Hospital Readmissions of Elderly PatientsLASUITENCT05814328
Geriatric Transitional Care for Older Patients Discharged From the Emergency Department: Impact on Early Readmissions
A study testing Transitional Care in people with Hospital Readmissions of Elderly Patients, run by Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris at 1 site in France.
Trial summary
Elderly adults have high rates of emergency department (ED) visits. Specificities of this population challenge organizations of care in the ED, and older adults are at risk of pejorative outcomes after an ED stay. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 75 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Hospital Readmissions of Elderly Patients
- What is being tested?
- Transitional Care
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 1,322 participants
- Where
- 1 siteFrance
- Study dates
- 4 Mar 2025to Feb 2027
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 75 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Patient admitted to the emergency departement over 75 years old and living at home (including independent residence)
- Patient admitted to the Emergency Reception Service (ERS) for less than 48 hours for whom a return home has been decided
- Identified at risk of readmissions to the emergency departement with a Triage Risk Screening Tool (TRST) score > 2.
- Consent to the study possible at the time of his visit to the emergency room by the patient or a caregiver present at the time of inclusion.
- Patient affiliated with a social security (beneficiary or partner)
Who cannot join
- Person living in an nursing home
- Severe cognitive impairment according to DSM V criteria and absence of a close relative at the time of inclusion
- Unstabilized psychiatric pathology and absence of relatives at the time of inclusion
- Language barrier and absence of relatives at the time of inclusion
- Person under guardianship, under legal safeguard measure, deprived of liberty by judicial or administrative decision, persons subject to psychiatric care without their consent, persons admitted to a health or social establishment for purposes other than those of the research
- Patient under state medical assistance
- Patient already included in the research
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
France1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Bichat Hospital
Paris, 75018
Claire Patry, MD PHD, 33153111821, claire.patry@aphp.fr
Manuel Sanchez, MD PHD, 33140257089, manuel.sanchez@aphp.fr
About this study
Elderly adults have high rates of emergency department (ED) visits. Specificities of this population challenge organizations of care in the ED, and older adults are at risk of pejorative outcomes after an ED stay. Numerous interventions have been designed to improve quality of care and outcomes for the older population in these settings, with a specific attention to concerning discharge from the ED. These interventions are interdisciplinary, bridging emergency and geriatric care. The wide range and complexity of these interventions make them difficult to assess and compare, as highlighted by several reviews in the past ten years. Prior analyses helped to categorize different intervention strategies and three main designs: inhospital, community and transitional interventions started in the ED and pursued in collaboration with community primary care professionals . Theses analyses show that the use of multiple strategies and transitional models of care tend to lead to better outcomes, and underline that more robust studies are needed to confirm this hypothesis. In France a majority of EDs collaborate with Geriatric Mobile Teams (GMT) to improve quality of care for older patients. GMTs are dedicated to patients over 75 years old, and interventions in EDs are targeted on patients at risk of worse outcome. When ED physicians detect older patients at risk they may call for the GMT for further assessment and management. GMTs either work in a inhospital standard approach or with a transitional care management. This second strategy, less common in France, is thought to be be efficient and has never been assessed. We have designed a study to compare these methods, with the hypothesis that among at-risk older adults, hospital-community transition care initiated by GMTs during an ED visit with direct discharge home will be associated with a reduction in the risk of early readmission within 30 days, and lower risk of loss of independence at 3 and 6 months. It is a french multicentric study, with a quasi-experimental design, comparing hospitals without transitional care management to hospitals with hospital-community transitional intervention. We aim at enrolling 1322 patients aged 75 and more at risk of pejorative outcomes as determined by the Triage Risk Screening Toll (TRST). The main outcome is a revisit to the ED between day 7 and day 30, secondary outcomes are autonomy, mortality, use of hospital services and caregiving at home at 6 months.
Read the detailed description
The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of transitional care initiated by Mobile Geriatrics Team (MGTs) at the time of the ED visit on the incidence of early readmissions, on medical journey and autonomy within 6 months after the ED visit, for adults aged 75 or older and considered at risk for early readmission. This is a multicenter, prospective, controlled, non-randomized quasi-experimental study. Inclusion criteria are age 75 years and more, returning home after an ED visit, with a Triage Risk Screening Tool (TRST) score ≥ 2. Exclusion criteria are living in nursing home, being under legal guardianship or incapacity to consent. All participants will provide a written consent after receiving oral and written information. Participants with language barrier, severe cognitive or psychiatric disorders may be included provided that a relative is physically present at the time of the ED visit. Otherwise they will not be included. The study protocol has been submitted for approval to the ethic committee. Five centers (two university hospitals, three regional hospitals) work on an in-hospital strategy and do not perform transitional care. After identifying the patient at risk, the in-hospital MGT solely provides usual recommendations at the time of the ED visit, without offering home-based intervention or coordination with community actors. The participants included in these centers will form the control group.
