| Literature DB >> 29179749 |
Xuejun Li1, Zhibin Li2,3, Changqin Liu1, Junfeng Zhang4, Zhonghai Sun5, Yuji Feng6, Jing Mei7, Chengming Gu6, Xiaoying Li8, Shuyu Yang9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Xiamen is a pilot city in China for hierarchical diagnosis and treatment reform of non-communicable diseases, especially diabetes. Since 2012, Xiamen has implemented a program called the "three-in-one", a team-based care model for the treatment of diabetes, which involves collaboration between diabetes specialists, general practitioners, and health managers. In addition, the program provides financial incentives to improve care, as greater accessibility to medications through community health care centers (CHCs). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of these policies in shifting visits from general hospitals to CHCs for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHOD AND MATERIALS: A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted using Xiamen's regional electronic health record (EHR) database, which included 90% of all patients registered since 2012. Logistic regression was used to derive the adjusted odds ratio (OR) for patients shifting from general hospitals to CHCs. Among patients treated at hospitals, Kaplan-Meier(KM) curves were constructed to evaluate the time from each policy introduction until the switch to CHCs. A k-means clustering analysis was conducted to identify patterns of patient care-seeking behavior.Entities:
Keywords: Chronic disease; Health policy reform; Hierarchical health care; Policy evaluation
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29179749 PMCID: PMC5704596 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-017-2705-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Health Serv Res ISSN: 1472-6963 Impact factor: 2.655
Fig. 1Schematic description of the Xiamen EHR database
Summary of policies for hierarchical medical system in Xiamen
| Time | Category | Policy change/Intervention | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A* | B** | C*** | |||
| P0 | 08/11 | NA | Reference period | ||
| P1 | 08/12 | x | Establishment of “Hospital-Community” integrated service model | ||
| 10/12 | x | Increase of Essential Drug List (EDL) for hypertension and diabetes to 48 types | |||
| x | Extension of the prescription interval at community health centers to 1 month | ||||
| P2 | 01/14 | x | Financial incentives to GPs for disease management at an average of ¥ 10,000/GP/year | ||
| x | Initiation of “1 + 1 + X” model: Paired specialists from tertiary hospitals with GPs from community health centers | ||||
| P3 | 10/14 | x | Financial incentives for disease management increased to an average of ¥ 40,000/GP/year | ||
| x | Initiation of “three-in-one” model: added health managers to specialist/GP pairs | ||||
| x | Establishment of diabetes patients network for enhanced disease management | ||||
| x | Increase of EDL for hypertension and diabetes to 84 types | ||||
| P4 | 04/15 | x | Establishment of the regional hierarchical medical system for chronic disease management, structured around an “overall health care network for diabetic and hypertensive patients”: | ||
| x | Change in the financial incentive to 600¥/person/year for diabetes patients and 300¥/person/year for hypertension patients | ||||
| x | Pilot in closing out-patient service in tertiary hospitals | ||||
| P5 | 07/15 | x | Formal establishment of health manager position in CHCs | ||
| x | Full implementation of the same EDL in community health centers as in general hospitals | ||||
| x | Extension of the prescription interval at community health centers to 2 months | ||||
| x | Change of periodical budget payment for CHCs to immediate payment settlement, and removal of the reimbursement limitations for CHCs | ||||
| P6 | 01/16 | x | Removal of upper limit on financial incentives to GPs for disease management | ||
*A: Hospital-CHC integration; **B: Financial incentives to CHC/GPs; ***C: Drug availability in CHC
Demographic characteristics of T2DM patients by clusters
| Overall | Cluster 1 | Cluster 2 | Cluster 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (n = 89,558) | ( | ( | ( | |
| Gender | ||||
| Male | 46·0% | 46·1% | 45·6% | 44·9% |
| Female | 54·0% | 53·9% | 54·4% | 55·1% |
| Age (years) | ||||
| 18–39 | 10·1% | 11·4% | 2·1% | 4·1% |
| 40–64 | 59·4% | 59·7% | 59·1% | 56·2% |
| 65+ | 30·5% | 28·9% | 38·8% | 39·7% |
