A cost effectiveness study of integrated care in health services delivery: a diabetes program in Australia

A health economic analysis of an integrated diabetes care program in China: based on real-world evidence

Introduction

An integrated care program was set up in China to improve the collaboration between primary healthcare centers and hospitals on diabetes management. This study aims to evaluate the economic value of this program with real-world data and to examine whether it can be promoted in primary healthcare settings in China.

Methods

This integrated diabetes care program was implemented in Yuhuan City, China, to coordinate primary care and specialty care, treatment and prevention services, as well as the responsibilities of doctors and nurses. Cost-effectiveness analysis was used to compare the short-term economic value of this program (intervention group) versus usual diabetes management (control group). The cost data were collected from a societal perspective, while the effectiveness indicators pointed to the improvement of control rates of fasting blood glucose (FBG), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) levels after the 1 year intervention. In addition, cost-utility analysis was applied to evaluate the long-term value of the two groups. Patients' long-term diabetes management costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were simulated by the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model 2.

Results

The results showed that for 1% FBG, SPB, and DBP control rate improvement, the costs for the intervention group were 290.53, 124.39, and 249.15 Chinese Yuan (CNY), respectively, while the corresponding costs for the control group were 655.19, 610.43, and 1460.25 CNY. Thus, the intervention group's cost-effectiveness ratios were lower than those of the control group. In addition, compared to the control group, the intervention group's incremental costs per QALY improvement were 102.67 thousand CNY, which means that the intervention was cost-effective according to the World Health Organization's standards.

Discussion

In conclusion, this study suggested that this integrated diabetes care program created short-term and long-term economic values through patient self-management support, primary care strengthening, and care coordination. As this program followed the principles of integrated care reform, it can be promoted in China. Also, its elements can provide valuable experience for other researchers to build customized integrated care models.

Australian general practitioners' perspectives on integrating specialist diabetes care with primary care: qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Improving the coordination and integration of health services is recognised nationally and internationally as a key strategy for improving the quality of diabetes care. The Australian Diabetes Alliance Program (DAP) is an integrated care model implemented in the Hunter New England Local Health District (HNELHD), New South Wales (NSW), in which endocrinologists and diabetes educators collaborate with primary care teams via case-conferencing, practice performance review, and education sessions. The objective of this study was to report on general practitioners' (GPs) perspectives on DAP and whether the program impacts on their skills, knowledge, and approach in delivering care to adult patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Four primary care practices with high rates of monitoring haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels (> 90% of patients annually) and five practices with low rates of monitoring HbA1c levels (< 80% of patients annually) from HNELHD, NSW provided the sampling frame. A total of nine GPs were interviewed. The transcripts from the interviews were reviewed and analysed to identify emergent patterns and themes.

RESULTS

Overall, GPs were supportive of DAP. They considered that DAP resulted in significant changes in their knowledge, skills, and approach and improved the quality of diabetes care. Taking a more holistic approach to care, including assessing patients with diabetes for co-morbidities and risk factors that may impact on their future health was also noted. DAP was noted to increase the confidence levels of GPs, which enabled active involvement in the provision of diabetes care rather than referring patients for tertiary specialist care. However, some indicated the program could be time consuming and greater flexibility was needed.

CONCLUSIONS

GPs reported DAP to benefit their knowledge, skills and approach for managing diabetes. Future research will need to investigate how to improve the intensity and flexibility of the program based on the workload of GPs to ensure long-term acceptability of the program.

Disease Focused Integrated Care - a New Model of Healthcare Delivery for the Treatment of Skin Cancer

Introduction

As the most common cancer in Australia, skin cancer generates a considerable health burden. This study outlines the establishment of a new model of integrated care for the diagnosis and management of skin cancer.

Methods

A new model of integrated care was established to provide access to all aspects of skin cancer management. General practitioners (GPs) were upskilled through hands-on training and a 6-month skin cancer education program and partnered with specialist Dermatologists and Plastic Surgeons co-located in the same clinic. Data including median wait times between the initial consultation and treatment were prospectively collected and compared patients seen through the integrated pathway to patients referred from their primary GP to specialist Dermatologists and Plastic Surgeons directly (non-integrated pathway). The percentage of patients needing co-consultation with a specialist in the integrated pathway was also measured over time.