Seven centers (three university hospitals, four regional hospitals) work on an transitional care method. These centers have an in and out-hospital MGT that carry out geriatric assessment, offer home-visits if necessary, and have a hospital-community coordination for the management of older patients. This coordination is defined by either regular joint clinical meetings, joint visits, shared professionals, or a shared information system. After identification of the at-risk patient, the first step in management consists in a telephone call by the GMT to the patient or his family and primary care professionals within six days of his return home. Depending on the geriatric assessment performed and the coordination organization specific to each center, multidisciplinary interventions can then be proposed and deployed. The patients included in these centers will form the intervention group.
All 12 centers (intervention and control) meet the following criteria for a standardized in-hospital management during the ED visit, including (i) identification of patients at risk based on clinical characteristics or identification scores with a procedure for reporting to the in-hospital GMT; (ii) a multidisciplinary GMT mobilized in the ED for patients at risk providing a standardized geriatric assessment; (iii) a discharge procedure with at least a medical report and referral to the general practitioner.
The principal investigator and the scientific committee will regularly verify that centers continue to meet the conditions of the group it is allocated.
After inclusion, the participants will benefit from the usual care specific to the inclusion center where they were recruited. In the intervention group, GMT intervention initiation consists in an early, standardized telephone call between D1 and D6 for each participant. To respect a pragmatic approach, the intervention of the MGT and the out-of-hospital management strategy are deliberately not standardized in order to evaluate the hospital-community coordination fitting each territory .
Clinical data will be collected at baseline and during follow-up at three (M3) and six (M6) months (Figure 1). The data collected at baseline during the ED visit (D1) by the MGT. This evaluation will be based on the patients' questioning and the medical record. If deemed necessary, the GMT may also rely on information transmitted by a relative or the general practitioner in order to cross-check the information, as is done routinely. The data relative to socio demographic items are age, sex; autonomy in the week prior to the ED visit using the Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) scales (18,19), self-reported difficulty related to housing, identification of relatives, family and professional caregivers preexisting the ED visit; the nutritional risk using the Mini Nutritional Assessment - Short form (MNA-SF) scale in its alternative version with measurement of calf circumference (20); the screening for cognitive disorders with the Abbreviated Mental Test 4 (AMT4) scale (21) and suggestive clinical diagnosis in the mild, moderate or severe stage, according to the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical manual of Mental disorders (DSM-V) criteria; the comorbidity level assessed the Charlson index (22) and the number of drugs in the patient's usual treatment; data on the ED visit that including duration the visit in hours and main diagnosis collected from medical records; the history of ED visits or hospitalizations in the previous month and the existence of a regular medical monitoring by the general practitioner (twice a year) or a geriatric team (previously hospitalized in a geriatric wards or appointment with a geriatrician).
One independent investigator will perform follow-up telephone interviews in both groups at M3 and M6 to precise the vital status, place of living (home, nursing home), ADL and IADL, interventions of professional and non-professional caregivers. In addition for participants in the intervention group the independent investigator will identify at M6 the MGT's actions after discharge from ED based on the MGT's medical record including the number and duration of telephone calls and home visits, the coordination with community professionals (medical appointment, rehabilitation care, request for social worker).
The primary endpoint will be the incidence of readmission to an ED between seven (D7) to thirty (D30) days after discharge from the ED visit leading to inclusion in the study, regardless of the reason for admission. This data will be collected from the National Health Data System (NHDS), thus allowing the identification of admissions to an ED on a national level and not exclusively in the centers participating in the research. Very early readmissions (from D1 to D6) will not be taken into account in the primary endpoint, as the time to first intervention in interventional group is a maximum of six days in the framework of the research protocol. Moreover, these very early readmissions are most often motivated by a rapid deterioration of the initial pathology, a diagnostic error or a possible side effect of a therapy (23). Hospital-community transitional care is not intended to avoid this type of very early readmission. The ED visits between D1 and D6 and after D30 will be collected in NHDS as secondary endpoints. The number of ED visits, unplanned hospitalizations and the time duration between inclusion and the first outcome will be also considered.
