Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
3.
NPJ Prim Care Respir Med ; 25: 15071, 2015 Dec 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26677770

ABSTRACT

This study aims to (1) examine the variation in implementation of a 2-year chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management programme called RECODE, (2) analyse the facilitators and barriers to implementation and (3) investigate the influence of this variation on health outcomes. Implementation variation among the 20 primary-care teams was measured directly using a self-developed scale and indirectly through the level of care integration as measured with the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) and the Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (ACIC). Interviews were held to obtain detailed information regarding the facilitators and barriers to implementation. Multilevel models were used to investigate the association between variation in implementation and change in outcomes. The teams implemented, on average, eight of the 19 interventions, and the specific package of interventions varied widely. Important barriers and facilitators of implementation were (in)sufficient motivation of healthcare provider and patient, the high starting level of COPD care, the small size of the COPD population per team, the mild COPD population, practicalities of the information and communication technology (ICT) system, and hurdles in reimbursement. Level of implementation as measured with our own scale and the ACIC was not associated with health outcomes. A higher level of implementation measured with the PACIC was positively associated with improved self-management capabilities, but this association was not found for other outcomes. There was a wide variety in the implementation of RECODE, associated with barriers at individual, social, organisational and societal level. There was little association between extent of implementation and health outcomes.


Subject(s)
Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Primary Health Care/organization & administration , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/rehabilitation , Self Care , Aged , Disease Management , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Multilevel Analysis , Physical Therapy Modalities , Smoking Cessation
4.
BMJ Open ; 5(10): e007284, 2015 Nov 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26525419

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) disease management (COPD-DM) programme in primary care, called RECODE, compared to usual care. DESIGN: A 2-year cluster-randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 40 general practices in the western part of the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 1086 patients with COPD according to GOLD (Global Initiative for COPD) criteria. Exclusion criteria were terminal illness, cognitive impairment, alcohol or drug misuse and inability to fill in Dutch questionnaires. Practices were included if they were willing to create a multidisciplinary COPD team. INTERVENTIONS: A multidisciplinary team of caregivers was trained in motivational interviewing, setting up individual care plans, exacerbation management, implementing clinical guidelines and redesigning the care process. In addition, clinical decision-making was supported by feedback reports provided by an ICT programme. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We investigated the impact on health outcomes (quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), Clinical COPD Questionnaire, St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire and exacerbations) and costs (healthcare and societal perspective). RESULTS: The intervention costs were €324 per patient. Excluding these costs, the intervention group had €584 (95% CI €86 to €1046) higher healthcare costs than did the usual care group and €645 (95% CI €28 to €1190) higher costs from the societal perspective. Health outcomes were similar in both groups, except for 0.04 (95% CI -0.07 to -0.01) less QALYs in the intervention group. CONCLUSIONS: This integrated care programme for patients with COPD that mainly included professionally directed interventions was not cost-effective in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Netherlands Trial Register NTR2268.


Subject(s)
Cost-Benefit Analysis , Disease Management , Health Care Costs , Patient Care Team , Primary Health Care , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/therapy , Quality of Life , Aged , Female , General Practice , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Motivational Interviewing , Netherlands , Patient Care Team/economics , Primary Health Care/economics , Program Evaluation/economics , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/economics , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Surveys and Questionnaires
5.
BMJ ; 349: g5392, 2014 Sep 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25209620

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the long term effectiveness of integrated disease management delivered in primary care on quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) compared with usual care. DESIGN: 24 month, multicentre, pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial SETTING: 40 general practices in the western part of the Netherlands PARTICIPANTS: Patients with COPD according to GOLD (Global Initiative for COPD) criteria. Exclusion criteria were terminal illness, cognitive impairment, alcohol or drug misuse, and inability to fill in Dutch questionnaires. Practices were included if they were willing to create a multidisciplinary COPD team. INTERVENTION: General practitioners, practice nurses, and specialised physiotherapists in the intervention group received a two day training course on incorporating integrated disease management in practice, including early recognition of exacerbations and self management, smoking cessation, physiotherapeutic reactivation, optimal diagnosis, and drug adherence. Additionally, the course served as a network platform and collaborating healthcare providers designed an individual practice plan to integrate integrated disease management into daily practice. The control group continued usual care (based on international guidelines). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was difference in health status at 12 months, measured by the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ); quality of life, Medical Research Council dyspnoea, exacerbation related outcomes, self management, physical activity, and level of integrated care (PACIC) were also assessed as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Of a total of 1086 patients from 40 clusters, 20 practices (554 patients) were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 20 clusters (532 patients) to the usual care group. No difference was seen between groups in the CCQ at 12 months (mean difference -0.01, 95% confidence interval -0.10 to 0.08; P=0.8). After 12 months, no differences were seen in secondary outcomes between groups, except for the PACIC domain "follow-up/coordination" (indicating improved integration of care) and proportion of physically active patients. Exacerbation rates as well as number of days in hospital did not differ between groups. After 24 months, no differences were seen in outcomes, except for the PACIC follow-up/coordination domain. CONCLUSION: In this pragmatic study, an integrated disease management approach delivered in primary care showed no additional benefit compared with usual care, except improved level of integrated care and a self reported higher degree of daily activities. The contradictory findings to earlier positive studies could be explained by differences between interventions (provider versus patient targeted), selective reporting of positive trials, or little room for improvement in the already well developed Dutch healthcare system. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR2268.


Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care, Integrated/standards , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/therapy , Aged , Cluster Analysis , Female , General Practice/standards , Humans , Male , Netherlands , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...