This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Non-randomized Protocols and Methods (ehealth) (671) Telehealth and Telemonitoring (2088) E-Health / Health Services Research and New Models of Care (718) Formative Evaluation of Digital Health Interventions (3229) Health Services Research (557) Cost-Effectiveness and Economics (355)

Published on in Vol 14 (2025)

Preprints (earlier versions) of this paper are available at https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/71847, first published .
Addressing Safety, Quality, and Cost of Care Through a Telehealth Outpatient Transitional Care Model: Protocol for a Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial

Addressing Safety, Quality, and Cost of Care Through a Telehealth Outpatient Transitional Care Model: Protocol for a Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial

Addressing Safety, Quality, and Cost of Care Through a Telehealth Outpatient Transitional Care Model: Protocol for a Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial

Authors of this article:

Kate Davis1 Author Orcid Image ;   Sepehr Shakib2, 3 Author Orcid Image ;   Greg Sharplin1 Author Orcid Image ;   Lachlan Darch1 Author Orcid Image ;   Nicholas Marlow1 Author Orcid Image ;   Marion Eckert1, 4 Author Orcid Image
Article Authors Cited by Tweetations Metrics

    Protocol

    1Rosemary Bryant AO Research Centre, Clinical and Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia

    2Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, Australia

    3School of Biomedicine, Department of Clinical Pharmacology, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia

    4College of Nursing adn Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia

    Corresponding Author:

    Kate Davis, BNsg, MClSc, PhD

    Rosemary Bryant AO Research Centre

    Clinical and Health Sciences

    University of South Australia

    City East Campus, Playford Building P4-27

    Adelaide, 5000

    Australia

    Phone: 61 0417893274

    Email: kate.davis@unisa.edu.au


    Background: People with multimorbidity have complex health care needs, resulting in high health service use, hospital readmission rates, and support needs. To prevent unnecessary hospital readmissions, effective coordination during the transition from hospital to primary care is essential; the transitional care model (TCM) is an effective approach to achieve this. This study will adapt the TCM, focusing on a nurse-led telehealth-based follow-up transition coordination service to enhance continuity between hospital and primary care, aiming to reduce unnecessary hospital readmissions and improve patient transitions.

    Objective: This study aims to assess the impact of a TCM on 3-month readmission rates in people with multimorbidity after discharge in an Australian context. Other objectives include evaluating the rate of re-presentation to hospital and overall length of hospital stay within 1, 6, and 12 months of discharge from the index admission; conducting a cost analysis of the transitional service model of care; evaluating the patient experience with the transition service; assessing patients’ symptom burden before and after transitional support service intervention; and evaluating patients’ quality of life, self-efficacy, and symptom management before and after intervention.

    Methods: The study design is a multicenter, pragmatic randomized controlled trial of patients with multimorbidity; therefore, real-world clinical practices, and operations will be the considerations within the research design elements. A mixed methods approach using quantitative and qualitative data collection methods will be used. The study setting incorporates 2 hospitals, initially commencing at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital (a 355-bed acute and subacute teaching hospital) and then at the Royal Adelaide Hospital (an 880-bed acute care teaching hospital), both located within the Central Adelaide Local Health Network, South Australia. We will include 3 to 6 medical units and wards. The intervention will focus on nurse-led transition assessment and care planning and telehealth transition coordination support for people with multimorbidity for 6 to 10 weeks following hospital discharge.

    Results: This project received ethics approval (17554) on June 29, 2023, and was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry on February 15, 2024 (12624000142538). The study commenced on July 1, 2023; data collection started in February 2024 and was completed on March 31, 2025. Finalized results are expected in March 2026.

    Conclusions: The Central Adelaide Local Health Network currently lacks a process to assess or manage readmission risks for people with multimorbidity, despite evidence linking transitional care to reduced rehospitalizations. Our feasibility study highlighted the effectiveness of a transition coordinator role in supporting patients’ return to home and community. Progressing this work, an adapted TCM, with telehealth-based follow-up and home and health care support, will enhance continuity between hospital and primary care, aiming to reduce unnecessary readmissions and improve patient transitions.

    Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12624000142538; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=383721

    International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/71847

    JMIR Res Protoc 2025;14:e71847

    doi:10.2196/71847

    Keywords

    transitional care model; multimorbidity; primary care; secondary care; nurse led 


    Background

    Multimorbidity, the presence of 2 or more chronic conditions, is common and becomes more common with increasing age [1]. It is estimated that 8% of Australians (9.7 million people) had 2 or more chronic disease conditions in 2022. This ranged from 11% of people aged between 0 and 14 years to 79% of people aged ≥85 years [2]. Due to increasing life expectancy and improvements in health care, the prevalence of multimorbidity is rising [3,4]. People with multimorbidity have health outcomes characterized by functional decline, decreased quality of life, and increased mortality [5]. Multimorbidity is also costly for health systems and society due to associations with high patient readmission rates [1], high health care use [6,7], and decreased productivity [8-10]. Historically, the health system has been underpinned and strengthened by the primacy of the single disease model of illness [4,11]. However, there is consensus that the single disease model is unsuitable for people with multimorbidity; a coordinated model of transitional care at the primary and secondary health care interface is required to reduce health service use, hospital readmission, and care fragmentation and support positive patient experiences [4,12].

