ArticleHealth services insights2021
Benchmarking European Home Care Models for Older Persons on Societal Costs: The IBenC Study.
Article in Health services insights, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to benchmark mean societal costs per client in different home care models and to describe characteristics of home care models with the lowest societal costs. In this prospective longitudinal study in 6 European countries, 6-month societal costs of resource utilization of 2060 older home care clients were estimated. Three care models were identified and compared based on level of patient-centered care (PCC), availability of specialized professionals (ASP) and level of monitoring of care performance (MCP). Differences in costs between care models were analyzed using linear regression while adjusting for case mix differences. Societal costs incurred in care model 2 (low ASP; high PCC & MCP) were significantly higher than in care model 1 (high ASP, PCC & MCP, mean difference €2230 (10%)) and in care model 3 (low ASP & PCC; high MCP, mean difference €2552 (12%)). Organizations within both models with the lowest societal costs, systematically monitor their care performance. However, organizations within one model arranged their care with a low focus on patient-centered care, and employed mainly generalist care professionals, while organizations in the other model arranged their care delivery with a strong focus on patient-centered care combined with a high availability of specialized care professionals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.