Abstract
ObjectivesTo assess the effects of an integrated care pathway on the use of primary and secondary healthcare by patients at high risk of emergency inpatient admission.DesignObservational study of a real-life deployment of integrated care, using patient-level administrative data. Regression analysis was used to compare integrated care patients with matched controls.SettingA deprived, inner city London borough (Tower Hamlets).Participants1720 patients aged 50+ years registered with a general practitioner in Tower Hamlets and at high risk of emergency inpatient admission enrolled onto integrated care during 2014. These patients were matched to control patients, also selected from Tower Hamlets, with respect to demographics, diagnoses of health conditions, previous hospital use and risk score.InterventionsEnrolled patients were eligible for a range of interventions, such as case management, support with self-care and enhanced care coordination. Control patients received usual care.Primary and secondary endpointsNumber of emergency inpatient admissions in the year after enrolment onto integrated care. Secondary endpoints included numbers of elective inpatient admissions, inpatient bed days, accident and emergency attendances, outpatient attendances and general practitioner contacts in the year after enrolment.ResultsThere was no evidence that the integrated care pathway reduced patients’ healthcare utilisation in the first year post-enrolment. Matched controls and integrated care patients were similar at baseline. Following enrolment, integrated care patients were more likely than matched controls to experience elective inpatient admissions (adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR)=1.27, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.49, p=0.004). They were also more likely to experience general practitioner contacts (adjusted IRR=1.11, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.16, p<0.001), but other endpoints were not significantly different between the groups.ConclusionsThe integrated care pathway was not associated with a reduction in healthcare utilisation in the first year, but appeared to have increased elective inpatient admissions and general practitioner workload.
Reference63 articles.
1. Ferris TG , Weil E , Meyer GS , et al . Cost savings from managing high-risk patients. In: Yong PL , Saunders RS , Olsen L , eds. The healthcare imperative: Lowering costs and improving outcomes: Workshop series summary. Washington DC, USA: National Academy of Science: Institute of Medicine, 2010:301–10.
2. House of Commons Health Committee. Managing the care of people with long-term conditions: Second Report of Session 2014-15 – Volume 1. 2014. Report number: HC401.
3. Epidemiology and impact of multimorbidity in primary care: a retrospective cohort study
4. The prevalence of multimorbidity in primary care and its effect on health care utilization and cost
5. Department of Health. Supporting people with long term conditions: an NHS and social care model to support local innovation and integration. UK, London: COI, 2005.
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献