To the best of our knowledge, this is the first nationwide study on unplanned readmission and out-of-hour ED visits among children who underwent tracheostomy in Japan. This study adds to previous studies by analyzing risk factors for readmissions and out-of-hour ED visits, considering not only factors related to patient characteristics but also other factors that may affect medical resource use, such as differences between hospitals based on bed size, distance to hospitals, and type of clinical course.
We found that 20% of patients were readmitted within 90 days after tracheostomy, and more than 40% of patients were readmitted within 180 days after index hospitalization. While most previous studies were conducted over a short period, our results highlight the importance of long-term follow-up for children who undergo tracheostomy. The characteristics of our study cohort were similar to those in previous reports, with half of the cases being less than 1 years old, approximately 40% on mechanical ventilators and tube feeding, and almost 70% having NIs. Surprisingly, more than 60% of the tracheostomies were unplanned, which has not been reported previously. Appropriate assessment of tracheostomy and daily care in cases of deteriorating health conditions is important. Guidelines on the indications for pediatric tracheostomy in chronic conditions are required.
The most common cause of readmission was respiratory-related diseases, and the frequency of tracheostomy-related complications was low in our cohort. This is similar to the low frequency of tracheostomy complications in previous reports, and readmissions for respiratory-related diseases, such as respiratory failure and airway infection, being the most common causes of readmissions [4; 9; 10]. This indicates the importance of expectoration, education of care, and prevention of respiratory infection among CMCs.
Compared with previous studies, the readmission rates were lower than those in other developed countries: 30 days (17% vs. 18–45%, respectively) [1; 9; 22], 90 days (25% vs. 44%, respectively) [4], and 180 days (34% vs. 63–66%, respectively) [10; 23] after tracheostomy. This is partly because this study was limited to readmissions to the same hospital and readmissions for treatment, which may have underestimated hospitalization rates. Moreover, differences in the indications for tracheostomy, discharge criteria, and healthcare systems may have influenced this disparity. Furthermore, most studies did not consider avoidable or unavoidable readmissions. Owing to the internationally high readmission rates from long-term assessments, further studies on unavoidable readmissions and long-term outcomes are required.
Less than 1 years of age, NI, tube feeding, and ventilation support were identified as risk factors associated with readmission within 180 days after tracheostomy. Infants and mechanical ventilators have been reported to be risk factors for readmission and frequent resource use in previous reports [10; 19; 24]. In the case of infants, because they are known to be immunologically vulnerable and their caregivers have just started to raise their child and are often unfamiliar with care, even if they have no medical technologies, they are potentially at risk of using hospital resources. Complex cases, such as those with NIs and children depending on medical technology, are known to use a large proportion of medical resources [6; 9]. For these children, it is advisable to prepare sufficient care training and dense care plans, such as home-visiting nurses or doctor plans, before initial discharge [25; 26].
In our cohort, 220 (20%) patients visited the ED within 180 days of
tracheostomy. Frequent ED visits are reportedly associated with readmission [18]. The risk factors tended to be similar to those for readmission, although children using only HOT had a higher risk of ED visits compared with those on mechanical ventilation, and patients living far from the hospital had a lower risk of ED visits. Since it has been reported that patients with long distances to hospitals often visited multiple hospitals [17], it is possible that the frequency of visits was underestimated in this study. Additionally, because severely complex cases, such as children depending on home ventilators, are often supported by home-visiting doctors and nurses in Japan, home ventilators may not be a risk factor for ED visits.
We also found that unplanned tracheostomy was associated with a higher risk of frequent out-of-hour ED visits than planned cases. While guidelines for the management of pediatric patients undergoing tracheostomy in the acute care setting exist [27], there has been no evidence of an association between the clinical course before tracheostomy and hospital resource use. Further research is needed to identify why unplanned tracheostomy are performed and why ED visits are frequent, which may reveal important factors in addressing this issue. In children with unstable airways, tracheostomy after appropriate evaluation during non-emergency conditions reduces the risk of frequent out-of-hour ED visits.
Less than 1 years of age was a common risk factor, and children depending on medical technologies have some risk of medical resource use. Emergency visits and subsequent hospital admissions have been reported to increase the length of hospital stay and lead to increased costs [28]. It is important to provide close care planning and patient education for children with these risk factors to minimize the use of medical resources, not only to improve patients’ health outcomes and quality of life but also to address the issue of social costs. Furthermore, the care of children with medical technology, such as tracheostomy independence, places a heavy burden on families [29]. Further research into the needs of the family is required as it is necessary to secure personnel and improve the uneven distribution of home medical care in order to expand the welfare system and services so that the burden is not placed solely on the family to provide care.
This study had a few limitations. First, due to the characteristics of this database, we were only able to track readmissions and visits to the same hospital. However, CMCs are generally less likely to be transferred to other hospitals; hence, we focused on patients who planned on attending outpatient clinics at the same hospital as the discharge destination. Second, disease classification was based on previous reports as there is no validated classification of diseases. Third, we were unable to obtain detailed information on the characteristics of the home ventilator, and we did not have data on the family background environment (structure, income, and educational standards of their parents). Fourth, regional differences in the density of support by home-visiting doctors and nurses may have been associated with readmissions; however, we could not account for this because we did not have detailed data on home care medicine. Fifth, we selected unplanned admissions among readmissions within 30 days after tracheostomy; however, between 31 and 90 days after the index discharge, we used admissions for treatments in the absence of the same information, which may have included a small number of admissions for respite. Finally, our database system did not capture daytime ED visits, and there were no data on the reasons for these visits; therefore, we were unable to investigate them.