Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40619395›Full record

ArticleBMC medicine2025

Chronic care provision in general practices and association with patient level outcomes: a nationwide cohort study.

Anders Prior, Claus Høstrup Vestergaard, Nynne Bech Utoft, Peter Vedsted, Susan M Smith, Mogens Vestergaard, Morten Fenger-Grøn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Anders PriorResearch Unit for General Practice, Aarhus, Denmark. anders.prior@ph.au.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4053-3701
Claus Høstrup VestergaardResearch Unit for General Practice, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2916-1548
Nynne Bech UtoftMedical Diagnostic Center, University Clinic for Innovative Patient Pathways, Regional Hospital Central Jutland, Silkeborg, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9353-3946
Peter VedstedResearch Unit for General Practice, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2113-5599
Susan M SmithDiscipline of Public Health and Primary Care, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6027-2727
Mogens VestergaardResearch Unit for General Practice, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-2937-4167
Morten Fenger-GrønMedical Diagnostic Center, University Clinic for Innovative Patient Pathways, Regional Hospital Central Jutland, Silkeborg, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6354-5871

Funding

Kræftens Bekæmpelse R330-A20465Novo Nordisk Fonden NNF18OC0031194Novo Nordisk Fonden NNF23SA0082354
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGeneral practice provides long-term care for most people living with long-term conditions, but the impact of generic chronic care provision on patient outcomes has not been examined on a national level. We aimed to investigate whether the provision of chronic care services in general practice is associated with potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potentially preventable hospitalisations in listed patients.

methodsNationwide cohort study using linked health registry data covering 4.42 million patients (18 + years) listed with general practices in Denmark in 2019 (n = 1769). The exposure was the patient's practice listing. Practices were grouped evenly into low, medium, or high level of service provision (chronic care consultations, chronic care procedures, and daytime consultations) after adjustment for patient case-mix and multimorbidity. Sub-group analyses were based on list size, morbidity load, deprivation score, and urbanisation. The outcomes at patient level were number of patient days with PIMs (modified STOPP-START criteria) and number of potentially preventable hospitalisations.

resultsIn practices providing high levels of chronic care consultations, the listed patients had a 1.2% lower risk of PIMs compared to the medium-level group (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.988, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.977 to 0.999, corresponding to 3600 fewer patient years of PIMs per year) and an IRR of 0.964 (95% CI 0.927 to 1.002) for potentially preventable hospitalisations. In practices providing high levels of chronic care procedures, patients had a 1.7% lower risk of PIMs (IRR 0.983, 95% CI 0.972 to 0.993, 5500 fewer patient years of PIMs) and an 8.6% lower risk of potentially preventable hospitalisations (IRR 0.914, 95% CI 0.879 to 0.950, 3700 fewer potentially preventable hospitalisations per year). High levels of daytime consultations were associated with higher risk of PIMs, but not with potentially preventable hospitalisations. We found an inverse dose-response relationship between chronic care provision and adverse outcomes. The findings were stable between different practice characteristics and patient populations.

conclusionsPatients experienced fewer potentially inappropriate medications and potentially preventable hospitalisations if listed at a general practice with high chronic care provision, regardless of other practice characteristics.

Indexed as

General PracticeHospitalizationAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChronic DiseaseCohort StudiesDenmarkFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRegistriesYoung AdultChronic diseaseCohort studiesDenmarkMedicinePatient admissionPrimary health careTreatment outcome

Identifiers

PMID40619395
PMCPMC12232575

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.