ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2022
The Medical Home Initiative in Italy: an Analysis of Changes in Healthcare Utilization.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stratifying the population based on health risk: identification of patient key health risk factors through consensus techniques.BMC primary care · 2025Guideline
- Toward resilient and efficient pediatric critical care provision amid falling birth rates.World journal of pediatrics : WJP · 2026Article
- Practice Site Heterogeneity within and between Medicaid Accountable Care Organizations.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeventeen medical homes (MHs) were established in the Local Health Authority (LHA) of Parma (about 450,000 residents), Emilia Romagna, Italy, between 2011 and 2016.
objectiveTo estimate the effects of MH implementation on healthcare utilization.
designWe conducted a longitudinal cohort study (01/2011-12/2017) using the Parma LHA administrative healthcare database.
participantsResidents for ≥1 year and older than 14 years of age with a documented primary care physician (PCP) in Parma LHA.
interventionMH exposure status was classified for each resident as either receiving care from a PCP that (1) eventually practices in an MH (pre-MH), (2) is currently in an MH (post-MH), or (3) does not join an MH (non-MH).
main outcome measuresRisks of ordinary inpatient hospital admissions, day hospital admissions, admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs), all-cause emergency department (ED) visits, and deferrable ED visits were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression and risks of all-cause 30- and 90-day readmissions for congestive heart failure (CHF) or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were compared using logistic regression. KEY
resultsPrior to MH implementation, the risk of all-cause ED visits for pre-MH residents was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.92-0.94) that of non-MH residents. After MH implementation, the relative risk for post-MH versus non-MH was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.85-0.87) and, over time, post-MH versus pre-MH was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.92-0.94). Hospitalization risks were generally lower among the pre-MH and post-MH, compared to non-MH. However, hospitalizations and HF or COPD readmissions were not generally lower post-MH compared to pre-MH.
conclusionsThis MH initiative was associated with a 7% reduction in risk of ED visits. More research is necessary to understand if ED visit risk will continue to improve and how other aspects of healthcare utilization might change as more MHs open and the length of exposure to MHs increases.
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.