Integrated care programmes for adults with chronic conditions: a meta-review.
Options
BORIS DOI
Date of Publication
2014
Publication Type
Article
Division/Institute
Series
International journal for quality in health care
ISSN or ISBN (if monograph)
1353-4505
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Language
English
Publisher DOI
PubMed ID
25108537
Uncontrolled Keywords
Description
OBJECTIVE
To review systematic reviews and meta-analyses of integrated care programmes in chronically ill patients, with a focus on methodological quality, elements of integration assessed and effects reported.
DESIGN
Meta-review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses identified in Medline (1946-March 2012), Embase (1980-March 2012), CINHAL (1981-March 2012) and the Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews (issue 1, 2012).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Methodological quality assessed by the 11-item Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) checklist; elements of integration assessed using a published list of 10 key principles of integration; effects on patient-centred outcomes, process quality, use of healthcare and costs.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven systematic reviews were identified; conditions included chronic heart failure (CHF; 12 reviews), diabetes mellitus (DM; seven reviews), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; seven reviews) and asthma (five reviews). The median number of AMSTAR checklist items met was five: few reviewers searched for unpublished literature or described the primary studies and interventions in detail. Most reviews covered comprehensive services across the care continuum or standardization of care through inter-professional teams, but organizational culture, governance structure or financial management were rarely assessed. A majority of reviews found beneficial effects of integration, including reduced hospital admissions and re-admissions (in CHF and DM), improved adherence to treatment guidelines (DM, COPD and asthma) or quality of life (DM). Few reviews showed reductions in costs.
CONCLUSIONS
Systematic reviews of integrated care programmes were of mixed quality, assessed only some components of integration of care, and showed consistent benefits for some outcomes but not others.
To review systematic reviews and meta-analyses of integrated care programmes in chronically ill patients, with a focus on methodological quality, elements of integration assessed and effects reported.
DESIGN
Meta-review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses identified in Medline (1946-March 2012), Embase (1980-March 2012), CINHAL (1981-March 2012) and the Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews (issue 1, 2012).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Methodological quality assessed by the 11-item Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) checklist; elements of integration assessed using a published list of 10 key principles of integration; effects on patient-centred outcomes, process quality, use of healthcare and costs.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven systematic reviews were identified; conditions included chronic heart failure (CHF; 12 reviews), diabetes mellitus (DM; seven reviews), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; seven reviews) and asthma (five reviews). The median number of AMSTAR checklist items met was five: few reviewers searched for unpublished literature or described the primary studies and interventions in detail. Most reviews covered comprehensive services across the care continuum or standardization of care through inter-professional teams, but organizational culture, governance structure or financial management were rarely assessed. A majority of reviews found beneficial effects of integration, including reduced hospital admissions and re-admissions (in CHF and DM), improved adherence to treatment guidelines (DM, COPD and asthma) or quality of life (DM). Few reviews showed reductions in costs.
CONCLUSIONS
Systematic reviews of integrated care programmes were of mixed quality, assessed only some components of integration of care, and showed consistent benefits for some outcomes but not others.
File(s)
| File | File Type | Format | Size | License | Publisher/Copright statement | Content | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Martinez-Gonzalez IntJQualHealthCare 2014.pdf | text | Adobe PDF | 360.62 KB | Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) | published |