Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29382327›Full record

SynthesisBMC health services research2018

A systematic review of care management interventions targeting multimorbidity and high care utilization.

Jennifer M Baker, Richard W Grant, Anjali Gopalan

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Caring for high-need patients.BMC health services research · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

3 authors.

Jennifer M BakerKaiser Permanente Northern California Division of Research, 2000 Broadway, Oakland, CA, 94612, USA.
Richard W GrantKaiser Permanente Northern California Division of Research, 2000 Broadway, Oakland, CA, 94612, USA.
Anjali GopalanKaiser Permanente Northern California Division of Research, 2000 Broadway, Oakland, CA, 94612, USA. Anjali.Gopalan@kp.org.ORCID 0000-0002-9300-1154

Funding

Multi-Component Behavioral Intervention for Complex Patients with CVD RiskR01HL117939 · NHLBI · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI GRANT, RICHARD W · 2014 to 2018
$3.4M
Mentored Research to Improve Care for Complex Patients with DiabetesK24DK109114 · NIDDK · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI GRANT, RICHARD W · 2016 to 2020
$914k
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL117939NIDDK NIH HHS K24 DK109114
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence supporting the effectiveness of care management programs for complex patients has been inconclusive. However, past reviews have not focused on complexity primarily defined by multimorbidity and healthcare utilization. We conducted a systematic review of care management interventions targeting the following three patient groups: adults with two or more chronic medical conditions, adults with at least one chronic medical condition and concurrent depression, and adults identified based solely on high past or predicted healthcare utilization.

methodsEligible studies were identified from PubMed, published between 06/01/2005 and 05/31/2015, and reported findings from a randomized intervention that tested a comprehensive, care management intervention. Identified interventions were grouped based on the three "complex" categories of interest (described above). Two investigators extracted data using a structured abstraction form and assessed RCT quality.

resultsWe screened 989 article titles for eligibility from which 847 were excluded. After reviewing the remaining 142 abstracts, 83 articles were excluded. We reviewed the full-text of 59 full-text articles and identified 15 unique RCTs for the final analysis. Of these 15 studies, two focused on patients with two or more chronic medical conditions, seven on patients with at least one chronic medical condition and depression, and six on patients with high past or predicted healthcare utilization. Measured outcomes included utilization, chronic disease measures, and patient-reported outcomes. The seven studies targeting patients with at least one chronic medical condition and depression demonstrated significant improvement in depression symptoms (ranging from 9.2 to 48.7% improvement). Of the six studies that focused on high utilizers, two showed small reductions in utilization. The quality of the research methodology in most of the studies (12/15) was rated fair or poor.

conclusionsInterventions were more likely to be successful when patients were selected based on having at least one chronic medical condition and concurrent depression, and when patient-reported outcomes were assessed. Future research should focus on the role of mental health in complex care management, finding better methods for identifying patients who would benefit most from care management, and determining which intervention components are needed for which patients.

Indexed as

Disease ManagementMultimorbidityPatient-Centered CareChronic DiseaseEvidence-Based PracticeHumansPatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient Reported Outcome MeasuresRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicCare managementCase managementChronic conditionComplex patientsDepressionMultimorbidityUtilization

Identifiers

PMID29382327
PMCPMC5791200

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.