    Several transition interventions have been trialed to reduce high short-term readmission rates [13,14]; however, no discrete intervention or bundle of interventions has been found to reliably reduce rehospitalization. Beneficial interventions for patients with multimorbidity include transition coaches, home visits, and postdischarge telephone calls. However, these patients also often take multiple medications (polypharmacy) and are frequently readmitted due to medication-related issues [15,16]. Depression and anxiety are also common in this group and can lead to poorer health outcomes [17,18]. To address these challenges, interventions such as home medication reviews and mental health care plans may improve overall care for patients with multimorbidity. Nonetheless, services required by people with multimorbidity go beyond their needs in relation to polypharmacy management. Services need to support continuity of care, including multifaceted, time-limited transitional care and multiple health and social service supports and coordination [19,20].

    Many services that were previously only provided face-to-face or through outpatient services have successfully, after the COVID-19 pandemic, transitioned to a telehealth service [21]. Still, issues with telehealth delivery persist, including device and internet capabilities at the end of the consumer, the unfamiliarity of the user interface, and uncertainty regarding the cost-effectiveness at the end of the provider [21,22].

    Although intensive interventions, including multidisciplinary care and home visits, have been shown to reduce short-term readmissions, they may not be cost-effective in all settings and are difficult to implement across an organization. Low-intensity interventions, such as phone calls, are easy to implement; however, they have not been shown to impact readmission rates by themselves [23]. What is needed is a low-cost intervention that combines multiple interventions into a coordinated package, which can be delivered without requiring face-to-face or outpatient consultations and which, if successful, can be readily spread across an organization.

    The transitional care model (TCM) is a nurse-led multidisciplinary model of care developed at the University of Pennsylvania [24]. It focuses on improving the transition of older adults with complex health needs from hospital to home, aiming to reduce hospital readmissions, improve overall patient outcomes, and demonstrate lower overall health care costs by providing comprehensive coordinated care during the critical period following hospital discharge [19,25,26]. Through personalized care coordination, comprehensive assessments (including risk of readmission), ongoing time-limited follow-up, nursing care, and interventions, the TCM has proven effective in enhancing patient care quality while lowering health care costs [26].

    To date, there is no evidence that the TCM has been implemented or adapted for implementation within the Australian health care system. However, related transitional care interventions have been trialed. An umbrella review by Berthelsen et al [27], which synthesized findings from 59 randomized controlled trials and 3 quasi-experimental studies relating to key components of the TCM, included 5 systematic reviews conducted in Australia. In these reviews, 5 Australian studies were identified. However, these studies were not direct implementations of the TCM.

    The Australian studies included the following: (1) evaluations of general practitioner (GP) involvement in discharge planning to reduce emergency service use [28,29]; (2) a care coordination intervention not based on the TCM [30]; (3) several occupational therapy–focused interventions [31]; and (4) a study related to residential care management [32]. Berthelsen et al [27] also refer to broader evidence regarding GP engagement in transitional care, citing studies such as Allen et al [33], Manderson et al [34], Morkisch et al [19], and Parker et al [35].

    In addition, Australia has implemented various care coordination programs, such as Planned Care for Better Health [36] and the inTouch Residential Aged Care Facility Pathway [37], although these initiatives are not based on the TCM. Other programs related to hospital discharge, such as those reported by Courtney et al [38], also diverge from the TCM framework.

    A recent feasibility study examined a nurse-led transition care coordinator role designed to improve the quality of transitional care for individuals with multimorbidity at risk of hospital readmission [39]. The study was successful, providing evidence of the role’s acceptability, feasibility, fidelity, and sustainability from both patients and staff in the Australian context. Results highlighted a gap in local health service provision, whereby there was no current process for assessing or managing the risk of readmission for people with multimorbidity, despite international evidence linking effective transitional care to reduced rehospitalization rates [39]. In addition, the study showed that the participants demonstrated significant support needs during the transition period, suggesting that a crucial shift is needed from traditional discharge planning to more tailored transition planning and care coordination for people with multimorbidity [39].

    Australia does not have the TCM embedded within its acute care services. This is significant because transition coordination between the primary and secondary health care sectors has been shown to decrease hospital readmissions and increase primary health care use [40]. This study is being implemented at 2 acute hospital sites, both located within the Central Adelaide Local Health Network (CALHN), South Australia; the purpose of the study is to implement an adapted nurse-led TCM to minimize unnecessary hospital readmissions and emergency department presentations for people with multimorbidity [12].

    Aim and Objectives

    The aim of this study is to develop and test an adapted nurse-led transition model of care to optimally support people living with multimorbidity after hospital discharge via telehealth and ensure continuity of care between the secondary (acute) and primary health care sectors to minimize direct contact with hospital services.

    The objectives of this study are as follows:

    • To implement an adapted nurse-led TCM intervention
    • To assess the intervention’s impact on the rate of re-presentation to the hospital (emergency department or hospital admission) within 3 months of discharge from the index admission
    • To quantify the rate of re-presentation to hospital (emergency department or hospital admission) within 1, 6, and 12 months of discharge from the index admission
    • To calculate a cost analysis of the transition service model of care
    • To evaluate the participants’ symptom burden, self-efficacy, quality of life, and experience of continuity of care in relation to the intervention

    Hypothesis

    We hypothesize that the provision of a nurse-led transition support service (after hospital discharge) for patients with multimorbidity will decrease the short-term hospital readmission rate for this patient cohort.


