Effects of a program to strengthen general practice care on hospitalisation rates: a comparative observational study

Figures & data

Table 1. Patient characteristics at baseline.

	Intervention Group (HZV)	Control Group (Non-HZV)
N	494,483	380,388
Age
Mean (SD)	59.1 (16.8)	59.9 (17.1)
% women	57.5	58.9
% retired	49.3	50.2
% German	87.6	87.2
Charlson Score
Mean (SD)	1.49 (1.96)	1.48 (1.91)
Intervention duration in Years, Mean (SD)	3.31 (0.62)	–

Figure 1. Hospitalization rate.

Figure 2. Rehospitalization rate within 4 weeks after discharge.

Figure 3. Rate of potentially avoidable hospitalizations.

Table 2. Hospitalization rates.

	2011	2012	2013	2014
Hospitalization rate
Intervention Cohort	0.191	0.203	0.218	0.222
Control Cohort	0.214	0.225	0.248	0.261
Absolute difference	−0.023	−0.022	−0.030	−0.039
Relative difference	−10.7%	−9.8%	−12.1%	−14.9%
	p < 0.0001	p < 0.0001	p < 0.0001	P < 0.0001
Re-hospitalization rate within 4 weeks after discharge
Intervention Cohort	0.145	0.162	0.173	0.170
Control Cohort	0.159	0.171	0.188	0.192
Absolute difference	−0.014	−0.009	−0.015	−0.022
Relative difference	−8.8%	−5.3%	−8.0%	−11.5%
	p < 0.0001	p < 0.0001	p < 0.0001	p < 0.0001
Rate of potentially avoidable hospitalizations
Intervention Cohort	0.136	0.139	0.149	0.150
Control Cohort	0.147	0.152	0.160	0.161
Absolute difference	−0.011	−0.013	−0.011	−0.011
Relative difference	−7.5%	−8.6%	−6.9%	−6.8%
	p < 0.0001	p < 0.0001	p < 0.0001	p < 0.0001
Number of days spent in hospital
Intervention Cohort	12.63	12.97	13.27	13.13
Control Cohort	13.45	13.55	14.02	14.01
Absolute difference	−0.82	−0.58	−0.75	−0.88
Relative difference	−6.1%	−4.3%	−5.3%	−6.3%
	p < 0.0001	p < 0.0001	p < 0.0001	p < 0.0001

Legend. Descriptive figures. P-values relate to adjusted effect estimates of group allocation (intervention cohort versus control cohort) in the regression modelling of the longitudinal trend.