Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T02:00:46.416Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Are we measuring what matters in health technology assessment of disease management? Systematic literature review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2006

Lotte Steuten ,
Bert Vrijhoef ,
Hans Severens ,
Frits van Merode  and
Cor Spreeuwenberg
Lotte Steuten
Affiliation:
Maastricht University
Bert Vrijhoef
Affiliation:
Maastricht University and University Hospital Maastricht
Hans Severens
Affiliation:
Maastricht University and University Hospital Maastricht
Frits van Merode
Affiliation:
Maastricht University
Cor Spreeuwenberg
Affiliation:
Maastricht University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: An overview was produced of indicators currently used to assess disease management programs and, based on these findings, provide a framework regarding sets of indicators that should be used when taking the aims and types of disease management programs into account.

Methods: A systematic literature review was performed.

Results: Thirty-six studies met the inclusion criteria. It appeared that a link between aims of disease management and evaluated structure, process, as well as outcome indicators does not exist in a substantial part of published studies on disease management of diabetes and asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, especially when efficiency of care is concerned. Furthermore, structure indicators are largely missing from the evaluations, although these are of major importance for the interpretation of outcomes for purposes of decision-making. Efficiency of disease management is mainly evaluated by means of process indicators; the use of outcome indicators is less common. Within a framework, structure, process, and outcome indicators for effectiveness and efficiency are recommended for each type of disease management program.

Conclusions: The link between aims of disease management and evaluated structure, process, and outcome indicators does not exist in a substantial part of published studies on disease management. The added value of this study mainly lies in the development of a framework to guide the choice of indicators for health technology assessment of disease management.

