Impact of a Care Coordination and Support Strategic Partnership on Clinical Outcomes

Engelhardt, Joseph B.; Kisiel, Theresa; Nicholson, Jeremy S.; Mulichak, Lori; DeMatteis, James; Tobin, Daniel R.

doi:10.1097/01.nhh.0000313348.85980.1e

Cited by 12 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Compared with younger cancer patients, older patients tend to have higher CCI scores, an independent predictor of competing mortality [45]. Additionally, for older patients, the support of family members and interaction with community service organizations may influence outcomes; however, the extent of this influence requires further research [46].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Combined Effect of Individual and Neighborhood Socioeconomic Status on Cancer Survival Rates

Chang

Lai

et al. 2012

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThis population-based study investigated the relationship between individual and neighborhood socioeconomic status (SES) and mortality rates for major cancers in Taiwan.MethodsA population-based follow-up study was conducted with 20,488 cancer patients diagnosed in 2002. Each patient was traced to death or for 5 years. The individual income-related insurance payment amount was used as a proxy measure of individual SES for patients. Neighborhood SES was defined by income, and neighborhoods were grouped as living in advantaged or disadvantaged areas. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to compare the death-free survival rates between the different SES groups after adjusting for possible confounding and risk factors.ResultsAfter adjusting for patient characteristics (age, gender, Charlson Comorbidity Index Score, urbanization, and area of residence), tumor extent, treatment modalities (operation and adjuvant therapy), and hospital characteristics (ownership and teaching level), colorectal cancer, and head and neck cancer patients under 65 years old with low individual SES in disadvantaged neighborhoods conferred a 1.5 to 2-fold higher risk of mortality, compared with patients with high individual SES in advantaged neighborhoods. A cross-level interaction effect was found in lung cancer and breast cancer. Lung cancer and breast cancer patients less than 65 years old with low SES in advantaged neighborhoods carried the highest risk of mortality. Prostate cancer patients aged 65 and above with low SES in disadvantaged neighborhoods incurred the highest risk of mortality. There was no association between SES and mortality for cervical cancer and pancreatic cancer.ConclusionsOur findings indicate that cancer patients with low individual SES have the highest risk of mortality even under a universal health-care system. Public health strategies and welfare policies must continue to focus on this vulnerable group.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Combined Effect of Individual and Neighborhood Socioeconomic Status on Cancer Survival Rates

Chang

Lai

et al. 2012

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A pilot program investigating the impact of a care coordination and support strategic partnership (CCSP) between a home healthcare agency and a telephone support service provided by nurses was presented by Engelhardt et al (2008). Thirty-six people with AD and their caregivers were recruited, with 32 actively participating.…”

Section: Service Delivery Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The alternatives under evaluation were discussed, albeit briefly in papers which modeled effectiveness data from other trials, or where companion papers gave fuller descriptions of the intervention (Neumann et al, 1999;Feldman et al, 2003Feldman et al, , 2004Gaugler et al, 2003;Getsios et al, 2010). The rationale behind study design was clearly stated and effectiveness was established for all studies apart from that by Engelhardt et al (2008), where effectiveness data were only collected for the intervention group due to the control being a matched historical cohort. This meant that it was not possible to determine how effective the intervention was compared to usual care.…”

Section: Study Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The range of costs collected in each study varied, with studies including health service use, social service use, informal caregiving time or a mixture of all three. Unit cost sources were stated on the whole, but several studies did not report the price year (Roberts et al, 1999;Challis et al, 2002;Courtney et al, 2004;Graff et al, 2006;Engelhardt et al, 2008). Of the studies where follow-up extended beyond 12 months, discounting of costs and benefits was conducted where appropriate, apart from the study by Courtney et al (2004) where annual costs were calculated by multiplying each 12-week phase up to a year rather than using costs collected over a longer time period.…”

Section: Study Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Half of the studies performed an incremental analysis of costs and consequences (Drummond et al, 1999;Neumann et al, 1999;Gaugler et al, 2003;Martikainen et al, 2004;Charlesworth et al, 2008;Getsios et al, 2010). No form of sensitivity analysis was mentioned in five of the studies (Drummond et al, 1999;Roberts et al, 1999;Challis et al, 2002;Gaugler et al, 2003;Engelhardt et al, 2008).…”

Section: Study Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of interventions for supporting informal caregivers of people with dementia residing in the community

Jones

Edwards

Hounsome

2011

Int. Psychogeriatr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At present few published studies report costs in enough detail to provide evidence of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of interventions for supporting caregivers. Future trials need to collect caregiver data alongside patient data in order to increase the evidence base for intervention effectiveness. Further research is required to establish the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of both pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches.

show abstract

An integrative review of measures of transitions and care coordination for persons living with dementia and their caregivers

Hirschman

McHugh

Morgan

2023

A&D Transl Res & Clin Interv

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionHigh rates of hospital visits and readmissions are common among persons living with dementia, resulting in frequent transitions in care and care coordination. This paper identifies and evaluates existing measures of transitions and care coordination for persons living with dementia and their caregivers.MethodsThis integrative review builds off a prior review using a systematic search of online databases (PubMed, EBSCO, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and Scopus) to identify records and locate reports (or articles) that use measures of care transitions and care coordination. Identified measures were compared to the Alzheimer's Association's Dementia Care Practice Recommendations to evaluate strengths and weaknesses of the measure in this population, such as if measures were person‐ and family‐centered.ResultsSeventy‐one reports using measures of transitions in care and care coordination for persons living with dementia and their caregivers were identified. There were multiple measures identified in some reports. Three main areas of measures were classified into: identification of the population (3 measures, 8 reports), transitional care and care coordination delivery (14 measures, 17 reports), and transitional care and care coordination outcomes (e.g., health‐care use, cost, and mortality; 17 measures, 60 reports). A strength of the three main areas of measures was that a portion of the measures were person‐ and family‐centered. Variability in the operational definitions of some measures and time intensiveness of collecting the measure (e.g., number of items, the time it takes to complete the items) were common weaknesses.DiscussionTransitions and care coordination measures are varied across studies targeted at persons living with dementia and their caregivers. Existing measures focus heavily on outcomes, specifically health‐care resource use, and cost, rather than the elements of transitional care or care coordination. Future measure development focused on care transitions and service coordination is needed.

show abstract

Impact of a Care Coordination and Support Strategic Partnership on Clinical Outcomes

Cited by 12 publications

References 3 publications

The Combined Effect of Individual and Neighborhood Socioeconomic Status on Cancer Survival Rates

The Combined Effect of Individual and Neighborhood Socioeconomic Status on Cancer Survival Rates

A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of interventions for supporting informal caregivers of people with dementia residing in the community

An integrative review of measures of transitions and care coordination for persons living with dementia and their caregivers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About