Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36481830›Full record

ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2023

Cost-benefit analysis of the CoCare intervention to improve medical care in long-term care nursing homes: an analysis based on claims data.

Boris A Brühmann, Klaus Kaier, Rieka von der Warth, Erik Farin-Glattacker

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Regional differences, repeated use, and costs of emergency medical services in Germany.Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2025
    Article
  3. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Boris A BrühmannInstitute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Section of Health Care Research and Rehabilitation Research (SEVERA), Faculty of Medicine and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. boris.bruehmann@uniklinik-freiburg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6012-6359
Klaus KaierInstitute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Division Methods in Clinical Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Rieka von der WarthInstitute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Section of Health Care Research and Rehabilitation Research (SEVERA), Faculty of Medicine and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Erik Farin-GlattackerInstitute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Section of Health Care Research and Rehabilitation Research (SEVERA), Faculty of Medicine and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
University of Freiburg · DE

Funding

Gemeinsame Bundesausschuss NVF1_2016-080
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProviding adequate medical care to nursing home residents is challenging. Transfers to emergency departments are frequent, although often avoidable. We conducted the complex CoCare intervention with the aim to optimize nursing staff-physician collaboration to reduce avoidable hospital admissions and ambulance transportations, thereby reducing costs.

methodsThis prospective, non-randomized study, based on German insurance data, includes residents in nursing homes. Health care cost from a payer perspective and cost-savings of such a complex intervention were investigated. The utilisation of services after implementation of the intervention was compared with services in previous quarters as well as services in the control group. To compensate for remaining differences in resident characteristics between intervention and control group, a propensity score was determined and adjusted for in the regression analyses.

resultsThe study population included 1240 residents in the intervention and 7552 in the control group. Total costs of medical services utilisation were reduced by €468.56 (p < 0.001) per resident and quarter in the intervention group. Hospital stays were reduced by 0.08 (p = 0.001) and patient transports by 0.19 (p = 0.049). This led to 1.66 (p < 0.001) avoided hospital days or €621.37 (p < 0.001) in costs-savings of inpatient services. More services were billed by general practitioners in the intervention group, which led to additional costs of €97.89 (p < 0.001).

conclusionThe benefits of our intervention clearly exceed its costs. In the intervention group, avoided hospital admissions led to additional outpatient billing. This indicates that such a multifactorial intervention program can be cost-saving and improve medical care in long-term care homes.

Indexed as

Long-Term CareNursing HomesCost-Benefit AnalysisHospitalizationHumansProspective StudiesClaims dataComplex health interventionCost analysisNursing home residentsPropensity scoreSecondary data

Identifiers

PMID36481830
PMCPMC10533715
OpenAlexW4310940460

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.