    Ethical Considerations

    This project received ethics approval on June 29, 2023, from the CALHN Human Research Ethics Committee (17554). It was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry on February 15, 2024 (12624000142538). Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants to ensure that they understand the study requirements, risks, and benefits. If potential participants accept an invitation to participate in the study, they will be provided with a participant information sheet and consent form for consideration. They will then be approached 24 hours later to confirm their willingness to participate. The study commenced on July 1, 2023; data collection started in February 2024 and was completed on March 31, 2025. Finalized results are expected in March 2026.

    Design and Setting

    This study is a multicenter pragmatic randomized controlled trial (pRCT) of patients with multimorbidity for deployment at 2 acute hospital sites, initially commencing at The Queen Elizabeth Hospital (a 355-bed acute and subacute teaching hospital) and then at The Royal Adelaide Hospital (an 880-bed acute care teaching hospital), both located within the CALHN, South Australia. Between 3 and 6 medical units or wards will be included per site. This pRCT uses a mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative data collection) approach.

    Data Collection

    The pRCT will use a mixed methods approach to data collection, primarily quantitative with a qualitative descriptive component. Data will be gathered through validated patient assessment and transition instruments (Table 1), electronic medical record reviews, phone call support and monitoring, and interviews.

    Table 1. Data collection instruments, characteristics, and analysis methods.
    InstrumentNumber of items and response optionsAnalysis method
    Community Assessment Risk Screen [41,42]Three items (ranging 0-9): 0-3 (low risk); 4-9 (high risk)Quantitative
    Customized transition nursing assessment [43]A total of 28 summary itemsQuantitative and qualitative: open-ended narrative comments from participants
    EQ-5D-3L health questionnaire [44]Five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain or discomfort, and anxiety or depression and patient’s self-rated health on a vertical visual analog scaleQuantitative and qualitative: open-ended narrative comments from participants
    Patient Continuity of Care Questionnaire (short) [45]A total of 12 itemsQuantitative and qualitative: open-ended narrative comments from participants
    Barthel Index [46]A scale describing 10 tasks scored according to the amount of time or assistance required by the patient; total score from 0 to 100, with lower scores representing greater nursing dependencyQuantitative
    Edmonton Frailty Scale [47,48]A scale sampling 10 domains, where the maximum score is 17, representing the highest level of frailtyQuantitative
    Kessler Psychological Distress Scale [49]A 10-Item measure designed to assess nonspecific psychological distressQuantitative
    Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool [50]Three independent criteria are assessed: BMI score, weight loss score, and acute disease effect score; all scores are added, where 0 indicates low risk, 1 indicates medium risk, and a score of 2≥ indicates high riskQuantitative
    General Self-Efficacy Scale [51]A 10-item scale for a self-rated measurement of self-efficacy; total score between 10 and 40, with higher scores indicating higher self-efficacyQuantitative and qualitative: open-ended narrative comments from participants
    Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [52]Measures symptom burden of chronic disease and has evolved into an 11-point numeric rating scale, ranging from 0 (no symptom) to 10 (worst possible)Quantitative

    As no suitable preexisting tools were available, customized instruments were developed in REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture; Vanderbilt University) to capture transition assessment data, medical record readmission data, and phone call monitoring data [53]. Table 1 provides an overview of the validated data collection instruments, their key characteristics, and the planned analysis. All 10 instruments will collect quantitative data, with 4 also incorporating qualitative data.

    Throughout the study, researchers and Supporting Transitions and Referrals nurses (STARnurses; recruited to support transitions and referrals) will prioritize patient sensitivity, build rapport, and minimize participant burden.

    Qualitative Data Analysis

    Thematic analysis, following the methodology by Braun and Clarke [54], will be used to categorize, analyze, and synthesize data from interviews and qualitative survey responses. Up to 15 interviews will be conducted or until thematic saturation is achieved.

    Interview tools, including 12 open-ended questions, will be designed, piloted, and validated by us before data collection. All interviews will be audio recorded and transcribed using artificial intelligence transcription software, with transcriptions reviewed and validated by participants. Once finalized, transcripts will be uploaded to NVivo (Lumivero) software for coding and analysis. To protect confidentiality, all personal and identifiable information will be removed, and participants will be assigned pseudonyms (numerical IDs).

    Each transcript will be systematically reviewed and coded, followed by an inductive categorization process. To support theme development, transcripts and categorized data will be read multiple times, allowing for the identification of emerging themes within the categories.

    Statistical Analysis

    An intention-to-treat approach will be used. Linear regression analyses will be conducted to estimate the effects of the intervention on primary and secondary outcomes. A fixed effects model will be used to account for stratification at the hospital and unit levels. Sensitivity analyses will be performed to assess the robustness of the findings. Table 2 presents the alignment of data analysis with primary and secondary study outcomes.

