ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2026
Effect of Integrated Care Management Interventions on Post-hospitalization Utilization and Cost Outcomes for Adults with Multiple Chronic Conditions.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA prior randomized trial assessed three care management (CM) interventions that were designed for adults at high risk of negative health outcomes following a hospital admission and implemented by a large health plan. These CM interventions positively and equivalently impacted several patient-centered outcomes over time.
objectiveUse the prior randomized trial as the basis for testing post-hospitalization utilization and cost impacts (1) across three CM models (primary analysis) and (2) for each CM model (secondary analysis).
designPost hoc comparison of three randomly assigned integrated CM interventions (IC) and a randomly selected, contemporaneous usual care control group (UC).
participantsRecently discharged high-risk Medicaid or dual-eligible Medicaid/Medicare members with multiple chronic conditions.
interventionsThree CM interventions: high-tech (4-12 months of remote patient monitoring with video visits/condition-specific texts and telephonic visits; n = 365); high-touch (4-12 months of telephonic visits; n = 335); optimal discharge planning (ODP; 2-4 weeks of telephonic visits; n = 149). All three included an initial in-person visit. MAIN MEASURES: Ninety-day readmission and emergency department (ED) visit rates; 12-month member care costs (total, medical, pharmacy). KEY
resultsUC had access to, but rarely used, traditional health plan CM. Compared to UC members (N = 886), IC members (N = 886) had similar total cost of care (p = 0.58). IC pharmacy costs trended 93.6% higher (p = 0.06) while medical costs trended 52.5% lower (p = 0.10), despite higher 90-day ED visit rates (IC 32.4% vs. UC 25.5% UC, p = 0.001) and no impact on 90-day readmission rate (IC 16.5% vs. UC 16.3%, p = 0.90). None of the three CM interventions showed an overall comparative advantage, despite some variations in their post-discharge utilization and cost impacts.
conclusionsThe three post-discharge CM interventions tested showed promise as cost-neutral interventions within a large health plan setting. CM engagement may reduce medical cost specifically despite its impact on readmissions and ED use, though further evaluations of CM interventions are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42045738What 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.