- Being tested
- Transitional Care
- Keywords
- Emergency, Elderly Patients, Geriatrics, transitional Care
- Medical subject headings
- Emergencies
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Transitional CareOther
Targeted inhospital intervention of GMT for patient aged 75 ans more with TRST score ≥2 with a follow-up after ED discharge. Transitional Care is defined by a geriatric team having intervention strategies linked to community care: home visits with community professionals and/or multidisciplinary clinical meetings and/or shared professionals and/or shared information systems.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Standard Care | No intervention | Targeted inhospital intervention of GMT for patient aged 75 ans more with TRST score ≥2 |
| Transitional Care | Experimental | Targeted inhospital intervention of GMT for patient aged 75 ans more with TRST score ≥2 with a follow-up after ED discharge. Transitional Care is defined by a geriatric team having intervention strategies linked to community care: home visits with community professionals and/or multidisciplinary clinical meetings and/or shared professionals and/or shared information systems. Receives: Other: Transitional Care |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Revisits to an emergency Department
Measured: From Day 7 to day 30
Secondary outcomes (34)
Delay to the first revisit to an ED
delay between ED discharge and the first revisit to an ED in days
Measured: day 7 to 6 months
Cumulated time of hospitalization
number of days of hospitalization from day 7 to 6 months
Measured: day 7 to 6 months
Independence evolution
defined by the loss of 1 point on the ADL or IADL scale
Measured: Day 0 to 3 months
Informal caregiver evolution
number of hours of weekly family caregiver presence
Measured: Day 0 to 3 months
Informal caregiver evolution
number of hours of weekly family caregiver presence
Measured: Day 0 to 6 months
Healthcare provider evolution
number of weekly visits of healthcare providers
Measured: Day 0 to 3 months
Healthcare provider evolution
number of weekly visits of healthcare providers
Measured: Day 0 to 6 months
Personal care assistant evolution
number of hours of weekly personal care assistant presence
Measured: Day 0 to 3 months
Personal care assistant evolution
number of hours of weekly personal care assistant presence
Measured: Day 0 to 6 months
Living in a nursing home
Number of Patients living in a nursing home
Measured: at 3 months and 6 months
Living at home
Number of patients living at home
Measured: at 3 months and 6 months
Hospitalization
Number of hospitalised patients
Measured: at 3 months and 6 months
Vital status
Number of deceased patients at 3 months and 6 months
Measured: at 3 months and 6 months
Number of ED visits
Number of ED visits recorded on national healthcare registers
Measured: from day 7 to 6 months
Number of primary care medical visits
Number of ED visits recorded on national healthcare registers
Measured: from day 7 to 6 months
Inhospital consultations
Number of inhospital consultations
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
Day hospital
Number of day hospital stays
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
Scheduled hospitalizations in short-term care,follow-up and rehabilitation care
Cumulative duration of stays in scheduled hospitalizations in short-term care,follow-up and rehabilitation care
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
Nature of scheduled hospitalizations in short-term care,follow-up and rehabilitation care
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
Unscheduled hospitalisation in short-term care, follow-up and rehabilitation care
Cumulative duration of stays in unscheduled hospitalisation in short-term care, follow-up and rehabilitation care
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
Nature of unscheduled hospitalizations in short-term care, follow-up and rehabilitation care
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
Number of patients with medical follow-up
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
Number of patient with autonomy, care or social assistance,
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
Number of patient with personalized health plan
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
Delay from ED to first GMT assessment
Number of days between discharge from the ED to first GMT phone call
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
GMT home visits
Number of GMT home visits
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
Contacts with patient and informal caregiver
Number of phone calls or email contact with patient and informal caregiver for the transitional care group
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
Contacts with primary healthcare providers
Number of phone calls or email contact with patient and primary healthcare providers for the transitional care group
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
Multidisciplinary GMT- community team meetings
Number of multidisciplinary GMT- community team meetings concerning GMT patients
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
Cumulative time of follow up
Delay between first assesment and end of the follow up
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
Cumulative GMT interventions
Number of interventions of the GMT during case follow up
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
Patient refusal
Interruption of GMT intervention due to patient refusal
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
Lost to follow up
Interruption of GMT intervention due to lost of follow up
Measured: from day 0 to 6 months
description of the socio-demographic characteristics of the patients
Measured: day 0
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted14 Apr 2023
- Study start4 Mar 2025
- Primary completionSep 2026 (estimated)
- Study completionFeb 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Hospital Readmissions of Elderly PatientsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de ParisThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 1,322 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Claire Patry, MD PHD, Principal investigator, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05814328
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 210989
- Other IDs
- 2021-A02657-34
- Acronym
- LASUITE
- Status last verified
- May 2025
- First submitted
- 3 Apr 2023
- Last updated
- 16 May 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Sanchez M, Eloy P, Godard V, Coutauchaud M, Lenouvel C, Charpigny M, Manchon P, Han THL, Raynaud-Simon A, Patry C. Geriatric-led transitional care for older adults discharged from the emergency department: impact on hospital readmissions and disability. Protocol for the controlled prospective quasi-experimental study LASUITE. BMC Geriatr. 2025 May 1;25(1):299. doi: 10.1186/s12877-025-05929-2.
