Broad Syntheses that include this review

loading
3 articles (3 Referencias) loading Revertir Estudificar

Síntesis amplia / Revisión panorámica de revisiones sistemáticas

No clasificado

Revista International journal of evidence-based healthcare
Año 2019
Cargando información sobre las referencias
AIM: Integrated care commonly involves provision of comprehensive community-based care for people with chronic conditions. It is anticipated that implementation of integrated care, with a proactive approach to management of chronic conditions, will reduce reliance on hospital and emergency department (ED) services. The aim of this rapid review was to summarize the best available evidence on the impact of integrated care for patients with chronic conditions on hospital and ED utilization and investigate trends in outcomes over time. METHODS: Given the large body of literature available on this topic, this rapid review considered existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses that included adults with chronic conditions. Any model of integrated care that involved management of patients across the continuum of care, with the aim to provide more care in community settings, was considered for inclusion. A search of PubMed, CINAHL, Google Advanced, and websites of international healthcare provider organizations was conducted to locate relevant published and gray literature. RESULTS: A total of 13 systematic reviews were included. Overall, evidence suggests that integrated care may reduce the risk of hospitalization, with reviews including patients with diverse chronic conditions showing a 19% reduction. Integrated care appears effective in reducing readmissions for patients with heart failure, with an absolute risk reduction of 8% for first and 19% for subsequent rehospitalization. For ED presentations, evidence indicates that integrated care has no effect overall but may reduce ED visits for patients aged 65 years or more. For patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, integrated care was associated with reductions in length of stay ranging from 2.5 to 4 days. Studies with shorter follow-up, from 3 to 12 months, in general appeared to show a greater impact of integrated care than studies with longer follow-up of 18 months or more. CONCLUSION: The evidence identified suggests integrated care generally reduces utilization of hospital services. In some instances, there were no differences observed between integrated care and usual care, but no included reviews reported increased utilization of these services. The impact of integrated care may be greater in the short-term, given the ultimate deterioration associated with advanced chronic disease which may negate any long-term benefits.

Síntesis amplia / Revisión panorámica de revisiones sistemáticas

No clasificado

Autores Damery S , Flanagan S , Combes G
Revista BMJ open
Año 2016
Cargando información sobre las referencias
OBJECTIVE: To summarise the evidence regarding the effectiveness of integrated care interventions in reducing hospital activity. DESIGN: Umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. SETTING: Interventions must have delivered care crossing the boundary between at least two health and/or social care settings. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients with one or more chronic diseases. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, ASSIA, PsycINFO, HMIC, CINAHL, Cochrane Library (HTA database, DARE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews), EPPI-Centre, TRIP, HEED, manual screening of references. OUTCOME MEASURES: Any measure of hospital admission or readmission, length of stay (LoS), accident and emergency use, healthcare costs. RESULTS: 50 reviews were included. Interventions focused on case management (n=8), chronic care model (CCM) (n=9), discharge management (n=15), complex interventions (n=3), multidisciplinary teams (MDT) (n=10) and self-management (n=5). 29 reviews reported statistically significant improvements in at least one outcome. 11/21 reviews reported significantly reduced emergency admissions (15-50%); 11/24 showed significant reductions in all-cause (10-30%) or condition-specific (15-50%) readmissions; 9/16 reported LoS reductions of 1-7 days and 4/9 showed significantly lower A&E use (30-40%). 10/25 reviews reported significant cost reductions but provided little robust evidence. Effective interventions included discharge management with postdischarge support, MDT care with teams that include condition-specific expertise, specialist nurses and/or pharmacists and self-management as an adjunct to broader interventions. Interventions were most effective when targeting single conditions such as heart failure, and when care was provided in patients' homes. CONCLUSIONS: Although all outcomes showed some significant reductions, and a number of potentially effective interventions were found, interventions rarely demonstrated unequivocally positive effects. Despite the centrality of integrated care to current policy, questions remain about whether the magnitude of potentially achievable gains is enough to satisfy national targets for reductions in hospital activity. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42015016458.

Síntesis amplia

No clasificado

Autores Hisashige A
Revista Global journal of health science
Año 2013
Cargando información sobre las referencias
OBJETIVO: enfoque de gestión de Enfermedades (DM) se aboga cada vez más como un medio para mejorar la eficacia y eficiencia de la asistencia sanitaria para las enfermedades crónicas. Para evaluar la evidencia sobre la eficacia y la eficiencia de la DM, la síntesis de la evidencia se llevó a cabo. MÉTODOS: Para localizar metanálisis elegibles y revisiones sistemáticas, se realizaron búsquedas en Medline, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, EXPANDED-SCI, SSCI, A & HCI, DARE, HTA y NHS EED 1995-2010. Dos revisores extrajeron de forma independiente los datos y evaluaron la calidad del estudio. RESULTADOS: Veintiocho metaanálisis y revisiones sistemáticas se incluyeron para la síntesis de la evidencia. La proporción de artículos que observó mejoría con una cantidad razonable de pruebas fue el más alto en el proceso (69%), seguido de los servicios de salud (63%), la calidad de vida (57%), los resultados de salud (51%), satisfacción (50%) , costos (38%) y así sucesivamente. En cuanto a la mortalidad, resultados estadísticamente significativos se observaron sólo en la enfermedad coronaria. Los componentes importantes en DM, como un enfoque multidisciplinario, se identificaron. CONCLUSIÓN: La evidencia sintetizada muestra una considerable evidencia de la eficacia y eficiencia de los programas de DM en proceso, los servicios de salud, calidad de vida y así sucesivamente. La pregunta ya si los programas DM trabajan no es, sino más bien qué tipo o componente de los programas de DM que funciona mejor y de manera eficiente en el contexto de cada sistema de salud o país.