BACKGROUND: Implementation of the chronic care model (CCM) has been shown to be an effective preventative strategy to improve outcomes in diabetes mellitus, depression, and congestive heart failure, but data are lacking regarding the effectiveness of this model in preventing complications in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases from inception to August 2005 and included English-language articles that enrolled adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and (1) contained intervention(s) with CCM component(s), (2) included a comparison group or measures at 2 points (before/after), and (3) had relevant outcomes. Two reviewers independently extracted data. RESULTS: Symptoms, quality of life, lung function, and functional status were not significantly different between the intervention and control groups. However, pooled relative risks (95% confidence intervals) for emergency/unscheduled visits and hospitalizations for the group that received at least 2 CCM components were 0.58 (0.42-0.79) and 0.78 (0.66-0.94), respectively. The weighted mean difference (95% confidence interval) for hospital stay was -2.51 (-3.40 to -1.61) days shorter for the group that received 2 or more components. There were no significant differences for those receiving only 1 CCM component. CONCLUSIONS: Limited published data exist evaluating the efficacy of CCM components in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease management. However, pooled data demonstrated that patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who received interventions with 2 or more CCM components had lower rates of hospitalizations and emergency/unscheduled visits and a shorter length of stay compared with control groups. The results of this review highlight the need for well-designed trials in this population.
BACKGROUND: Implementation of the chronic care model (CCM) has been shown to be an effective preventative strategy to improve outcomes in diabetes mellitus, depression, and congestive heart failure, but data are lacking regarding the effectiveness of this model in preventing complications in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases from inception to August 2005 and included English-language articles that enrolled adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and (1) contained intervention(s) with CCM component(s), (2) included a comparison group or measures at 2 points (before/after), and (3) had relevant outcomes. Two reviewers independently extracted data. RESULTS: Symptoms, quality of life, lung function, and functional status were not significantly different between the intervention and control groups. However, pooled relative risks (95% confidence intervals) for emergency/unscheduled visits and hospitalizations for the group that received at least 2 CCM components were 0.58 (0.42-0.79) and 0.78 (0.66-0.94), respectively. The weighted mean difference (95% confidence interval) for hospital stay was -2.51 (-3.40 to -1.61) days shorter for the group that received 2 or more components. There were no significant differences for those receiving only 1 CCM component. CONCLUSIONS: Limited published data exist evaluating the efficacy of CCM components in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease management. However, pooled data demonstrated that patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who received interventions with 2 or more CCM components had lower rates of hospitalizations and emergency/unscheduled visits and a shorter length of stay compared with control groups. The results of this review highlight the need for well-designed trials in this population.
Authors: Karin M M Lemmens; Anna P Nieboer; Maureen P M H Rutten-Van Mölken; Constant P van Schayck; Javier D Asin; Jos A M Dirven; Robbert Huijsman Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2010-03-26 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Latifa M Baynouna; Amal I Shamsan; Tahira A Ali; Lolowa A Al Mukini; Moza H Al Kuwiti; Thuraya A Al Ameri; Nico J D Nagelkerke; Ahmad M Abusamak; Nader M Ahmed; Sanaa M Zein Al Deen; Tariq M Jaber; Abdulkarim M Elkhalid; Anthony D Revel; Alhusini I Al Husaini; Fouad A Nour; Hayat O Ahmad; Mohammad K Nazirudeen; Rowaya Al Dhahiri; Yahya O Zain Al Abdeen; Aziza O Omar Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2010-02-22 Impact factor: 2.655