Melissa Desmedt

Economic Impact of Integrated Care Models for Patients with Chronic Diseases: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES To assess the costs and potential financial benefits of integrated care models for patients with chronic diseases, that is, type 2 diabetes mellitus, schizophrenia, and multiple sclerosis, respectively. METHODS A systematic search of the literature was performed using EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. Studies that conducted a cost analysis, considered at least two components of the chronic care model, and compared integrated care with standard care were included. RESULTS Out of 575 articles, 26 were included. Most studies examined integrated care models for type 2 diabetes mellitus (n = 18) and to a lesser extent for schizophrenia (n = 6) and multiple sclerosis (n = 2). Across the three disease groups, the incremental cost per patient per year ranged from - €3860 to + €613.91 (x¯ = - €533.61 ± €902.96). The incremental cost for type 2 diabetes mellitus ranged from - €1507.49 to + €299.20 (x¯ = - €518.22 ± + €604.75), for schizophrenia from - €3860 to + €613.91 (x¯ = - €677.21 ± + €1624.35), and for multiple sclerosis from - €822 to + €339.43 (x¯ = - €241.29 ± + €821.26). Most of the studies (22 of 26 [84.6%]) reported a positive economic impact of integrated care models: for type 2 diabetes mellitus (16 of 18 [88.9%]), schizophrenia (4 of 6 [66.7%]), and multiple sclerosis (1 of 2 [50%]). CONCLUSIONS In this systematic literature review, predominantly positive economic impacts of integrated care models for patients with chronic diseases were found.

Integrating and safeguarding care: The potential role of health information technologies:

The increasing burden of chronic diseases is one of the greatest challenges healthcare systems globally are facing. Across the world, compelling demands can be found for a fundamental shift in the organisation of health and social care to meet the needs of chronic patients. Integrated care has gathered momentum to overcome fragmentation of care in order to create care systems which are demand-driven, client-centred and cost-conscious. Health information technology – often referred to as eHealth – is usually considered to be an essential building brick of integrated care. Moreover, health information technology is said to hold potential for improving patient safety in chronic care settings. The current perspective paper explores the role of health information technology in integrating and safeguarding care. We argue that health information technology – which supports integrated care – may create optimal conditions to improve patient safety, but only when well-implemented, state-of-the-art technologies are used.

Organization, quality and cost of oncological home-hospitalization: A systematic review

BACKGROUND Home-hospitalization might be a patient-centred approach facing the increasing burden of cancer on societies. This systematic review assessed how oncological home-hospitalization has been organized and to what extent its quality and costs were evaluated. RESULTS Twenty-four papers describing parenteral cancer drug administration to adult patients in their homes were included. Most papers concluded oncological home-hospitalization had no significant effect on patient-reported quality of life (7/8 = 88%), but large majority of patients were satisfied (12/13, 92%) and preferred home treatment (7/8, 88%). No safety risks were associated with home-hospitalization (10/10, 100%). The cost of home-hospitalization was found beneficial in five trials (5/9, 56%); others reported no financial impact (2/9, 22%) or additional costs (2/9, 22%). CONCLUSION Despite heterogeneity, majority of reported models for oncological home-hospitalization demonstrated that this is a safe, equivalent and acceptable alternative to ambulatory hospital care. More well-designed trials are needed to evaluate its economic impact.

The SCOPE-PC instrument for assessing patient safety culture in primary care: a psychometric evaluation

Abstract Introduction: Primary healthcare differs from hospitals in terms of – inter alia – organisational structure. Therefore, patient safety culture could differ between these settings. Various instruments have been developed to measure collective attitudes of personnel within a primary healthcare organisation. However, the number of valid and reliable instruments is limited. Objectives: Psychometric properties of the SCOPE-Primary Care instrument were tested to examine the instrument’s applicability in home care services in Belgium. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted by administering the SCOPE-PC questionnaire in a single home care organisation with more than 1000 employees, including nurses, midwives, healthcare assistants, diabetes educators and nursing supervisors. First, a confirmatory factor analysis was performed to test whether the observed dataset fitted to the proposed seven-factor model of the SCOPE-PC instrument. Second, Cronbach’s alphas were calculated to examine internal consistency reliability. Finally, the instrument’s validity was also examined. Results: In total, 603 questionnaires were retained for further analysis, representing an overall response rate of 43.9%. Most respondents were nursing staff, followed by healthcare assistants and nursing supervisors. The results of the confirmatory factor analyses satisfied the chosen cut-offs, indicating an acceptable to good model fit. With the exception of the dimension ‘organizational learning’ (0.58), Cronbach’s alpha scores of the SCOPE-PC scales indicated a good level of internal consistency: ‘open communication and learning from error’ (0.86), ‘handover and teamwork’ (0.78), ‘adequate procedures and working conditions’ (0.73), ‘patient safety management’ (0.81), ‘support and fellowship’ (0.75), and ‘intention to report events (0.85). Moreover, inter-correlations between the seven dimensions as well as with the patient safety grade were moderate to good. Conclusions: The present study indicated that the SCOPE-Primary Care instrument has good psychometric properties for home care services in Belgium. No modifications are required to the original questionnaire in order to allow benchmarking between primary healthcare settings.