Results

A total of 25341 patients were seen from the commencement of the clinic in August 2015 to June 2021. In 2017 and 2018 the median wait time to be treated was 7 days for the integrated model compared to 54 days (2017) and 46 days (2018) for non-integrated care (p < 0.0001). The percentage of GPs requesting specialist co-consultations for assessment of skin cancer fell from 98% in 2015, to 5.6% in 2021. Histopathology shows that 66% of lesions excised by GPs in this model were malignant or pre-malignant.

Conclusions

This study firstly shows a significant reduction in time to treatment in an integrated skin cancer model over traditional models of health. Secondly it demonstrates GP upskilling over time in the integrated program. Integrating GP and specialist medical practitioners in the treatment of skin cancer offers potential for more efficient, accessible, and affordable care. This cooperative, co-located model may provide a template for the integrating the management of other conditions.

Economic evaluations of audit and feedback interventions: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of audit and feedback (A&F) interventions to improve compliance to healthcare guidelines is supported by randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses of RCTs. However, there is currently a knowledge gap on their cost-effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess whether A&F interventions targeting improvements in compliance to recommended care are economically favourable.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review including experimental, observational and simulation-based economic evaluation studies of A&F interventions targeting healthcare providers. Comparators were a 'do nothing' strategy, or any other intervention not involving A&F or involving a subset of A&F intervention components. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, Econlit, EMBASE, Health Technology Assessment Database, MEDLINE, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, ABI/INFORM, Web of Science, ProQuest and websites of healthcare quality associations to December 2021. Outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, incremental cost-utility ratios, incremental net benefit and incremental cost-benefit ratios. Pairs of reviewers independently selected eligible studies and extracted relevant data. Reporting quality was evaluated using CHEERS (Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards). Results were synthesised using permutation matrices for all studies and predefined subgroups.

RESULTS

Of 13 221 unique citations, 35 studies met our inclusion criteria. The A&F intervention was dominant (ie, at least as effective with lower cost) in 7 studies, potentially cost-effective in 26 and was dominated (ie, the same or less effectiveness and higher costs) in 2 studies. A&F interventions were more likely to be economically favourable in studies based on health outcomes rather than compliance to recommended practice, considering medical costs in addition to intervention costs, published since 2010, and with high reporting quality.

DISCUSSION

Results suggest that A&F interventions may have a high potential to be cost-effective. However, as is common in systematic reviews of economic evaluations, publication bias could have led to an overestimation of their economic value.

Cost-effectiveness of a complex intervention in general practice to increase uptake of long-acting reversible contraceptives in Australia

Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the Australian Contraceptive ChOice pRoject (ACCORd) intervention. Methods An economic evaluation compared the costs and outcomes of the ACCORd intervention with usual care (UC). Data from the ACCORd trial were used to estimate costs and efficacy in terms of contraceptive uptake and quality of life. Rates of contraceptive failure and pregnancy were sourced from the literature. Using a Markov model, within-trial results were extrapolated over 10 years and subjected to univariate sensitivity analyses. Model outputs were expressed as the cost per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained and cost per unintended pregnancy resulting in birth (UPB) avoided. Results Over 10 years, compared with UC, initiating contraception through the ACCORd intervention resulted in 0.02 fewer UPB and higher total costs (A$2505 vs A$1179) per woman. The incremental cost-effectiveness of the ACCORd intervention versus UC was A$1172 per QALY gained and A$7385 per UPB averted. If the start-up cost of the ACCORd intervention was removed, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was A$81 per QALY gained and A$511 per UPB averted. The results were most sensitive to the probability of contraceptive failure, the probability of pregnancy-related healthcare service utilisation or the inclusion of the costs of implementing the ACCORd intervention. Conclusions From a health system perspective, if implemented appropriately in terms of uptake and reach, and assuming an implicit willingness to pay threshold of A$50 000 the ACCORd intervention is cost-effective. What is known about the topic? The uptake of long-active reversible contraceptives (LARC) in Australia is low. The ACCORd trial assessed the efficacy of providing structured training to general practitioners (GPs) on LARC counselling, together with access to rapid referral to insertion clinics. What does this paper add? This study is the first to assess the cost-effectiveness of a complex intervention in the general practice setting aimed at increasing the uptake of LARC in Australia. What are the implications for practitioners? The results show that implementing a complex intervention in general practice involving GP education and the availability of rapid referral to LARC insertion clinics is a cost-effective approach to increase LARC use and its attending efficacy. If the majority of Australian GPs were able to deliver effectiveness-based contraceptive counselling and either insert LARC or use a rapid referral process to a LARC insertion clinic, the additional cost associated with the purchase of LARC products and their insertion would be offset by reductions to health system costs as a result of fewer UPB and abortions. Moreover, the benefits to women's physical and psychological health of avoiding such events is substantial.

