH, but staff face difficulties at organisational and practice levels. Cost analysis suggests there can be cost savings with CCTH, but several factors influence these. CONCLUSION: CCTH may be an effective and feasible option for children and young people who are ill.
Authors: Malin de Flon; Gisela Glaffey; Linda Jarl; Kristin Sellbrant; Stefan Nilsson Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-06-09 Impact factor: 3.390