Effects of team care of frequent attenders on patients and physicians.

Adam, Patricia; Brandenburg, Dana; Bremer, Karin Lindstrom; Nordstrom, David L.

doi:10.1037/a0020944

Cited by 16 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These included some services beyond vider or care coordinator. Other participants varied and sometimes having an IPC, but they involved less comprehensive care coordinaincluded mental health professionals (Katon et al, 2010; Unützer tion and more narrowly defined patient populations than the studies et al, 2002) or multidisciplinary teams (Adam et al, 2010; Aiken mentioned earlier. We identified three studies in adults and one in et al, 2006;Casey et al, 2011;Counsell et al, 2007).…”

Section: Farmer Et Al 2005mentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Studies examining who should participate in developing an IPC or which components are most effective for improving outcomes are also lacking, although Targeted Populations most IPCs described in the literature included a clinical summary or Populations targeted fell into three main categories: patients with medical management plan, and many from the adult literature taichronic disease impacting multiple organ systems, considered comlored standardized protocols to individuals' needs. Nonetheless, IPC plex (Adam et al, 2010;Aiken et al, 2006;Cady et al, 2009; use is a common and often prominent part of multifaceted intervenet al, 2011;Farmer et al, 2005;Gordon et al, 2007;Kelly et al, tions that have resulted in improved mortality, hospitalization, dis-2002); patients with chronic disease impacting primarily a single ease management, and family satisfaction, among other outcomes. organ system, considered noncomplex (Katon et al, 2001;Lozano The evidence is particularly compelling for improved symptoms and The evidence is particularly compelling for improved symptoms and disease management in adults with depression.…”

Section: Important Components and Participants In Ipcsmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…We identified a single study describing the impact of an IPC alone on outcomes. The small trial (n 5 20) evaluated the effect of an IPC with multidisciplinary input for adult primary care patients considered "frequent attenders" (Adam, Brandenburg, Bremer, & Nordstrom, 2010). Compared to controls, IPC patients had greater satisfaction, fewer clinic visits, and improved referral to mental health and pharmacy services.…”

Section: Outcomes Associated With Ipc Interventions By Intervention Typementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Intervention patients had fewer symptom days, conditions with evidence-based treatment approaches. We did Casey et al, 2011;Dorr et al, 2008;Lozano et al, 2004;Palfrey et al, 2004;Rocco et al, 2011 Medication list 2 0 Casey et al, 2011;Lozano et al, 2004 Anticipated acute medical management plans 1 1 Aiken et al, 2006;Cady et al, 2009 Medical management plan for chronic or 1 6 Adam et al, 2010;Casey et al, 2011;Counsell et al, general problems 2007;Dorr et al, 2008;Katon et al, 2010;Katon et al, 2001;Unützer et al, 2002 Protocol-based medical management plans 1 6 Aiken et al, 2006;Counsell et al, 2007;Dorr et al, 2008;Katon et al, 2010;Katon et al, 2001;Lozano et al, 2004;Unützer et al, 2002 Goal-setting 2 4 Aiken et al, 2006;Farmer et al, 2005;Farmer et al, 2011;Katon et al, 2010;Katon et al, 2001;Rocco et al, 2011 List of community services 3 0 Casey et al, 2011;Farmer et al, 2005;Gordon et al, 2007 Self-monitoring plans 1 1 Katon et al, 2001;Lozano et al, 2004 Note. IPC 5 individualized plan of care.…”

Section: Important Components and Participants In Ipcsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Individualized Plans of Care to Improve Outcomes Among Children and Adults With Chronic Illness: A Systematic Review

Lion

Mangione-Smith²,

Britto³

2014

Care Management Journals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Farmer Et Al 2005mentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Important Components and Participants In Ipcsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Outcomes Associated With Ipc Interventions By Intervention Typementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Important Components and Participants In Ipcsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Individualized Plans of Care to Improve Outcomes Among Children and Adults With Chronic Illness: A Systematic Review

Lion

Mangione-Smith²,

Britto³

2014

Care Management Journals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A qualitative study by Grinberg et al 41 on the key components of successful case management reported that the development of a healing relationship between clinicians and their patients was based on security, genuineness, and continuity of care. A nonrandomized but controlled study by Adam et al 42 demonstrated an improvement in patient well-being after the implementation of a case management intervention by an interdisciplinary care team. In addition, the evaluation of a community matron service by Leighton et al 43 found that a better access to health care services was related to patient confidence.…”