    Table 2. Primary and secondary outcomes—measurement and statistical analysis.
    OutcomeData source, measurement, and analysis
    Primary

    		The percentage of patients having hospital re-presentation (emergency department presentation with or without hospital admission) within 3 months of discharge from the index admission
    • Re-presentation data available from the electronic medical record
    • Statistical analysis: comparison of proportions between treatment and control groups and time to re-presentation analysis using the log-rank test with the method of Kaplan-Meier [55]
    Secondary

    		Health care use


    		The rate of hospital re-presentation within 1, 6, and 12 months of discharge from the index admission
    • Readmission data available from electronic medical record
    • Rate defined as the number of re-presentations over a unit of time (eg, 1 y)
    • Statistical analysis: nonparametric comparison of rates of re-presentation between treatment and control groups


    		Overall length of hospital stay within 1, 3, 6, and 12 months of discharge from the index admission
    • Readmission data available from electronic medical record
    • Defined as the cumulative number of days spent in hospital over a unit of time (eg, d/y)
    • Statistical analysis: nonparametric comparison of rates of re-presentation between treatment and control groups


    		Cost of transition service
    • Economic benefits of the intervention will be confirmed through a comparison of subsequent rehospitalization costs in the treatment and control groups

    		Model of care and patient outcomes


    		Patient-reported symptom burden
    • ESASa [52] (nonparametric comparison of responses between treatment and control groups)


    		Patient symptom management and self-efficacy
    • ESAS [52]
    • GSEb [51] (nonparametric comparison of responses between treatment and control groups)


    		Quality of life
    • EQ-5D-3L health questionnaire [44]


    		Patient experience, satisfaction, and perceived continuity of care
    • PCCQc (short) [45] (nonparametric comparison of responses between treatment and control groups)

    		Organization of care


    		Implementation of components of the TCMd
    • Economic benefits: cost calculations of comparison between control and intervention hospital readmissions from the index admission
    • Includes TCM intervention cost compared with usual care cost


    		Implementation of the transition action plan for all patients
    • Customized transition action plan developed

    aESAS: Edmonton Symptom Assessment System.

    bGSE: General Self-Efficacy Scale.

    cPCCQ: Patient Continuity of Care Questionnaire.

    dTCM: transitional care model.

    Sample Size Estimation and Justification

    We anticipate that the enrollment of approximately 200 patients over 15 months will be feasible and provide a sufficient sample size to achieve the primary outcome, with the anticipated baseline readmission rate in the control group and absolute reduction in the intervention group (Table 3). Enrollment commenced in February 2024 and was completed on March 31, 2025. Given that the primary end point will be derived from health information systems in South Australia and that the study has an intention-to-treat approach, there will be a need to consider a larger sample size, taking into account withdrawals, dropouts, or loss to follow-ups.

    Table 3. Sample size per group by baseline readmission rate and absolute reduction in readmission with 80% power (α=.05).
    Absolute reduction in readmission rate in the intervention group (%)Baseline readmission rate in the control group at 3 mo, n

    		35%40%45%
    15136150160
    20707986
    25404752

    Randomization

    The randomization will occur at the individual level. The participants will be randomized 1:1, with stratification at the ward or unit level to intervention or control, using REDCap, a secure, web-based software platform designed to support data capture for research studies [53].

    Control

    Participants in the control group will receive usual care, which is defined as the “usual follow-up services” planned while the patient is in hospital, before discharge. Transition care is not implemented after discharge from the hospital (usual care). Usual services are planned or initiated while the participant is in the hospital in preparation for discharge, but provision of these services is not followed up by the STARnurses.

    Eligibility Criteria

    The eligible population includes individuals aged ≥18 years with multimorbidity who fulfill all inclusion criteria and do not meet any of the exclusion criteria. For the purposes of the inclusion criteria, multimorbidity is defined as the coexistence of 2 or more chronic conditions [56] (Textbox 1).

    Textbox 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

    Inclusion criteria

    • Inpatients (ward or emergency department)
    • Sufficient cognitive function and English language skills to provide informed consent and complete assessments
    • Ability to engage in telehealth
    • A history of either diabetes with cardiovascular disease or comorbidity in minimum 3 of the following illness domains:
      • Diabetes—type 1 or type 2
      • Cardiovascular disease—symptomatic atherosclerotic disease (ischemic heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral vascular disease, symptomatic valvular heart disease, or atrial fibrillation)
      • Chronic cardiac failure
      • Psychiatric illness, including mood or anxiety disorders
      • Respiratory disease, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, or interstitial lung disease
      • Kidney disease resulting in chronic renal impairment, with creatinine clearance ≤30 mL/min
      • Current malignant neoplasm

    Exclusion criteria

    • Patients living in or likely to be discharged to a high-level residential care facility for older adults
    • Patients enrolled in a comprehensive management program upon discharge, for example, a formal rehabilitation program, rehabilitation in the home, heart failure outreach service, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease pulmonary rehabilitation, hospital in the home, or receiving disability or community psychiatric services, including care coordination
    • Patients followed up through other local health network services providing community outreach, such as patients who are homeless
    • Patients with a current history of illicit drug or alcohol dependence, which may interfere with their ability to engage with the program
    • Patients with palliative intent and likely to have a life expectancy of <6 mo
    • Patients due for elective readmission within 2 wk of current hospital discharge
    • Insufficient cognitive function or English language skills to provide informed consent and complete assessments
    • Patients who are found to have been in hospital for >3 wk during the index admission and are not transitional patients

    Identification and Recruitment of Participants

    Several procedures to identify and recruit participants for the trial intervention have been incorporated into the study design.

    Nursing, medical, pharmacy, and allied health leads and managers; ward staff; and patient flow and bed management meetings will be attended by the research leads and STARnurses to brief staff and explain all aspects of the research and introduce the STARnurses and their role. Emails and flyers will be sent by the research leads to medical, nursing, pharmacy, and allied health leads as well as relevant clinical staff.

