Michel Wensing1, Joachim Szecsenyi2, Gunter Laux2. 1. Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. Michel.Wensing@med.uni-heidelberg.de. 2. Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High continuity of care is a key feature of strong general practice. This study aimed to assess the effect of a programme for enhancing strong general practice care on the continuity of care in Germany. The second aim was to assess the effect of continuity of care on hospitalization patterns. METHODS: We performed an observational study in Germany, involving patients who received a strong general practice care programme (n=1.037.075) and patients who did not receive this programme (n=723.127) in the year 2017. We extracted data from a health insurance database. The cohorts were compared with respect to three measures of continuity of care (Usual Provider Index, Herfindahl Index, and the Sequential Continuity Index), adjusted for patient characteristics. The effects of continuity in general practice on the rates of hospitalization, rehospitalization, and avoidable hospitalization were examined in multiple regression analyses. RESULTS: Compared to the control cohort, continuity in general practice was higher in patients who received the programme (continuity measures were 12.47 to 23.76% higher, P< 0.0001). Higher continuity of care was independently associated with lowered risk of hospitalization, rehospitalization, and avoidable hospitalization (relative risk reductions between 2.45 and 9.74%, P< 0.0001). Higher age, female sex, higher morbidity (Charlson-index), and home-dwelling status (not nursing home) were associated with higher rates of hospitalization. CONCLUSION: Higher continuity of care may be one of the mechanisms underlying lower hospitalization rates in patients who received strong general practice care, but further research is needed to examine the causality underlying the associations.
BACKGROUND: High continuity of care is a key feature of strong general practice. This study aimed to assess the effect of a programme for enhancing strong general practice care on the continuity of care in Germany. The second aim was to assess the effect of continuity of care on hospitalization patterns. METHODS: We performed an observational study in Germany, involving patients who received a strong general practice care programme (n=1.037.075) and patients who did not receive this programme (n=723.127) in the year 2017. We extracted data from a health insurance database. The cohorts were compared with respect to three measures of continuity of care (Usual Provider Index, Herfindahl Index, and the Sequential Continuity Index), adjusted for patient characteristics. The effects of continuity in general practice on the rates of hospitalization, rehospitalization, and avoidable hospitalization were examined in multiple regression analyses. RESULTS: Compared to the control cohort, continuity in general practice was higher in patients who received the programme (continuity measures were 12.47 to 23.76% higher, P< 0.0001). Higher continuity of care was independently associated with lowered risk of hospitalization, rehospitalization, and avoidable hospitalization (relative risk reductions between 2.45 and 9.74%, P< 0.0001). Higher age, female sex, higher morbidity (Charlson-index), and home-dwelling status (not nursing home) were associated with higher rates of hospitalization. CONCLUSION: Higher continuity of care may be one of the mechanisms underlying lower hospitalization rates in patients who received strong general practice care, but further research is needed to examine the causality underlying the associations.
Entities:
Keywords:
Continuity of care; General practice; Health services research; Hospitalization patterns
Authors: Antje Freytag; Janine Biermann; Andreas Ochs; Gerald Lux; Thomas Lehmann; Jana Ziegler; Sven Schulz; Michel Wensing; Jürgen Wasem; Jochen Gensichen Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2016-11-25 Impact factor: 5.594
Authors: Andrew Bazemore; Stephen Petterson; Lars E Peterson; Richard Bruno; Yoonkyung Chung; Robert L Phillips Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Tobias Freund; Stephen M Campbell; Stefan Geissler; Cornelia U Kunz; Cornelia Mahler; Frank Peters-Klimm; Joachim Szecsenyi Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2013 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Michel Wensing; Petra Kaufmann Kolle; Joachim Szecsenyi; Christian Stock; Gunter Laux Journal: Scand J Prim Health Care Date: 2018-04-06 Impact factor: 2.581
Authors: Angelina Mueller; Olga A Sawicki; Moritz Philipp Günther; Anastasiya Glushan; Claudia Witte; Renate Klaaßen-Mielke; Ferdinand M Gerlach; Martin Beyer; Kateryna Karimova Journal: Eur J Gen Pract Date: 2022-12 Impact factor: 3.636
Authors: Angelina Müller; Olga Anastasia Amberger; Anastasiya Glushan; Renate Klaaßen-Mielke; Claudia Witte; Marjan van den Akker; Robin Brünn; Ferdinand M Gerlach; Martin Beyer; Kateryna Karimova Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-08-08 Impact factor: 3.006