Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34378796›Full record

ArticleHealth services research2021

Differences in health outcomes for high-need high-cost patients across high-income countries.

Irene Papanicolas, Kristen Riley, Olukorede Abiona, Mina Arvin, Femke Atsma, Enrique Bernal-Delgado, Nicholas Bowden, Carl Rudolf Blankart, Sarah Deeny, Francisco Estupiñán-Romero and 16 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The healthcare system in Sweden.European journal of epidemiology · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

26 authors.

Irene PapanicolasDepartment of Health Policy, London School of Economics, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8000-3185
Kristen RileyDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Olukorede AbionaCentre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation (CHERE), University of Technology, Sydney, Australia.
Mina ArvinScientific Center for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Femke AtsmaScientific Center for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5944-2431
Enrique Bernal-DelgadoInstitute for Health Sciences in Aragon (IACS), Zaragoza, Aragon, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-0961-3298
Nicholas BowdenDunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, Otago, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-4589-9956
Carl Rudolf BlankartKPM Center for Public Management, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-6719-0038
Sarah DeenyThe Health Foundation, London, UK.
Francisco Estupiñán-RomeroInstitute for Health Sciences in Aragon (IACS), Zaragoza, Aragon, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-6285-8120
Robin GauldOtago Business School, University of Otago, Dunedin, Otago, New Zealand.
Philip HaywoodCentre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation (CHERE), University of Technology, Sydney, Australia.
Nils JanlovThe Swedish Agency for Health and Care Services Analysis, Stockholm, Sweden.
Hannah KnightThe Health Foundation, London, UK.
Luca LorenzoniHealth Division, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0001-5449-2985
Alberto MarinoDepartment of Health Policy, London School of Economics, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1588-8746
Zeynep OrInstitute for Research and Documentation in Health Economics (IRDES), Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-6860-3735
Anne PenneauInstitute for Research and Documentation in Health Economics (IRDES), Paris, France.
Andrew J SchoenfeldDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Kosta ShatrovKPM Center for Public Management, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-6421-6754
Mai StaffordThe Health Foundation, London, UK.
Onno van de GalienZilveren Kruis, Leusden, The Netherlands.
Kees van GoolCentre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation (CHERE), University of Technology, Sydney, Australia.
Walter WodchisInstitute of Health Policy Management & Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2494-7031
Ashish K JhaBrown School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6602-6444
Jose F FigueroaDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3811-257X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study explores variations in outcomes of care for two types of patient personas-an older frail person recovering from a hip fracture and a multimorbid older patient with congestive heart failure (CHF) and diabetes. DATA SOURCES: We used individual-level patient data from 11 health systems. STUDY

designWe compared inpatient mortality, mortality, and readmission rates at 30, 90, and 365 days. For the hip fracture persona, we also calculated time to surgery. Outcomes were standardized by age and sex. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION

methodsData was compiled by the International Collaborative on Costs, Outcomes and Needs in Care across 11 countries for the years 2016-2017 (or nearest): Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United States. PRINCIPAL

findingsThe hip sample across ranged from 1859 patients in Aragon, Spain, to 42,849 in France. Mean age ranged from 81.2 in Switzerland to 84.7 in Australia, and the majority of hip patients across countries were female. The congestive heart failure (CHF) sample ranged from 742 patients in England to 21,803 in the United States. Mean age ranged from 77.2 in the United States to 80.3 in Sweden, and the majority of CHF patients were males. Average in-hospital mortality across countries was 4.1%. for the hip persona and 6.3% for the CHF persona. At the year mark, the mean mortality across all countries was 25.3% for the hip persona and 32.7% for CHF persona. Across both patient types, England reported the highest mortality at 1 year followed by the United States. Readmission rates for all periods were higher for the CHF persona than the hip persona. At 30 days, the average readmission rate for the hip persona was 13.8% and 27.6% for the CHF persona.

conclusionAcross 11 countries, there are meaningful differences in health system outcomes for two types of patients.

Indexed as

Heart FailureHip FracturesOutcome Assessment, Health CareAgedAged, 80 and overAustraliaDeveloped CountriesDiabetes MellitusEuropeFemaleFrail ElderlyHospital MortalityHumansMaleNorth AmericaPatient Readmissionhealth systemsmortalityreadmissions

Identifiers

PMID34378796
PMCPMC8579207

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.