Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29420543›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2018

Does the chronic care model meet the emerging needs of people living with multimorbidity? A systematic review and thematic synthesis.

Kasey R Boehmer, Abd Moain Abu Dabrh, Michael R Gionfriddo, Patricia Erwin, Victor M Montori

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 64 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
64citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

64 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. National and Subnational Models of Care That Support Primary Health Care: A Mixed-Methods Study.The International journal of health planning and management · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Caring for high-need patients.BMC health services research · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

4 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Kasey R BoehmerKnowledge and Evaluation Research (KER) Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-5637-6803
Abd Moain Abu DabrhKnowledge and Evaluation Research (KER) Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America.
Michael R GionfriddoKnowledge and Evaluation Research (KER) Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America.
Patricia ErwinMayo Medical Libraries, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America.
Victor M MontoriKnowledge and Evaluation Research (KER) Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Chronic Care Model (CCM) emerged in the 1990s as an approach to re-organize primary care and implement critical elements that enable it to proactively attend to patients with chronic conditions. The chronic care landscape has evolved further, as most patients now present with multiple chronic conditions and increasing psychosocial complexity. These patients face accumulating and overwhelming complexity resulting from the sum of uncoordinated responses to each of their problems. Minimally Disruptive Medicine (MDM) was proposed to respond to this challenge, aiming at improving outcomes that matter to patients with the smallest burden of treatment. We sought to critically appraise the extent to which MDM constructs (e.g., reducing patient work, improving patients' capacity) have been adopted within CCM implementations.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review and qualitative thematic synthesis of reports of CCM implementations published from 2011-2016.

resultsCCM implementations were mostly aligned with the healthcare system's goals, condition-specific, and targeted disease-specific outcomes or healthcare utilization. No CCM implementation addressed patient work. Few reduced treatment workload without adding additional tasks. Implementations supported patient capacity by offering information, but rarely offered practical resources (e.g., financial assistance, transportation), helped patients reframe their biography with chronic illness, or assisted them in engaging with a supportive social network. Few implementations aimed at improving functional status or quality of life, and only one-third of studies were targeted for patients of low socioeconomic status.

conclusionMDM provides a lens to operationalize how to care for patients with multiple chronic conditions, but its constructs remain mostly absent from how implementations of the CCM are currently reported. Improvements to the primary care of patients with multimorbidity may benefit from the application of MDM, and the current CCM implementations that do apply MDM constructs should be considered exemplars for future implementation work.

Indexed as

Models, OrganizationalMultimorbidityChronic DiseaseDelivery of Health CareHumans

Identifiers

PMID29420543
PMCPMC5805171

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.