Section: Findings In Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Case Management in Primary Care for Frequent Users of Health Care Services: A Mixed Methods Study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE This study aimed to evaluate the effects of the V1SAGES case management intervention (Vulnerable Patients in Primary Care: Nurse Case Management and Self-management Support) for frequent users of health care services with chronic disease and complex care needs on psychological distress and patient activation. METHODSWe used a 2-phase sequential mixed methods design. The first phase was a pragmatic randomized controlled trial with intention-to-treat analysis that measured the effects of the intervention compared with usual care on psychological distress and patient activation before and after 6 months. The second phase had a qualitative descriptive design and entailed thematic analysis of in-depth interviews (25 patients, 6 case management nurses, 9 health managers) and focus groups (8 patients' spouses, 21 family physicians) to understand stakeholders' perceived effects of the intervention on patients. RESULTSA total of 247 patients were randomized into the intervention group (n = 126) or the control group (n = 121). Compared with usual care, the intervention reduced psychological distress (odds ratio = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.19-0.95, P = .04), but did not have any significant effect on patient activation (P = .43). Qualitative results suggested that patients and their spouses benefitted from the case management intervention, gaining a sense of security, and stakeholders noted better patient self-management of health.CONCLUSIONS Together, our study's quantitative and qualitative results suggest that case management reduces psychological distress, making patients and caregivers feel more secure, whereas impact on self-management is unclear. Case management is a promising avenue to improve outcomes among frequent users of health care with complex needs. Ann Fam Med 2018;16:232-239. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2233. INTRODUCTIONF requent use of health care services is often driven by the complex health and social care needs of individuals having chronic physical conditions and, often, mental health comorbidities, sometimes accompanied by social vulnerability.1,2 Frequent users with chronic disease and complex care needs often experience fragmented, uncoordinated, and ineffective health care, resulting in poor health outcomes at considerable costs to the health care system. 3 Although high use may be defined from either a frequency or cost perspective, the former is more convenient and easier to measure when identifying this population in a pragmatic context. Given that primary care is a first point of contact with the health and social care system, it may play a strong role in allowing the implementation of innovations to provide more coordinated care. 4 Different interventions have been developed and evaluated to improve care for frequent users of health care services, such as case management, individualized care plans, self-management support, and information sharing. 5 Case management is the intervention most supported by evidence on improving appropriate use of health care resources, decreasing undue C...

show abstract

Interventions to Improve Outcomes for High-Need, High-Cost Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Chronic disease patients who are the greatest users of healthcare services are often referred to as high-need, high-cost (HNHC). Payers, providers, and policymakers in the United States are interested in identifying interventions that can modify or reduce preventable healthcare use among these patients, without adversely impacting their quality of care and health. We systematically reviewed the evidence on the effectiveness of complex interventions designed to change the healthcare of HNHC patients, modifying cost and utilization, as well as clinical/functional, and social risk factor outcomes. METHODS: We searched 8 electronic databases (January 2000 to March 2021) and selected non-profit organization and government agency websites for randomized controlled trials and observational studies with comparison groups that targeted HNHC patients. Two investigators independently screened each study and abstracted data into structured forms. Study quality was assessed using standard risk of bias tools. Random-effects meta-analysis was conducted for outcomes reported by at least 3 comparable samples. RESULTS: Forty studies met our inclusion criteria. Interventions were heterogenous and classified into 7 categories, reflecting the predominant service location/modality (home, primary care, ambulatory intensive caring unit [aICU], emergency department [ED], community, telephonic/mail, and system-level). Home-, primary care-, and ED-based interventions resulted in reductions in high-cost healthcare services (ED and hospital use). ED-based interventions also resulted in greater use of primary care. Primary care-and ED-based interventions reduced costs. System-level transformation interventions did not reduce costs. DISCUSSION: We found limited evidence of intervention effectiveness in relation to cost and use, and additional evidence is needed to strengthen our confidence in the findings. Few studies reported patient clinical/ Prior Presentations Findings from an early draft of these results were presented at the 2020 AcademyHealth Annual Research Meeting. The results using all included studies can be found in the full AHRQ evidence report, available at https://doi.org/10.23970/AHRQEPCCER246.

show abstract

Effects of team care of frequent attenders on patients and physicians.

Cited by 16 publications

References 22 publications

Individualized Plans of Care to Improve Outcomes Among Children and Adults With Chronic Illness: A Systematic Review

Individualized Plans of Care to Improve Outcomes Among Children and Adults With Chronic Illness: A Systematic Review

Case Management in Primary Care for Frequent Users of Health Care Services: A Mixed Methods Study

Interventions to Improve Outcomes for High-Need, High-Cost Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About