Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23530744›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2013

Is Europe putting theory into practice? A qualitative study of the level of self-management support in chronic care management approaches.

Arianne Elissen, Ellen Nolte, Cécile Knai, Matthias Brunn, Karine Chevreul, Annalijn Conklin, Isabelle Durand-Zaleski, Antje Erler, Maria Flamm, Anne Frølich and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Active Health Governance-A Conceptual Framework Based on a Narrative Literature Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Arianne ElissenDepartment of Health Services Research, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, Duboisdomein 30, PO Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. a.elissen@maastrichtuniversity.nl
Ellen Nolte
Cécile Knai
Matthias Brunn
Karine Chevreul
Annalijn Conklin
Isabelle Durand-Zaleski
Antje Erler
Maria Flamm
Anne Frølich
Birgit Fullerton
Ramune Jacobsen
Zuleika Saz-Parkinson
Antonio Sarria-Santamera
Andreas Sönnichsen
Hubertus Vrijhoef

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSelf-management support is a key component of effective chronic care management, yet in practice appears to be the least implemented and most challenging. This study explores whether and how self-management support is integrated into chronic care approaches in 13 European countries. In addition, it investigates the level of and barriers to implementation of support strategies in health care practice.

methodsWe conducted a review among the 13 participating countries, based on a common data template informed by the Chronic Care Model. Key informants presented a sample of representative chronic care approaches and related self-management support strategies. The cross-country review was complemented by a Dutch case study of health professionals' views on the implementation of self-management support in practice.

resultsSelf-management support for chronically ill patients remains relatively underdeveloped in Europe. Similarities between countries exist mostly in involved providers (nurses) and settings (primary care). Differences prevail in mode and format of support, and materials used. Support activities focus primarily on patients' medical and behavioral management, and less on emotional management. According to Dutch providers, self-management support is not (yet) an integral part of daily practice; implementation is hampered by barriers related to, among others, funding, IT and medical culture.

conclusionsAlthough collaborative care for chronic conditions is becoming more important in European health systems, adequate self-management support for patients with chronic disease is far from accomplished in most countries. There is a need for better understanding of how we can encourage both patients and health care providers to engage in productive interactions in daily chronic care practice, which can improve health and social outcomes.

Indexed as

Self CareSocial SupportChronic DiseaseEuropeHumansModels, TheoreticalOrganizational Case StudiesQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID23530744
PMCPMC3621080

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.