"They were all together … discussing the best options for me": Integrating specialist diabetes care with primary care in Australia

Over one-third of diabetes-related encounters with healthcare providers in Australia fail to meet clinical guidelines. Evidence is mounting that care provision within an integrated framework may facilitate greater adherence to clinical guidelines and improved outcomes for patients. The Diabetes Alliance Program was implemented across a large healthcare district to enhance diabetes care capacity at the primary care level through intensive case-conferencing involving the primary care team, patients and visiting specialist team, whole practice performance review and regular diabetes education for practitioners. Here, we provide an in-depth patient assessment of the case-conferencing process and impact on diabetes management. Two practices with high pre-intervention HbA1c monitoring and three practices with low HbA1c monitoring provided the sampling frame. Patients were selected according to their score on the Patient Activation Measure^TM to achieve maximum variation, with up to two patients with high scores and three with low scores, selected from each practice. Patients were sampled until data saturation was achieved and then subjected to thematic content analysis (n = 19). Patients mostly described the model of care as a positive experience, reporting a boost in confidence in diabetes self-management (particularly around nutrition). The program was also seen to be helpful in providing an opportunity to refocus when "life gets in the way". Other valued aspects of the program included the holistic approach to healthcare, reduced travel time, familiarity in environment and clinical care, top-down knowledge transfer as well as mutual learning by the patient and their primary care team. Despite this, difficulties in coping with diabetes and adherence to treatment recommendations remained for a minority of patients. Integrating specialist teams within primary care has the ability to provide efficient healthcare delivery, better patient experience and health outcomes. Investment in such approaches will be critical to navigating healthcare provision in order to meet the demands of an ageing population.

Cost-Effectiveness of Technology-Assisted Case Management in Low-Income, Rural Adults with Type 2 Diabetes

Objective: The objective of this study was to examine whether delivering technology-assisted case management (TACM) with medication titration by nurses under physician supervision is cost effective compared with usual care (standard office procedures) in low-income rural adults with type 2 diabetes.

Methods: One hundred and thirteen low-income, rural adults with type 2 diabetes and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≥8%, were randomized to a TACM intervention or usual care. Effectiveness was measured as differences in HbA1c between the TACM and usual care groups at 6 months. Total cost per patient included intervention or usual care cost, medical care cost, and income loss associated with lost workdays. The total cost per patient and HbA1c were used to estimate a joint distribution of incremental cost and incremental effect of TACM compared with usual care. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated to summarize the cost-effectiveness of the TACM intervention relative to usual care to decrease HbA1c by 1%.

Results: Costs due to intervention, primary care, other health care, emergency room visits, and workdays missed showed statistically significant differences between the groups (usual care $1,360.49 vs. TACM $5,379.60, p=0.004), with an absolute cost difference of $4,019.11. Based on the intervention cost per patient and the change in HbA1c, the median bootstrapped ICERs was estimated to be $6,299.04 (standard error=731.71) per 1% decrease in HbA1c.

Conclusion: Based on these results, a 1% decrease in HbA1c can be obtained with the TACM intervention at an approximate cost of $6,300; therefore, it is a cost-effective option for treating vulnerable populations of adults with type 2 diabetes.

Thinking outside the system: the integrated care experience in Queensland, Australia

Health policy-makers are faced with a demand for health care that exceeds supply, driven in part by an ageing population and an increased prevalence of chronic disease. An integrated 'people-centred' model of care across primary, secondary and tertiary health care can strengthen the health system by streamlining services to improve the patient journey and outcomes. Integrated care offers an opportunity to reduce admissions and re-admissions to hospitals, reduce presentations to emergency departments and improve the capacity of outpatient clinics while delivering better outcomes to patients. Queensland's $35 million Integrated Care Innovation Fund (ICIF) has provided seed funding to 24 projects covering a wide spectrum of chronic disease management and complex disease. Programs such as the ICIF offer an opportunity to provide a new approach to caring for vulnerable populations such as the frail and elderly; children with behavioural and developmental issues; children in out-of-home care; rural and remote populations; and people with mental health issues, whose care runs the risk of 'falling through the cracks' with conventional healthcare approaches.

