Virtual Wards for Acute Care Patients: A Scoping Review
In brief
Across 22 studies, virtual wards had similar short-term outcomes to hospital care
A review of 22 studies found that selected adults with acute conditions receiving hospital-level care at home had broadly similar rates of emergency visits, readmission, short-term death, and adverse events to those treated in hospital. Hospital stays tended to be shorter, but cost findings were mixed; mostly non-randomized studies and varied care models limit confidence in the comparison.
- Journal
- Journal of general internal medicine (Q1)
- Published
- 13 October 2026
- Study design
- Systematic review / meta-analysis of RCTs
- Evidence level
- Level 1, High (CEBM 1a)
- Authors
- Sophie M E van Baar de Knegt, Noortje Zelis, Karin A H Kaasjager, Patricia M Stassen
- PMID
- 42870180
- DOI
- 10.1007/s11606-026-10682-2
Why clinicians should know about it
- Picked for Internal Medicine (top studies of the week, 18 October 2026): Digital outreach for lung cancer screening eligibility
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Increasing capacity pressures and overcrowding in hospitals and emergency departments (EDs) have led to a global surge in the adoption of technology-enabled hospital-at-home programs, also known as virtual wards (VWs). These models provide hospital-level care in patients' homes supported by remote monitoring, aiming to shorten or avoid hospital admission. While substantial evidence supports the feasibility of VWs for chronic care, evidence for use in patients with acute conditions remains limited. This scoping review aimed to map existing evidence on VWs for acute medical patients within acute care settings. METHODS: In February 2025, multiple databases were searched to identify studies evaluating VWs for adult acute care populations. Outcomes included clinical and safety variables, length of stay, functional outcomes, cost and resource use, barriers and facilitators to implementation, user experiences, and qualitative analyses. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies were included (RCTs n = 3, case-controls n = 9, cohort n = 7, qualitative n = 3), with substantial heterogeneity in VW models and telemonitoring approaches. The most common indication was infection (e.g. pneumonia, urinary tract). Results of this narrative synthesis suggest care delivered in VWs may be similar to hospital care for rates of ED visits, readmission, short-term mortality, and adverse events. Length of stay in the hospital tended to be shorter. Functional outcomes may be better in VWs. Cost analyses were limited and showed mixed results. Surveys and qualitative analyses indicated high acceptability and generally positive experiences among patients, carers, and healthcare staff. DISCUSSION: Evidence from the predominantly non-randomized studies included in this review suggests that VWs may be a feasible alternative for selected acute care patients, with outcomes broadly similar to standard hospital care. Substantial heterogeneity in study designs, alongside the descriptive nature of this synthesis, limits the evaluation of evidence strength and comparability. Robust randomized trials and comprehensive cost-effectiveness analyses are needed.
Abstract as published, via PubMed.
For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.