    Study criteria will be entered into the local electronic medical record to produce a trial list of potential participants. The STARnurses will review the list daily and follow up with relevant treating clinicians. Daily rounds will be conducted at trial wards, and nursing staff will liaise with medical staff to identify patients. Huddles will be attended, and nursing staff will liaise with medical staff to identify patients.

    The patient’s clinical team will be consulted first, and if permission is granted, a research team member will then approach the patient. They will be invited to participate in the study, and if they accept, they will be provided with a participant information sheet and consent form for consideration. The patient will then be approached 24 hours later to confirm their willingness to participate. Individual randomization using REDCap will take place following informed written consent [53].

    It is acknowledged that participants who provide consent will have multimorbidity and may even be frail, and the collaboration with their multidisciplinary team will be an integral component of the intervention. Therefore, balancing the participant’s agency and self-efficacy and capability with their anxiety and hesitancy will require ongoing discussion between the participant and team members, along with their support.

    Intervention

    The intervention involves establishing a transition coordination service led by nursing transition coordinators, who will support transitions and referrals, known as STARnurses. The intervention consists of 4 key phases.

    The first phase involves in-hospital screening in which “risk of readmission” screening is conducted during the hospital stay, using the Community Assessment Risk Screen tool [41,42]. Patients who meet the inclusion criteria are invited to participate in the study.

    The second phase involves in-hospital baseline assessment, transition planning, and participant goal setting (following participant research and information discussion, acceptance to participate, and consent procedure complete). A detailed inpatient baseline and transition assessment is performed to collaboratively develop personalized goals and a transition action plan. Researchers will use the following tools to assess participants’ transition needs: customized transition nursing assessment [43], Barthel Index [46], Edmonton Frailty Scale [47,48], Kessler Psychological Distress Scale [49], Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool scale [50], and General Self-Efficacy Scale [51]. The participant’s GP or practice nurse will be contacted and receive the transition action plan before the participant’s hospital discharge.

    The third phase is posthospital discharge transition coordination. Participants will receive transitional care coordination, with phone calls or telehealth follow-up in the first 48 hours following discharge and then weekly and fortnightly (Figure 1).

    ‎
    Figure 1. Interventions aligned with time points (TPs) of data collection and phone calls. ESAS-r: Edmonton Symptom Assessment System–Revised; TAP: transition action plan.

    The fourth phase involves handover to primary care. A multidisciplinary case discussion will occur approximately 4 weeks after discharge in preparation for handover to the GP or practice nurse and other specialist providers. The STARnurse will have a final consultation with the patient after the multidisciplinary case discussion (6-10 wk after discharge) to inform the patient of any outcomes or actions. Handover and written communication are provided to the GP or practice nurse to ensure the participant is stable in the community, and if not stable, follow-up care is required.

    In this study, a key adaptation of the TCM is replacing the advanced practice registered nurse home visits with STARnurse telehealth or telephone follow-up. This follow-up is provided according to the intervention protocol (Figure 1). The feasibility of the STARnurse and transition coordinator role and the associated transition service was previously evaluated in an earlier feasibility study [24].


    This project received ethics approval (17554) on June 29, 2023, and it was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry on February 15, 2024 (12624000142538). This study commenced on July 1, 2023, with data collection commencing in February 2024; data collection was completed on March 31, 2025. Finalized results are expected in March 2026.


    Anticipated Findings

    The primary outcome of this research is decreasing the rate of hospital readmission within 3 months of discharge from the index admission in people with multimorbidity. In a prospective, quasi-experimental TCM study (N=172), improvements in all health status and quality of life measures were observed after intervention compared to before the intervention, and a significant decrease in total number of readmissions (TCM: 45 readmissions vs control: 60 readmissions; P<.041) and total hospital days (TCM: 252 d vs control: 351 d; P<.032) were observed at 3 months [57].

    The secondary outcomes include the cost analysis of the transition service model of care. In a previous study, cost savings were demonstrated in relation to appropriate implementation of the TCM, whereby it was associated with a short-term decrease of US $439 per patient per month in total health care costs at 3 months and cumulative per-patient savings of US $2170 at 1 year (P<.037). In a cost comparison study in which the post–acute care costs of 3 care management interventions for hospitalized older adults with cognitive impairment and their family caregivers were compared (N202), the TCM had significantly lower costs than 2 other comparable care management interventions and has been associated with an estimated net savings of US $2972 per individual at 6 months [26].

    People with multimorbidity are readmitted to the hospital more, spend more time seeking health care, and often receive fragmented care. When they are discharged from the hospital, they are often readmitted due to poor health care team communication, uncoordinated follow-ups, and not knowing whom to contact when they have symptoms. Supporting these patients as they transition to the community after hospital discharge with an adapted nurse-led TCM intervention will assist them to resume their normal lives more quickly and prevent unnecessary hospital contact.

    This study is informed by TCM evidence and an earlier feasibility study [12,39]. Consequently, it represents an additional and focused investigation into a discrete and known area of health service provision. This focus has allowed researchers to refine the intervention to a practical and effective modality. The method responds to previously encountered challenges and locates the participant and their health care team at its center. It is anticipated that patients’ awareness of this approach will encourage their health care agency in a goal-directed and beneficial manner. The previous research was at a single large acute hospital; the sample size was small; and the design omitted the use of comparator groups. These parameters have been addressed in this study, enabling future generalizability of the findings.