Keywords

Disease managementProgram evaluationDecision makingReview
Type
GENERAL ESSAYS
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 22 , Issue 1 , January 2006 , pp. 47 - 57
Copyright
© 2006 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abourizk NN, O'Connor PJ, Crabtree BF, Schnatz JD. 1994 An outpatient model of integrated diabetes treatment and education: Functional, metabolic, and knowledge outcomes. Diabetes Educ. 20: 416– 421.Google Scholar
Alderson P, Bero LA, Grilli R, et al. 2004. Effective practice and organisation of care group. In: The Cochrane Library. Issue 2, Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Arah OA, Klazinga NS, Delnoij DMJ, Ten Asbroek AHA, Custers T. 2003 Conceptual framework for health systems performance: A quest for effectiveness, quality, and improvement. Int J Qual Health Care. 15: 377– 398.Google Scholar
Aubert RE, Herman WH, Waters J, et al. 1998 Nurse case management to improve glycaemic control in diabetic patients in a HMO. Ann Intern Med. 129: 605– 612.Google Scholar
Banta D. 2003 The development of health technology assessment. Health Policy. 63: 121– 132.Google Scholar
Benjamin EM, Schneider MS, Hinchey KT. 1999 Implementing practice guidelines for diabetes care using problem-based learning. Diabetes Care. 22: 1672– 1678.Google Scholar
Berringer R, Shibley MCH, Cary CC, Pugh CB, Powers PAG, Rafi JA. 1991 Outcomes of a community pharmacy-based diabetes monitoring program. J Am Pharm Assoc. 39: 791– 797.Google Scholar
Bodenheimer T, Wagner EH, Grumbach K. 2002 Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness. The chronic care model, part 2. JAMA. 288: 1909– 1914.Google Scholar
Bone RC. 1996 Goals of asthma management: A step-care approach. Chest. 109: 1056– 1065.Google Scholar
Chiou ST, Lin HD, Yu NC, et al. 2001 An initial assessment of the feasibility and effectiveness of implementing diabetes shared care system in Taiwan—some experiences from I-Lan County. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 54: S67– S73.Google Scholar
Cote J, Cartier A, Robichaud P, et al. 1997 Influence on asthma morbidity of asthma education programs based on self-management plans following treatment optimisation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 155: 1509– 1514.Google Scholar
Diabetes Integrated Care Evaluation Team (DICET). 1994 Integrated care for diabetes: Clinical, psychosocial, and economic evaluation. BMJ. 308: 1209– 1212.
Disease Management Association of America. Available at: www.dmaa.org. Accessed at May 17, 2005.
Donabedian A. 1980. The definition of quality and approaches to its assessment. Ann Arbor, MI: Health Administration Press;
Donabedian A. 1992 The role of outcomes in quality assessment and assurance. Qual Rev Bull. 18: 356– 360.Google Scholar
Donaldson C, Mugford M, Vale L, eds. 2002. Evidence-based health economics: From effectiveness to efficiency in systematic review. London: BMJ Books;
Donohoe ME, Fletton JA, Hook A, et al. 2000 Improving foot care for people with diabetes mellitus—a randomized controlled trial of an integrated care approach. Diabetes Med. 17: 581– 587.Google Scholar
Drummond N, Adbdalla M, Buckingham JK, et al. 1994 Integrated care for asthma: A clinical, social, and economic evaluation. BMJ. 308: 559– 564.Google Scholar
Friedman NM, Gleeson JM, Kent MJ, Foris M, Rodriguez DJ. 1998 Management of diabetes in the Lovelace Health Systems' EPISODES OF CARE program. Eff Clin Pract. 1: 5– 11.Google Scholar
Haggerty JL, Reid RJ, Freeman GK, et al. 2003 Continuity of care: A multidisciplinary review. BMJ. 327: 1219– 1221.Google Scholar
Hogan AJ. 1997 Methodological issues in linking costs and health outcomes in research on differing care delivery systems. Med Care. 35: NS96– NS105.Google Scholar
Hoskins PL, Fowler M, Constantino J, Forrest DK, Turtle JR. 1993 Sharing the care of diabetic patients between hospital and general practitioners: Does it work? Diabetes Med. 10: 81– 86.Google Scholar
Hurwitz B, Goodman C, Yudkin J. 1993 Prompting the clinical care of non-insulin dependent (type II) diabetic patients in an inner city area: One model of community care. BMJ. 306: 624– 630.Google Scholar
Jaber LA, Halapy H, Fernet M, Tummalapalli S, Diwakaran H. 1996 Evaluation of a pharmaceutical care model on diabetes management. Ann Pharmacother. 30: 238– 243.Google Scholar
Kodner DL, Spreeuwenberg C. 2002. Integrated care: Meaning, logic, applications, and implications. IJIC. Available at: www.ijic.org. Accessed October 2Google Scholar
Lahdensuo A, Haahtela T, Herrala J, et al. 1996 Randomised comparison of guided self-management and traditional treatment of asthma over one year. BMJ. 312: 748– 752.Google Scholar
Lamb GS. 1997 Outcomes across the care continuum. Med Care. 35 (11): NS106– NS114.Google Scholar
Levetan CS, Salas JR, Wilets IF, Zumoff B. 1995 Impact of endocrine and diabetes team consultation on hospital length of stay for patients with diabetes. Am J Med. 99: 22– 28.Google Scholar
Lucas DO, Zimmer LO, Paul JE, et al. 2001 Two-year results from the asthma self-management program: Long term impact on health care services, costs, functional status, and productivity. J Asthma. 38: 321– 330.Google Scholar
Manley S. 2003 Haemoglobin A1c—a marker for complications of type 2 diabetes: The experience from the UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS). Clin Chem Lab Med. 41: 1182– 1190.Google Scholar
Mant J. 2001 Process versus outcome indicators in the assessment of quality of health care. Int J Qual Health Care. 13: 475– 480.Google Scholar
Mason J, Freemantle N, Nazareth I, Eccles M, Haines A, Drummond M. 2001 When is it cost-effective to change the behaviour of health professionals? JAMA. 286: 2988– 2992.Google Scholar
Mayo PH, Weinberg BJ, Kramer B, et al. 1996 Results of a program to improve the process of inpatient care of adult asthmatics. Chest. 110: 48– 52.Google Scholar
