Virtual healthcare in the UK: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials evaluating quality of life and satisfaction in virtual wards and hospital-at-home services compared to hospital care

Abstract Introduction Virtual wards (VWs) and Hospital-at-Home (HaH) services are increasingly used in the UK to support acute care delivery. While clinical outcomes are often comparable to conventional inpatient care, the success of these models also depends on patient and carer experiences, including quality of life (QoL), satisfaction, and caregiver burden. Evidence synthesising these patient-centred outcomes within the UK context is needed to inform service implementation. Aim To systematically synthesise evidence from UK-based randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating patient and carer satisfaction, QoL, and caregiver burden in VWs/HaH compared with traditional inpatient care. Methods Following PRISMA guidelines, PubMed and CINAHL databases were searched for UK-based randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (inception-October 2024) reporting QoL measures, patient/carer satisfaction, or caregiver burden, comparing VWs/HaH to traditional inpatient care for patients with acute illness. Validated tools (e.g. EQ-5D and custom surveys) were prioritised in data extraction. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB2 tool. Meta-analysis employed a random-effects model; heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Results Fourteen RCTs (n = 3416 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Patient satisfaction was consistently high across studies. For example, one RCT reported very good/excellent satisfaction ratings of 91.7% for HaH compared with 88.1% for inpatient care.[1] Meta-analysis of satisfaction outcomes (five studies) showed no significant difference between groups (OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.29–1.54) with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 78%). Carer outcomes varied; some studies found high satisfaction and no additional workload, while moderate-to-severe caregiver burden in 25% of carers was reported in one RCT.[2] QoL outcomes measured by various tools like the Euro Quality of Life EQ-5D-5L showed no clinically meaningful differences between groups. Some studies indicated better outcomes for home-treated patients in specific domains, including significantly lower depression scores (p < 0.001) and slightly higher social activity, and lower rate of select medical complications, although overall QoL remained comparable. Conclusion UK virtual health care services offer patient experiences that are comparable to traditional hospital care, with consistently high satisfaction and similar QoL outcomes. Carer experiences are more variable, highlighting a need for improved caregiver support within VW/HaH models. A key limitation of this review is the heterogeneity in the QoL and satisfaction measures used across included RCTs, which restricted the scope of quantitative synthesis. Future UK research should adopt standardised, validated outcome sets to strengthen comparability and inform evidence-based implementation.