    Limitations

    Although the power of the research has been addressed through an appropriate cohort number, the 2 hospitals included in this study remain within the same local health network, which could emerge as a limitation later. At this point, an adapted nurse-led TCM is being trialed, posing infidelity to the original model; in addition, people with cognitive impairment have been excluded. However, this research is considered part of an overall plan to eventually embed the transition care model as standard care within the health system; consequently, each research project builds on demonstrated evidence.

    Health sectors use diverse electronic record and patient data systems, which can lead to challenges with access and consistency. To address these challenges, this study is a pragmatic one, emphasizing relationship building [46] and fostering regular, consistent communication among the multidisciplinary team, the participants and significant others, and the health sectors as integral components of the nursing interventions.

    Conclusions

    In this research, the role of the STARnurses is key, which spans the hospital, multidisciplinary teams, and the primary health care setting. Their collaborative role enables patient-centered care that is tailored to participants’ transition goals; it needs to empower them in the management of their own care. Evidence is clear that the TCM has a positive impact on reducing readmission rates through its enhanced care coordination and the management of patients in transition from the acute to the primary health care sector. However, the South Australian local health networks currently lack a structured process to evaluate the risk of hospital readmission at the time of discharge, even though readmissions among patients with multimorbidity are both costly and potentially avoidable. This research offers the opportunity to enhance continuity of care, minimize unnecessary rehospitalizations, significantly decrease overall health care use, and improve quality of life for people with multimorbidity. It also represents a significant opportunity to transform health care delivery, emphasizing a shift from discharge planning to an integrated model of transition planning and care.

    Acknowledgments

    The authors wish to thank the Central Adelaide Local Health Network, particularly the executive team and Supporting Transitions and Referrals nurses (STARnurses). This work was supported by a Central Adelaide Local Health Network Chief Executive Officer Clinical Rapid Implementation Project Scheme grant.

    Data Availability

    The datasets generated or analyzed during this study will be available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

    Authors' Contributions

    KD contributed to the literature search, study design, and drafting the initial manuscript and its revised versions. SS, ME, and GS significantly contributed to the study design and also contributed to the literature search and drafting and reviewing the initial manuscript and its revised versions. NM significantly contributed to drafting the initial manuscript, and LD contributed to the preparation and revision of the manuscript.

    Conflicts of Interest

    None declared.