McCulloch DK, Price MJ, Hindmarsh M, Wagner EH. 1998 A population-based approach to diabetes management in a primary care setting: Early results and lessons learned. Eff Clin Pract. 1: 12– 22.Google Scholar
McCulloch DK, Price M, Hindmarsh M, Wagner EH. 2000 Improvement in diabetes care using an integrated population-based approach in a primary care setting. Dis Manag. 3: 75– 82.Google Scholar
Mühlhauser I, Richter B, Kraut D, et al. 1991 Evaluation of a structured treatment and teaching programme on asthma. J Intern Med. 230: 157– 164.Google Scholar
Munroe WP, Kunz K, Dalmady-Israel C, Potter L, Schonfeld WH. 1997 Economic evaluation of pharmacist involvement in disease management in a community pharmacy setting. Clin Ther. 19: 113– 123.Google Scholar
Norris SL, Nichols PJ, Caspersen CJ, et al. 2002 Increasing diabetes self-management education in community settings. A systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 22: 15– 38.Google Scholar
O'Connor PJ, Rush WA, Peterson J, et al. 1996 Continuous quality improvement can improve glycemic control for HMO patients with diabetes. Arch Fam Med. 5: 502– 506.Google Scholar
Osman LM, Abdalla MI, Beattie JAG, et al. 1994 Reducing hospital admission through computer education for asthma patients. BMJ. 308: 568– 571.Google Scholar
Overland J, Mira M, Yue DK. 1999 Diabetes management: Shared care or shared neglect. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 44: 123– 128.Google Scholar
Patrick DL. 1997 Finding health-related quality of life outcomes sensitive to health-care organization and delivery. Med Care. 35: S49– S57.Google Scholar
Piette JD, Weinberger M, McPhee SJ. 2000 The effect of automated calls with telephone nurse follow-up on patient-centered outcomes of diabetes care. Med Care. 38: 218– 230.Google Scholar
Rossiter LF, Whitehurst-Cook MY, Small RE, et al. 2000 The impact of disease management on outcomes and cost of care: A study of low-income asthma patients. Inquiry. 37: 188– 202.Google Scholar
Rutten GEHM, Maaijen J, Valkenburg ACH, Blankestijn JG, De Valk HW. 2001 The Utrecht Diabetes Project: Telemedicine support improves GP care in Type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Med. 18: 459– 463.Google Scholar
Sidorov J, Shull R, Tomcavage J, Girolami S, Lawton N, Harris R. 2002 Does diabetes disease management save money and improve outcomes? Diabetes Care. 25: 684– 689.Google Scholar
Smith S, Byrne G, Shannon WF, et al. 2001 The North Dublin Shared Care (DiSC) Project: A profile of current diabetes care in Ireland. Ir Med J. 94: 1– 8.Google Scholar
Standards of Reporting Trials Group. 1994 A proposal for structured reporting of randomised controlled trials. JAMA. 272: 1926– 1931.
Steuten LMG, Vrijhoef HJM, Van Merode GG, Severens JL, Spreeuwenberg C. 2004 Methodological quality of disease management evaluation studies can best be assessed with the HTA-DM instrument. J Clin Epidemiol. 57: 881– 888.Google Scholar
Szende Á, Svensson K, Ståhl E, Mészáros Á, Berta GA. 2004 Psychometric and utility-based measures of health status of asthmatic patients with different disease control level. Pharmacoeconomics. 22: 537– 547.Google Scholar
Thorell B, Olsson L, Svardsudd K. 1994 Implementation of a structured care programme for diabetes mellitus in a defined population in Mid-Sweden. Diabetes Med. 11: 458– 464.Google Scholar
Tschopp JM, Frey JG, Pernet R, et al. 2002 Bronchial asthma and self-management education: Implementation of guidelines by an interdisciplinary programme in a health network. Swiss Med Wkly. 132: 92– 97.Google Scholar
Van den Arend IJM, Stolk RP, Rutten GEHM, Schrijvers G. 2000 Education integrated into structured general practice care for type 2 diabetic patients results in sustained improvement of disease knowledge and self-care. Diabetes Med. 17: 190– 197.Google Scholar
Verhagen AP, de Vet HC, de Bie RA, et al. 1998 The Delphi-list: Criteria list for quality assessment of randomised clinical trials for conducting systematic reviews developed by Delphi consensus. J Clin Epidemiol. 51: 1235– 1241.Google Scholar
Vrijhoef HJM, Spreeuwenberg C, Eijkelberg IMJG, Wolffenbuttel BHR, Van Merode G. 2001 Adoption of disease management model for diabetes in the region of Maastricht. BMJ. 323: 983– 985.Google Scholar
Vrijhoef HJM, Diederiks JPM, Spreeuwenberg C, Wolffenbuttel BHR. 2001 Substitution model with central role for nurse specialist is justified in the care for stable type 2 diabetic outpatients. J Adv Nurs. 36: 1– 10.Google Scholar
Vrijhoef HJM, Diederiks JPM, Spreeuwenberg C, Wolffenbuttel BHR, Van Wilderen LJGP. 2002 The nurse specialist as main care-provider for patients with type 2 diabetes in a primary care setting: Effects on patient outcomes. Int J Nurs Stud. 39: 441– 451.Google Scholar
Wagner EH, Austin BT, Von Korff M. 1996 Organizing care for patients with chronic illness. Milbank Q. 54: 56– 58.Google Scholar
Weinberger M, Kirkman MS, Samsa GP, et al. 1995 A nurse-coordinated intervention for primary care patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: Impact on glycemic control and health-related quality of life. J Gen Intern Med. 10: 111– 112.Google Scholar
Weingarten SR, Henning JM, Badamgaraw E, et al. 2002 Interventions used in disease management programmes for patients with chronic illness—which ones work? Meta-analysis of published reports. BMJ. 235: 925– 937.Google Scholar
Zgibor JC, Rao H, Wesche-Thobaben J, Gallagher N, McWilliams J, Korytkowski MT. 2004 Improving quality of diabetes care in primary care practice. J Health Qual. 26: 14– 21.Google Scholar
Zimmer LO, Almond MJ, Jones D, et al. 2000 One-year outcomes from a computer-based disease management program: The individualized asthma care training program (IACT). Dis Manag. 3: 65– 73.Google Scholar