Factors associated with acute care service use after epilepsy hospitalisation in people with intellectual disability.
P Liao, J Trollor, S Reppermund and 3 others
PMID 36330725WHAT IT FOUND
Hospital readmission and emergency presentations after epilepsy admission were common in people with intellectual disability, especially those with self-harm history, mental or developmental disorders, asthma, longer stays, or incarceration history.
Key findings
01Within 30 days after discharge from an epilepsy admission, 423 of 3293 people with intellectual disability had at least one unplanned readmission and 599 had an emergency department presentation.
02Adjusted analyses linked higher 30-day readmission risk to female sex, age 16 to 44 years, index length of stay of 3 days or more, acute index care, incarceration history, mental and developmental disorders excluding autism spectrum disorder, and asthma.
03Self-harm had the largest adjusted 365-day readmission risk among comorbidities, with a relative risk of 2.15 and a 95% confidence interval of 1.41 to 3.29.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The cohort was derived from health and disability service records, so it likely represents people with more severe disability or health conditions and may not apply to people with mild intellectual disability. The study used administrative data and lacked clinical details such as epilepsy subtype and treatments. Comorbidities recorded only in community or outpatient care may have been missed, especially mental health conditions. Emergency department data covered only 60% of New South Wales public hospitals during part of the period, so emergency department presentations may have been undercounted. The study could not examine post-discharge community care or medication use, so it cannot show what happened after discharge or whether continuity of care explained the risk.
Declared interests
The work was supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council and the University of New South Wales Scientia PhD Scholarship. The authors declared no conflict of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not treat these associations as evidence that any intervention reduces readmission. This observational study found no causal effect, and the authors did not test treatment pathways or post-discharge care.