    1. Aubert CE, Schnipper JL, Fankhauser N, Marques-Vidal P, Stirnemann J, Auerbach AD, et al. Patterns of multimorbidity associated with 30-day readmission: a multinational study. BMC Public Health. Jun 13, 2019;19(1):738. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    2. Australia's health 2018. The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. 2018. URL: https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-health/australias-health-2018/contents/overview [accessed 2025-08-07]
    3. Harrison C, Henderson J, Miller G, Britt H. The prevalence of complex multimorbidity in Australia. Aust N Z J Public Health. Jun 2016;40(3):239-244. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    4. Pefoyo AJ, Bronskill SE, Gruneir A, Calzavara A, Thavorn K, Petrosyan Y, et al. The increasing burden and complexity of multimorbidity. BMC Public Health. Apr 23, 2015;15(1):415. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    5. Nguyen Q, Wu C, Odden MC, Kim DH. Multimorbidity patterns, frailty, and survival in community-dwelling older adults. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. Jul 12, 2019;74(8):1265-1270. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    6. Aubert CE, Fankhauser N, Marques-Vidal P, Stirnemann J, Aujesky D, Limacher A, et al. Multimorbidity and healthcare resource utilization in Switzerland: a multicentre cohort study. BMC Health Serv Res. Oct 17, 2019;19(1):708. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    7. Frølich A, Ghith N, Schiøtz M, Jacobsen R, Stockmarr A. Multimorbidity, healthcare utilization and socioeconomic status: a register-based study in Denmark. PLoS One. Aug 1, 2019;14(8):e0214183. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    8. Vetrano DL, Palmer K, Marengoni A, Marzetti E, Lattanzio F, Roller-Wirnsberger R, et al. Frailty and multimorbidity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. Apr 23, 2019;74(5):659-666. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    9. St John PD, Tyas SL, Menec V, Tate R, Griffith L. Multimorbidity predicts functional decline in community-dwelling older adults: prospective cohort study. Can Fam Physician. Feb 2019;65(2):e56-e63. [FREE Full text] [Medline]
    10. Makovski TT, Schmitz S, Zeegers MP, Stranges S, van den Akker M. Multimorbidity and quality of life: systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Ageing Res Rev. Aug 2019;53:100903. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    11. Gérvas J, Pérez Fernández M. Western European best practice in primary healthcare. Eur J Gen Pract. Jul 11, 2006;12(1):30-33. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    12. Naylor MD, Hirschman KB, Toles MP, Jarrín OF, Shaid E, Pauly MV. Adaptations of the evidence-based Transitional Care Model in the U.S. Soc Sci Med. Sep 2018;213:28-36. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    13. Hansen LO, Young RS, Hinami K, Leung A, Williams MV. Interventions to reduce 30-day rehospitalization: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. Oct 18, 2011;155(8):520-528. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    14. Leppin AL, Gionfriddo MR, Kessler M, Brito JP, Mair FS, Gallacher K, et al. Preventing 30-day hospital readmissions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. JAMA Intern Med. Jul 01, 2014;174(7):1095-1107. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    15. Julia CT, Jill CS, Riley H, Amanda M, Dan F, Peter D, et al. Comorbidity-polypharmacy score predicts readmissions and in-hospital mortality: a six-hospital health network experience. J Basic Clin Pharma. 2017;8:98-103. [FREE Full text]
    16. Stafford G, Villén N, Roso-Llorach A, Troncoso-Mariño A, Monteagudo M, Violán C. Combined multimorbidity and polypharmacy patterns in the elderly: a cross-sectional study in primary health care. Int J Environ Res Public Health. Sep 01, 2021;18(17):9216. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    17. Read JR, Sharpe L, Modini M, Dear BF. Multimorbidity and depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Affect Disord. Oct 15, 2017;221:36-46. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    18. Birk JL, Kronish IM, Moise N, Falzon L, Yoon S, Davidson KW. Depression and multimorbidity: considering temporal characteristics of the associations between depression and multiple chronic diseases. Health Psychol. Sep 2019;38(9):802-811. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    19. Morkisch N, Upegui-Arango LD, Cardona MI, van den Heuvel D, Rimmele M, Sieber CC, et al. Components of the transitional care model (TCM) to reduce readmission in geriatric patients: a systematic review. BMC Geriatr. Sep 11, 2020;20(1):345. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    20. Schiøtz ML, Høst D, Frølich A. Involving patients with multimorbidity in service planning: perspectives on continuity and care coordination. J Comorb. Sep 16, 2016;6(2):95-102. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    21. Thomas EE, Haydon HM, Mehrotra A, Caffery LJ, Snoswell CL, Banbury A, et al. Building on the momentum: sustaining telehealth beyond COVID-19. J Telemed Telecare. May 2022;28(4):301-308. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    22. Anderson TS, O'Donoghue AL, Dechen T, Herzig SJ, Stevens JP. Trends in telehealth and in-person transitional care management visits during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Am Geriatr Soc. Oct 25, 2021;69(10):2745-2751. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    23. Jayakody A, Bryant J, Carey M, Hobden B, Dodd N, Sanson-Fisher R. Effectiveness of interventions utilising telephone follow up in reducing hospital readmission within 30 days for individuals with chronic disease: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. Aug 18, 2016;16(1):403. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    24. Hirschman KB, Shaid E, McCauley K, Pauly MV, Naylor MD. Continuity of care: the transitional care model. Online J Issues Nurs. Sep 30, 2015;20(3):1. [FREE Full text] [Medline]
    25. Naylor MD, Hirschman KB, Hanlon AL, Bowles KH, Bradway C, McCauley KM, et al. Comparison of evidence-based interventions on outcomes of hospitalized, cognitively impaired older adults. J Comp Eff Res. May 2014;3(3):245-257. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    26. Pauly MV, Hirschman KB, Hanlon AL, Huang L, Bowles KH, Bradway C, et al. Cost impact of the transitional care model for hospitalized cognitively impaired older adults. J Comp Eff Res. Sep 2018;7(9):913-922. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    27. Berthelsen C, Møller N, Bunkenborg G. Transitional care model for older adults with multiple chronic conditions: an evaluation of benefits utilising an umbrella review. J Clin Nurs. Feb 18, 2024;33(2):481-496. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    28. McInnes E, Mira M, Atkin N, Kennedy P, Cullen J. Can GP input into discharge planning result in better outcomes for the frail aged: results from a randomized controlled trial. Fam Pract. Jun 1999;16(3):289-293. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    29. Preen DB, Bailey BE, Wright A, Kendall P, Phillips M, Hung J, et al. Effects of a multidisciplinary, post-discharge continuance of care intervention on quality of life, discharge satisfaction, and hospital length of stay: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Qual Health Care. Feb 01, 2005;17(1):43-51. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    30. Lim WK, Lambert SF, Gray LC. Effectiveness of case management and post-acute services in older people after hospital discharge. Med J Aust. Mar 17, 2003;178(6):262-266. