Loraine Busetto1, Katrien Ger Luijkx1, Arianne Mathilda Josephus Elissen2, Hubertus Johannes Maria Vrijhoef1,3. 1. Department of TRANZO, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands. 2. Department of Health Services Research, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 3. Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore & National University Health System, Singapore.
Abstract
RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The delivery of integrated care is a priority in many countries' efforts to improve health outcomes for people at risk of or with diabetes. This study aims to provide an overview of the different types of integrated care interventions for type 2 diabetes and to report their outcomes. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed and Cochrane for the period 2003-2013. Article selection and data extraction were performed independently by three researchers and results were discussed together. The chronic care model (CCM) was used to describe intervention types. RESULTS: Forty-four articles met the inclusion criteria. Most interventions included all CCM components and a variety of sub-components. Most studies reported positive patient, process and health service utilization measures. The information on costs was limited and inconsistent. The low number of articles reporting comparable outcome measures made it difficult to make meaningful statements about an association between intervention type and outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Future research would benefit from a more uniform understanding of integrated care as well as intermediate outcome measurements that allow for the establishment of a chain of evidence from specific intervention types to specific outcomes achieved. It is expected that such a comprehensive approach will reveal important insights as to which integrated care intervention types and settings are most conducive to successful implementation and would thereby be of relevance to policy makers and practitioners involved in the financing, management and delivery of integrated care.
RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The delivery of integrated care is a priority in many countries' efforts to improve health outcomes for people at risk of or with diabetes. This study aims to provide an overview of the different types of integrated care interventions for type 2 diabetes and to report their outcomes. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed and Cochrane for the period 2003-2013. Article selection and data extraction were performed independently by three researchers and results were discussed together. The chronic care model (CCM) was used to describe intervention types. RESULTS: Forty-four articles met the inclusion criteria. Most interventions included all CCM components and a variety of sub-components. Most studies reported positive patient, process and health service utilization measures. The information on costs was limited and inconsistent. The low number of articles reporting comparable outcome measures made it difficult to make meaningful statements about an association between intervention type and outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Future research would benefit from a more uniform understanding of integrated care as well as intermediate outcome measurements that allow for the establishment of a chain of evidence from specific intervention types to specific outcomes achieved. It is expected that such a comprehensive approach will reveal important insights as to which integrated care intervention types and settings are most conducive to successful implementation and would thereby be of relevance to policy makers and practitioners involved in the financing, management and delivery of integrated care.
Authors: Hubertus Jm Vrijhoef; Antonio Giulio de Belvis; Matias de la Calle; Maria Stella de Sabata; Bastian Hauck; Sabrina Montante; Annette Moritz; Dario Pelizzola; Markku Saraheimo; Nick A Guldemond Journal: Int J Care Coord Date: 2017-06-14
Authors: Maureen Markle-Reid; Jenny Ploeg; Kimberly D Fraser; Kathryn Ann Fisher; Noori Akhtar-Danesh; Amy Bartholomew; Amiram Gafni; Andrea Gruneir; Sandra P Hirst; Sharon Kaasalainen; Caralyn Kelly Stradiotto; John Miklavcic; Carlos Rojas-Fernandez; Cheryl A Sadowski; Lehana Thabane; Jean A C Triscott; Ross Upshur Journal: Trials Date: 2017-02-06 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Kasey R Boehmer; Abd Moain Abu Dabrh; Michael R Gionfriddo; Patricia Erwin; Victor M Montori Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-02-08 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Loraine Busetto; Katrien Luijkx; Stefano Calciolari; Laura Guadalupe González Ortiz; Hubertus Johannes Maria Vrijhoef Journal: Int J Integr Care Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 5.120
Authors: Abigail Powers; Yara Mekawi; Maximilian Fickenwirth; Nicole R Nugent; H Drew Dixon; Sean Minton; Ye Ji Kim; Rachel Gluck; Sierra Carter; Negar Fani; Ann C Schwartz; Bekh Bradley; Guillermo E Umpierrez; Thaddeus W W Pace; Tanja Jovanovic; Vasiliki Michopoulos; Charles F Gillespie Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2021-07-29 Impact factor: 5.250
Authors: Loraine Busetto; Katrien Ger Luijkx; Arianne Mathilda Josephus Elissen; Hubertus Johannes Maria Vrijhoef Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2016-01-15 Impact factor: 2.655