The hospital-at-home (HaH) model has gained traction as a viable alternative to traditional inpatient care, allowing patients to receive care in their own homes. Despite its growing popularity, there is a lack of comprehensive research addressing effectiveness, safety and factors critical to the successful implementation of HaH programmes. We conducted a scoping review to comprehensively map and summarise the evidence on both admission avoidance and early-supported discharge up until now.

A scoping review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis: extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines.

Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science were systematically searched up to July 2024

We included English-language RCTs published from 2005 onwards, involving adults (≥18 years) receiving acute care at home who would otherwise require hospital admission. Eligible studies evaluated admission avoidance or early supported discharge within HaH settings for acutely ill patients. Studies focusing on outpatient care, non-acute conditions or interventions not aligning with the widely accepted HaH definition were excluded. COVID-19-related studies were also excluded to avoid context-specific bias.

Two reviewers independently extracted data on study characteristics, interventions and outcomes including mortality, length of stay, escalation rates, costs and patient and caregiver satisfaction. Implementation facilitators and barriers were also collected. Discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. Results were synthesised descriptively in accordance with PRISMA-ScR guidelines.

Nine RCTs were identified. The review shows that the HaH model is at least as safe as usual care, with lower or comparable mortality rates. Length of stay varied, with some studies reporting longer stays in the HaH group due to cautious clinical practices. Cost analyses often indicate lower healthcare costs with staffing as the largest expense. Patient and caregiver satisfaction was high, but essential implementation factors were not clearly addressed.

The HaH model represents a promising alternative to acute inpatient care for suitable patients. Future research should focus on conducting larger RCTs, expanding the range of conditions suitable for HaH. Despite favourable clinical outcomes, substantial implementation barriers remain underexplored in current RCTs. This underscores the need to identify strategies for successful implementation, including the integration of technological advancements and qualitative insights into patient and caregiver experiences.

Myocardial protection against ischaemia–reperfusion injury is a key determinant of heart function and outcome following cardiac surgery in children. However, myocardial injury still occurs routinely following aortic cross-clamping, as demonstrated by the ubiquitous rise in circulating troponin. del Nido cardioplegia was designed to protect the immature myocardium and is widely used in the USA but has not previously been available in the UK, where St. Thomas’ blood cardioplegia is most common. The del Nido versus St. Thomas’ blood cardioplegia in the young (DESTINY) trial will evaluate whether one solution is better than the other at improving myocardial protection by reducing myocardial injury, shortening ischaemic time and improving clinical outcomes.

The DESTINY trial is a multicentre, patient-blinded and assessor-blinded, parallel-group, individually randomised controlled trial recruiting up to 220 children undergoing surgery for congenital heart disease. Participants will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to either del Nido cardioplegia or St. Thomas’ blood cardioplegia, with follow-up until 30 days following surgery. The primary outcome is area under the time–concentration curve for plasma high-sensitivity troponin I in the first 24 hours after aortic cross-clamp release. Secondary outcome measures include the incidence of low cardiac output syndrome and Vasoactive-Inotropic Score in the first 48 hours, total aortic cross-clamp time, duration of mechanical ventilation and lengths of stay in the paediatric intensive care unit and the hospital.

The trial was approved by the West Midlands—Coventry and Warwickshire National Health Service Research Ethics Committee (21/WM/0149) on 30 June 2021. Findings will be disseminated to the academic community through peer-reviewed publications and presentation at national and international meetings. Parents will be informed of the results through a newsletter in conjunction with a national charity.

ISRCTN13638147; Pre-results.