PubMed 40312294
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 16 May 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Geriatric Transitional Care for Older Patients Discharged From the Emergency Department: Impact on Early Readmissions
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05814328
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- LASUITE / 210989
- Keywords
- Emergency, Elderly Patients, Geriatrics, transitional Care
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 1,322 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de ParisUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 4 Mar 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Sep 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Feb 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 14 Apr 2023 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Elderly adults have high rates of emergency department (ED) visits. Specificities of this population challenge organizations of care in the ED, and older adults are at risk of pejorative outcomes after an ED stay. Numerous interventions have been designed to improve quality of care and outcomes for the older population in these settings, with a specific attention to concerning discharge from the ED. These interventions are interdisciplinary, bridging emergency and geriatric care. The wide range and complexity of these interventions make them difficult to assess and compare, as highlighted by several reviews in the past ten years. Prior analyses helped to categorize different intervention strategies and three main designs: inhospital, community and transitional interventions started in the ED and pursued in collaboration with community primary care professionals . Theses analyses show that the use of multiple strategies and transitional models of care tend to lead to better outcomes, and underline that more robust studies are needed to confirm this hypothesis. In France a majority of EDs collaborate with Geriatric Mobile Teams (GMT) to improve quality of care for older patients. GMTs are dedicated to patients over 75 years old, and interventions in EDs are targeted on patients at risk of worse outcome. When ED physicians detect older patients at risk they may call for the GMT for further assessment and management. GMTs either work in a inhospital standard approach or with a transitional care management. This second strategy, less common in France, is thought to be be efficient and has never been assessed. We have designed a study to compare these methods, with the hypothesis that among at-risk older adults, hospital-community transition care initiated by GMTs during an ED visit with direct discharge home will be associated with a reduction in the risk of early readmission within 30 days, and lower risk of loss of independence at 3 and 6 months. It is a french multicentric study, with a quasi-experimental design, comparing hospitals without transitional care management to hospitals with hospital-community transitional intervention. We aim at enrolling 1322 patients aged 75 and more at risk of pejorative outcomes as determined by the Triage Risk Screening Toll (TRST). The main outcome is a revisit to the ED between day 7 and day 30, secondary outcomes are autonomy, mortality, use of hospital services and caregiving at home at 6 months.
Detailed description
The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of transitional care initiated by Mobile Geriatrics Team (MGTs) at the time of the ED visit on the incidence of early readmissions, on medical journey and autonomy within 6 months after the ED visit, for adults aged 75 or older and considered at risk for early readmission. This is a multicenter, prospective, controlled, non-randomized quasi-experimental study. Inclusion criteria are age 75 years and more, returning home after an ED visit, with a Triage Risk Screening Tool (TRST) score ≥ 2. Exclusion criteria are living in nursing home, being under legal guardianship or incapacity to consent. All participants will provide a written consent after receiving oral and written information. Participants with language barrier, severe cognitive or psychiatric disorders may be included provided that a relative is physically present at the time of the ED visit. Otherwise they will not be included. The study protocol has been submitted for approval to the ethic committee. Five centers (two university hospitals, three regional hospitals) work on an in-hospital strategy and do not perform transitional care. After identifying the patient at risk, the in-hospital MGT solely provides usual recommendations at the time of the ED visit, without offering home-based intervention or coordination with community actors. The participants included in these centers will form the control group.
