RNSystematic ReviewScandinavian journal of caring sciences2026

Mapping Scandinavian Hospital-at-Home Organisations and Interventions for Patients With Acute Somatic Illness-A Scoping Review.

Kristina Kock Hansen, Dorthe Eg Holm, Maria Klitgaard Christensen and 7 others

PMID 42704143

WHAT IT FOUND

Scandinavian Hospital-at-Home programmes used specialised acute nursing teams to deliver intravenous fluids, antibiotics, blood tests and vital-sign monitoring at home, mostly for adults aged 65 or older with infections, dehydration or COPD exacerbations.

Key findings

01Specialised acute nursing teams treated patients at home in all included Scandinavian Hospital-at-Home studies.

02Common interventions included intravenous fluid and medication administration, point-of-care blood tests, and measurement of vital signs.

03Most patients offered Hospital-at-Home were adults aged 65 or older referred for infection, dehydration or acute exacerbation of COPD.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs

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.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The review used a narrow Hospital-at-Home definition that required follow-up, so single-contact mobile services were excluded. The included studies were heterogeneous in design, country, staffing and patient groups, so they could not show which patient categories benefit most. Only four of ten studies described patient severity. No adverse events or infections were reported, so safety cannot be judged from this review. Scandinavian health systems are not homogeneous, and local or regional variation limits direct comparison. The role of GPs in Hospital-at-Home was poorly described in the included studies.

Declared interests

The authors reported nothing to disclose and no conflicts of interest.

The easy way to misread this

Do not conclude that Hospital-at-Home reduces admissions, costs or complications. This is a scoping review mapping services, not an effectiveness comparison, and none of the included studies reported adverse events or infections.

Read it on PubMed →