| Employee status | ||||
| Yes | 89·6% | 88·8% | 95·2% | 92·3% |
| No | 10·4% | 11·2% | 4·8% | 7·7% |
| Insurance plan type | ||||
| Urban employee | 27·3% | 26·3% | 32·8% | 31·4% |
| Urban residence | 48·7% | 48·1% | 51·2% | 52·2% |
| New rural cooperative | 12·4% | 13·2% | 9·8% | 6·9% |
| Others | 11.6% | 12.4% | 6.2% | 9.5% |
| Complications of interest | ||||
| Hypertension | 73·7% | 71·5% | 83·1% | 88·5% |
| Dyslipidemia | 56·1% | 52·9% | 67·4% | 80·3% |
| Stroke | 27·0% | 23·6% | 36·5% | 55·1% |
| Myocardial infarction | 49·0% | 45·4% | 62·8% | 75·0% |
| Chronic complications | 16·2% | 11·9% | 25·6% | 54·7% |
| Acute complications | 0·48% | 0·5% | 0·8% | 1·5% |
| Tumor or cancer | 17·6% | 16·9% | 17·9% | 25·9% |
| Hypoglycemia | 0·36% | 0·4% | 0·5% | 1·0% |
Fig. 2Patient flow diagram
Demographic characteristics of T2DM patients by policy period (%)
| Overall | P1 | P2 | P3 | P4 | P5 | P6 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | |
| Gender | |||||||
| Male | 46·0% | 45·6% | 45·6% | 46·6% | 46·6% | 46·4% | 47·1% |
| Female | 54·0% | 54·4% | 54·4% | 53·4% | 53·4% | 53·6% | 52·9% |
| Age (years) | |||||||
| 18–39 | 10·1% | 8·9% | 7·1% | 6.0% | 5·5% | 5·5% | 4·8% |
| 40–64 | 59·4% | 59·3% | 57·7% | 56·5% | 56·1% | 56·2% | 56·1% |
| 65+ | 30·5% | 31·8% | 35·2% | 37·5% | 38·4% | 38·3% | 39·1% |
| Employee status | |||||||
| Yes | 89·6% | 90·3% | 91% | 91·4% | 91·7% | 91·7% | 91·8% |
| No | 10·4% | 9·7% | 9.0% | 8·6% | 8·3% | 8·3% | 8·2% |
| Insurance plan type | |||||||
| Urban employee | 27·3% | 28·5% | 29·2% | 29.0% | 29·4% | 28·1% | 28·5% |
| Urban residence | 48·7% | 51.0% | 50·2% | 49·4% | 48·2% | 48·6% | 48·3% |
| New rural cooperative | 12·4% | 9·8% | 10·4% | 11·7% | 12·5% | 13·2% | 13·3% |
| Others | 11.6% | 10.7% | 10.2% | 9.9% | 9.9% | 10.1% | 9.9% |
| Complications of interest | |||||||
| Hypertension | 73·7% | 78·1% | 77·0% | 75·8% | 75·1% | 74·8% | 73·6% |
| Dyslipidemia | 56·1% | 61·6% | 60.0% | 58·2% | 57·9% | 56·5% | 56·7% |
| Stroke | 27·0% | 31·6% | 31·7% | 30·2% | 30·5% | 28·2% | 29·3% |
| Myocardial infarction | 49·0% | 55·4% | 54.0% | 51·7% | 51·1% | 49·3% | 49·8% |
| Chronic complications | 16·2% | 21·5% | 21·5% | 21·3% | 22·2% | 19·3% | 21·2% |
| Acute complications | 0·48% | 0·20% | 0·18% | 0·17% | 0·07% | 0·13% | 0·09% |
| Tumor or cancer | 17·6% | 19·4% | 19.0% | 18·1% | 17·7% | 16·7% | 17.0% |
| Hypoglycemia | 0·36% | 0·18% | 0·13% | 0·08% | 0·11% | 0·09% | 0·05% |
Fig. 3Volume changes of medical visits to general hospitals and CHCs between policies
Multivariate logistic regression of the medical visits to CHCs
| Two-sided | OR | 95% CI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | |||
| Gender | ||||
| Female (ref.) | 1·0 | |||
| Male | <0.001 | 0·841 | 0·836 | 0·845 |
| Age group, years | ||||
| 18–39 (ref.) | 1·0 | |||
| 40–64 | <0.001 | 2·798 | 2·755 | 2·843 |
| 65+ | <0.001 | 3·330 | 3·276 | 3·384 |
| Policy period | ||||
| P0 (ref.) | 1·0 | |||
| P1 | <0.001 | 1·111 | 1·102 | 1·121 |
| P2 | <0.001 | 1·247 | 1·236 | 1·259 |
| P3 | <0.001 | 1·580 | 1·564 | 1·597 |
| P4 | <0.001 | 2·809 | 2·773 | 2·845 |
| P5 | <0.001 | 4·745 | 4·696 | 4·794 |
| P6 | <0.001 | 5·675 | 5·599 | 5·752 |
| If newly reported cases | ||||
| Yes v.s. No. | <0.001 | 1·623 | 1·600 | 1·647 |
| Employee status | ||||
| Yes v.s. No. | <0.001 | 1·176 | 1·161 | 1·191 |
| Insurance plan type | ||||
| New rural cooperative | <0.001 | 1·186 | 1·169 | 1·204 |
| Urban residence | <0.001 | 1·280 | 1·265 | 1·295 |
| Urban employee | <0.001 | 1·282 | 1·266 | 1·297 |
| Others (ref.) | 1·0 | |||
| Complications of interest | ||||
| Hypertension | <0.001 | 1·109 | 1·100 | 1·117 |
| Dyslipidemia | <0.001 | 0·826 | 0·820 | 0·831 |
| Stroke | <0.001 | 0·701 | 0·696 | 0·706 |
| Myocardial infarction | <0.001 | 0·838 | 0·832 | 0·844 |
| Chronic complications | <0.001 | 0·431 | 0·428 | 0·434 |
| Acute complications | <0.001 | 0·283 | 0·263 | 0·304 |
| Tumor or cancer | <0.001 | 0·828 | 0·822 | 0·835 |
| Hypoglycemia | <0.001 | 0·607 | 0·569 | 0·647 |
Fig. 4Three clusters identified by the K-means cluster analysis
Fig. 5Switch patterns per policy for inactive patients (cluster 1)
Fig. 6Switch patterns per policy for patients primarily visiting CHCs (cluster 2)
Fig. 7Switch patterns per policy for patients primarily visiting general hospitals (cluster 3)
Fig. 8Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves of days from policy change until patients’ first switch from general hospital to CHC