Seven centers (three university hospitals, four regional hospitals) work on an transitional care method. These centers have an in and out-hospital MGT that carry out geriatric assessment, offer home-visits if necessary, and have a hospital-community coordination for the management of older patients. This coordination is defined by either regular joint clinical meetings, joint visits, shared professionals, or a shared information system. After identification of the at-risk patient, the first step in management consists in a telephone call by the GMT to the patient or his family and primary care professionals within six days of his return home. Depending on the geriatric assessment performed and the coordination organization specific to each center, multidisciplinary interventions can then be proposed and deployed. The patients included in these centers will form the intervention group.
All 12 centers (intervention and control) meet the following criteria for a standardized in-hospital management during the ED visit, including (i) identification of patients at risk based on clinical characteristics or identification scores with a procedure for reporting to the in-hospital GMT; (ii) a multidisciplinary GMT mobilized in the ED for patients at risk providing a standardized geriatric assessment; (iii) a discharge procedure with at least a medical report and referral to the general practitioner.
The principal investigator and the scientific committee will regularly verify that centers continue to meet the conditions of the group it is allocated.
After inclusion, the participants will benefit from the usual care specific to the inclusion center where they were recruited. In the intervention group, GMT intervention initiation consists in an early, standardized telephone call between D1 and D6 for each participant. To respect a pragmatic approach, the intervention of the MGT and the out-of-hospital management strategy are deliberately not standardized in order to evaluate the hospital-community coordination fitting each territory .
Clinical data will be collected at baseline and during follow-up at three (M3) and six (M6) months (Figure 1). The data collected at baseline during the ED visit (D1) by the MGT. This evaluation will be based on the patients' questioning and the medical record. If deemed necessary, the GMT may also rely on information transmitted by a relative or the general practitioner in order to cross-check the information, as is done routinely. The data relative to socio demographic items are age, sex; autonomy in the week prior to the ED visit using the Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) scales (18,19), self-reported difficulty related to housing, identification of relatives, family and professional caregivers preexisting the ED visit; the nutritional risk using the Mini Nutritional Assessment - Short form (MNA-SF) scale in its alternative version with measurement of calf circumference (20); the screening for cognitive disorders with the Abbreviated Mental Test 4 (AMT4) scale (21) and suggestive clinical diagnosis in the mild, moderate or severe stage, according to the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical manual of Mental disorders (DSM-V) criteria; the comorbidity level assessed the Charlson index (22) and the number of drugs in the patient's usual treatment; data on the ED visit that including duration the visit in hours and main diagnosis collected from medical records; the history of ED visits or hospitalizations in the previous month and the existence of a regular medical monitoring by the general practitioner (twice a year) or a geriatric team (previously hospitalized in a geriatric wards or appointment with a geriatrician).
One independent investigator will perform follow-up telephone interviews in both groups at M3 and M6 to precise the vital status, place of living (home, nursing home), ADL and IADL, interventions of professional and non-professional caregivers. In addition for participants in the intervention group the independent investigator will identify at M6 the MGT's actions after discharge from ED based on the MGT's medical record including the number and duration of telephone calls and home visits, the coordination with community professionals (medical appointment, rehabilitation care, request for social worker).
The primary endpoint will be the incidence of readmission to an ED between seven (D7) to thirty (D30) days after discharge from the ED visit leading to inclusion in the study, regardless of the reason for admission. This data will be collected from the National Health Data System (NHDS), thus allowing the identification of admissions to an ED on a national level and not exclusively in the centers participating in the research. Very early readmissions (from D1 to D6) will not be taken into account in the primary endpoint, as the time to first intervention in interventional group is a maximum of six days in the framework of the research protocol. Moreover, these very early readmissions are most often motivated by a rapid deterioration of the initial pathology, a diagnostic error or a possible side effect of a therapy (23). Hospital-community transitional care is not intended to avoid this type of very early readmission. The ED visits between D1 and D6 and after D30 will be collected in NHDS as secondary endpoints. The number of ED visits, unplanned hospitalizations and the time duration between inclusion and the first outcome will be also considered.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Standard Care | No intervention | –Targeted inhospital intervention of GMT for patient aged 75 ans more with TRST score ≥2 |
| Transitional Care | Experimental | Other: Transitional CareTargeted inhospital intervention of GMT for patient aged 75 ans more with TRST score ≥2 with a follow-up after ED discharge. Transitional Care is defined by a geriatric team having intervention strategies linked to community care: home visits with community professionals and/or multidisciplinary clinical meetings and/or shared professionals and/or shared information systems. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 75 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Patient admitted to the emergency departement over 75 years old and living at home (including independent residence)
- Patient admitted to the Emergency Reception Service (ERS) for less than 48 hours for whom a return home has been decided
- Identified at risk of readmissions to the emergency departement with a Triage Risk Screening Tool (TRST) score > 2.
