Observational studyPloS one2024
Are integrated care models associated with improved drug safety in Swiss primary care? an observational analysis using healthcare claims data.
Observational study in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntegrated care models (ICMs) might be an effective strategy to improve patients' quality of care. The aim of this study was to compare different ICMs such as family-doctor models, and a standard care model (SCM) regarding patients' drug safety in Swiss primary care.
methodsWe performed an observational study using health insurance claims data from patients who were continuously enrolled in an ICM or in a SCM between 2020 and 2021. ICMs included family-doctor model (FDM), family-doctor model light (FDM-light) and the telemedicine model (TM). Drug safety was assessed by the prescription of potentially inappropriate proton pump-inhibitors (PIPPI), opioids (PIO), medications (PIM), and polypharmacy. Propensity-score-weighted multiple logistic regression models were used to examine the association between different types of ICMs and drug safety.
resultsPatients in FDM had significantly lower odds of receiving PIPPI (OR, 0.86; CI 95%, 0.83-0.89), PIO (OR, 0.81; CI 95%, 0.76-0.85), PIM (OR, 0.94; CI 95%, 0.91-0.97), and polypharmacy (OR, 0.94; CI 95%, 0.91-0.97) compared to patients in SCM. Potentially inappropriate prescribing was also lower in patients in TM and partly in FDM-light than in SCM. Persons enrolled in FDM were less likely to receive PIM (OR, 0.93; CI 95%, 0.89-0.97) and polypharmacy (OR, 0.94; CI 95%, 0.90-0.99) than those in FDM-light, whereas the odds of receiving PIPPI and polypharmacy were higher in FDM than in TM.
conclusionICMs were significantly associated with higher drug safety compared to SCM for most outcomes. Findings suggest that patients may benefit most from ICMs with a high degree of coordination or gatekeeping. ICM may represent an effective approach to improve patients' drug safety and, thus, to reduce the risk of adverse events.
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.