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    31. Clemson L, Lannin NA, Wales K, Salkeld G, Rubenstein L, Gitlin L, et al. Occupational therapy predischarge home visits in acute hospital care: a randomized trial. J Am Geriatr Soc. Oct 07, 2016;64(10):2019-2026. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    32. Lau L, Chong CP, Lim WK. Hospital treatment in residential care facilities is a viable alternative to hospital admission for selected patients. Geriatr Gerontol Int. Apr 17, 2013;13(2):378-383. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    33. Allen J, Hutchinson AM, Brown R, Livingston PM. Quality care outcomes following transitional care interventions for older people from hospital to home: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. Aug 15, 2014;14(1):346. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    34. Manderson B, McMurray J, Piraino E, Stolee P. Navigation roles support chronically ill older adults through healthcare transitions: a systematic review of the literature. Health Soc Care Community. Mar 2012;20(2):113-127. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    35. Parker KJ, Hickman LD, Phillips JL, Ferguson C. Interventions to optimise transitional care coordination for older people living with dementia and concomitant multimorbidity and their caregivers: a systematic review. Contemp Nurse. Sep 10, 2020;56(5-6):505-533. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    36. Hartati A, Jarrett M, McDougall B, Kent M, Ljubojevic M, Stolzenhein K. Care navigation and coordination program on reducing hospital use for adults with complex health and psychosocial needs in South West Sydney, Australia. Int J Integr Care. 2024;24(3):7. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    37. Greenfield D, Ellis J, Eljiz K, Medlin J, Derrett A, Loy G. Redesigning the future for person-centric care through organisational integration and coordination across the health and community sectors: experience from Australia. Int J Health Gov. May 14, 2025;30(2):206-219. [CrossRef]
    38. Courtney M, Edwards H, Chang A, Parker A, Finlayson K, Hamilton K. Fewer emergency readmissions and better quality of life for older adults at risk of hospital readmission: a randomized controlled trial to determine the effectiveness of a 24-week exercise and telephone follow-up program. J Am Geriatr Soc. Mar 03, 2009;57(3):395-402. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    39. Davis K, Ramsey I, Sharplin G, Eckert M, Shakib S. A nurse-led, telehealth transitional care intervention for people with multimorbidity: a feasibility study. Aust J Adv Nurs. Dec 16, 2024;41(4):43-52. [CrossRef]
    40. Weeks LE, Macdonald M, Martin-Misener R, Helwig M, Bishop A, Iduye DF, et al. The impact of transitional care programs on health services utilization in community-dwelling older adults: a systematic review. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. Feb 2018;16(2):345-384. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    41. Marcoux V, Chouinard MC, Diadiou F, Dufour I, Hudon C. Screening tools to identify patients with complex health needs at risk of high use of health care services: a scoping review. PLoS One. Nov 30, 2017;12(11):e0188663. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    42. Shelton P, Sager MA, Schraeder C. The community assessment risk screen (CARS): identifying elderly persons at risk for hospitalization or emergency department visit. Am J Manag Care. Aug 2000;6(8):925-933. [FREE Full text] [Medline]
    43. Chaboyer W, Marshall A, Gillespie B, McMurray A. Engaging patients in communication at transitions of care. Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care. 2015. URL: https:/​/www.​safetyandquality.gov.au/​sites/​default/​files/​migrated/​Engaging-Patients-in-Communication-at-Transitions.​pdf [accessed 2025-08-07]
    44. Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen MF, Kind P, Parkin D, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. Dec 9, 2011;20(10):1727-1736. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    45. Safstrom E, Arestedt K, Hadjistavropoulos HD, Liljeroos M, Nordgren L, Jaarsma T, et al. Development and psychometric properties of a short version of the Patient Continuity of Care Questionnaire. Health Expect. Jun 16, 2023;26(3):1137-1148. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    46. Quinn TJ, Langhorne P, Stott DJ. Barthel Index for Stroke Trials: development, properties, and application. Stroke. Apr 2011;42(4):1146-1151. [CrossRef]
    47. Rolfson DB, Majumdar SR, Tsuyuki RT, Tahir A, Rockwood K. Validity and reliability of the Edmonton Frail Scale. Age Ageing. Sep 2006;35(5):526-529. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    48. Hilmer SN, Perera V, Mitchell S, Murnion BP, Dent J, Bajorek B, et al. The assessment of frailty in older people in acute care. Australas J Ageing. Dec 24, 2009;28(4):182-188. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    49. Anderson TM, Sunderland M, Andrews G, Titov N, Dear BF, Sachdev PS. The 10-item Kessler psychological distress scale (K10) as a screening instrument in older individuals. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. Jul 2013;21(7):596-606. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    50. Stratton RJ, Hackston A, Longmore D, Dixon R, Price S, Stroud M, et al. Malnutrition in hospital outpatients and inpatients: prevalence, concurrent validity and ease of use of the 'malnutrition universal screening tool' ('MUST') for adults. Br J Nutr. Nov 09, 2004;92(5):799-808. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    51. Nel P, Boshoff A. Evaluating the factor structure of the General Self-Efficacy Scale. S Afr J Psychol. Jul 02, 2015;46(1):37-49. [CrossRef]
    52. Hui D, Bruera E. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System 25 years later: past, present, and future developments. J Pain Symptom Manage. Mar 2017;53(3):630-643. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    53. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. Apr 2009;42(2):377-381. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    54. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. Jan 2006;3(2):77-101. [CrossRef]
    55. Rich JT, Neely JG, Paniello RC, Voelker CC, Nussenbaum B, Wang EW. A practical guide to understanding Kaplan-Meier curves. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. Sep 2010;143(3):331-336. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
    56. Johnston MC, Crilly M, Black C, Prescott GJ, Mercer SW. Defining and measuring multimorbidity: a systematic review of systematic reviews. Eur J Public Health. Feb 01, 2019;29(1):182-189. [CrossRef] [Medline]
    57. Candas B, Jobin G, Dubé C, Tousignant M, Abdeljelil AB, Grenier S, et al. Barriers and facilitators to implementing continuous quality improvement programs in colonoscopy services: a mixed methods systematic review. Endosc Int Open. Feb 15, 2016;4(2):E118-E133. [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]

    ‎
    CALHN: Central Adelaide Local Health Network
    GP: general practitioner
    pRCT: pragmatic randomized controlled trial
    STARnurse: Supporting Transitions and Referrals nurse
    TCM: transitional care model

    Edited by J Sarvestan; submitted 28.01.25; peer-reviewed by H Brom, A Debbarma; comments to author 11.03.25; revised version received 14.04.25; accepted 03.07.25; published 05.09.25.

    Copyright

    ©Kate Davis, Sepehr Shakib, Greg Sharplin, Lachlan Darch, Nicholas Marlow, Marion Eckert. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 05.09.2025.

    This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Research Protocols, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.researchprotocols.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.