- Consent to the study possible at the time of his visit to the emergency room by the patient or a caregiver present at the time of inclusion.
- Patient affiliated with a social security (beneficiary or partner)
Key exclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Person living in an nursing home
- Severe cognitive impairment according to DSM V criteria and absence of a close relative at the time of inclusion
- Unstabilized psychiatric pathology and absence of relatives at the time of inclusion
- Language barrier and absence of relatives at the time of inclusion
- Person under guardianship, under legal safeguard measure, deprived of liberty by judicial or administrative decision, persons subject to psychiatric care without their consent, persons admitted to a health or social establishment for purposes other than those of the research
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Transitional CareTargeted inhospital intervention of GMT for patient aged 75 ans more with TRST score ≥2 with a follow-up after ED discharge. Transitional Care is defined by a geriatric team having intervention strategies linked to community care: home visits with community professionals and/or multidisciplinary clinical meetings and/or shared professionals and/or shared information systems. | Other | Transitional Care |
Primary outcome
Revisits to an emergency Department
Time frame: From Day 7 to day 30
34 secondary outcomes
Delay to the first revisit to an ED
Time frame: day 7 to 6 months
Cumulated time of hospitalization
Time frame: day 7 to 6 months
Independence evolution
Time frame: Day 0 to 3 months
Informal caregiver evolution
Time frame: Day 0 to 3 months
Informal caregiver evolution
Time frame: Day 0 to 6 months
Healthcare provider evolution
Time frame: Day 0 to 3 months
Healthcare provider evolution
Time frame: Day 0 to 6 months
Personal care assistant evolution
Time frame: Day 0 to 3 months
Personal care assistant evolution
Time frame: Day 0 to 6 months
Living in a nursing home
Time frame: at 3 months and 6 months
Living at home
Time frame: at 3 months and 6 months
Hospitalization
Time frame: at 3 months and 6 months
Vital status
Time frame: at 3 months and 6 months
Number of ED visits
Time frame: from day 7 to 6 months
Number of primary care medical visits
Time frame: from day 7 to 6 months
Inhospital consultations
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
Day hospital
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
Scheduled hospitalizations in short-term care,follow-up and rehabilitation care
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
Nature of scheduled hospitalizations in short-term care,follow-up and rehabilitation care
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
Unscheduled hospitalisation in short-term care, follow-up and rehabilitation care
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
Nature of unscheduled hospitalizations in short-term care, follow-up and rehabilitation care
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
Number of patients with medical follow-up
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
Number of patient with autonomy, care or social assistance,
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
Number of patient with personalized health plan
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
Delay from ED to first GMT assessment
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
GMT home visits
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
Contacts with patient and informal caregiver
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
Contacts with primary healthcare providers
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
Multidisciplinary GMT- community team meetings
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
Cumulative time of follow up
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
Cumulative GMT interventions
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
Patient refusal
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
Lost to follow up
Time frame: from day 0 to 6 months
description of the socio-demographic characteristics of the patients
Time frame: day 0
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 16 May 2025.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 40312294Sanchez M, Eloy P, Godard V, Coutauchaud M, Lenouvel C, Charpigny M, Manchon P, Han THL, Raynaud-Simon A, Patry C. Geriatric-led transitional care for older adults discharged from the emergency department: impact on hospital readmissions and disability. Protocol for the controlled prospective quasi-experimental study LASUITE. BMC Geriatr. 2025 May 1;25(1):299. doi: 10.1186/s12877-025-05929-2.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Claire Patry, MD PHD principal investigator
Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Transitional Care in people with Hospital Readmissions of Elderly Patients, run by Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris at 1 site in France.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 7 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 16 May 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in France. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Claire Patry, MD PHD (33153111821, claire.patry@aphp.fr), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Revisits to an emergency Department (time frame: From Day 7 to day 30). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT05814328, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 16 May 2025.