Cost-effectiveness of Interventions to Manage Diabetes: Has the Evidence Changed Since 2008?

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize updated evidence on the cost-effectiveness (CE) of interventions to manage diabetes, its complications, and comorbidities.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review of studies from high-income countries evaluating the CE of diabetes management interventions recommended by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and published in English between June 2008 and July 2017. We also incorporated studies from a previous CE review from the period 1985-2008. We classified the interventions based on their strength of evidence (strong, supportive, or uncertain) and levels of CE: cost-saving (more health benefit at a lower cost), very cost-effective (≤$25,000 per life year gained [LYG] or quality-adjusted life year [QALY]), cost-effective ($25,001-$50,000 per LYG or QALY), marginally cost-effective ($50,001-$100,000 per LYG or QALY), or not cost-effective (>$100,000 per LYG or QALY). Costs were measured in 2017 U.S. dollars.

RESULTS

Seventy-three new studies met our inclusion criteria. These were combined with 49 studies from the previous review to yield 122 studies over the period 1985-2017. A large majority of the ADA-recommended interventions remain cost-effective. Specifically, we found strong evidence that the following ADA-recommended interventions are cost-saving or very cost-effective: In the cost-saving category are 1) ACE inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) therapy for intensive hypertension management compared with standard hypertension management, 2) ACEI/ARB therapy to prevent chronic kidney disease and/or end-stage renal disease in people with albuminuria compared with no ACEI/ARB therapy, 3) comprehensive foot care and patient education to prevent and treat foot ulcers among those at moderate/high risk of developing foot ulcers, 4) telemedicine for diabetic retinopathy screening compared with office screening, and 5) bariatric surgery compared with no surgery for individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and obesity (BMI ≥30 kg/m²). In the very cost-effective category are 1) intensive glycemic management (targeting A1C <7%) compared with conventional glycemic management (targeting an A1C level of 8-10%) for individuals with newly diagnosed T2D, 2) multicomponent interventions (involving behavior change/education and pharmacological therapy targeting hyperglycemia, hypertension, dyslipidemia, microalbuminuria, nephropathy/retinopathy, secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease with aspirin) compared with usual care, 3) statin therapy compared with no statin therapy for individuals with T2D and history of cardiovascular disease, 4) diabetes self-management education and support compared with usual care, 5) T2D screening every 3 years starting at age 45 years compared with no screening, 6) integrated, patient-centered care compared with usual care, 7) smoking cessation compared with no smoking cessation, 8) daily aspirin use as primary prevention for cardiovascular complications compared with usual care, 9) self-monitoring of blood glucose three times per day compared with once per day among those using insulin, 10) intensive glycemic management compared with conventional insulin therapy for T2D among adults aged ≥50 years, and 11) collaborative care for depression compared with usual care.

CONCLUSIONS

Complementing professional treatment recommendations, our systematic review provides an updated understanding of the potential value of interventions to manage diabetes and its complications and can assist clinicians and payers in prioritizing interventions and health care resources.

Does attending Work It Out - a chronic disease self-management program - affect the use of other health services by urban Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with or at risk of chronic disease? A comparison between program participants and non-participants

Work It Out is a holistic chronic disease self-management program for urban Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Queensland, which is part of an integrated and comprehensive system of care for chronic disease management. This study examines differences in primary healthcare services use between Work It Out participants and non-participants. This retrospective observational study of services use, analysed data extracted from the clinical medical records system and Work It Out program assessments. General practitioner and allied health services use were compared among the participants and non-participants using logistic regression models and zero-truncated Poisson and negative binomial regression models. Compared with non-participants, Work It Out participants were more likely to use GP management plans, GP team care arrangements, GP mental health consultation and subsequent allied health services. Among those who used the services more than once, Work It Out participants had higher service use rates than non-participants for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health assessments, GP management plans, team care arrangements and podiatry, physiotherapy and dietetic services. Engagement in Work It Out can facilitate the use of primary healthcare services, which are important for chronic disease management for urban Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

Economic Evaluation of Quality Improvement Interventions Designed to Improve Glycemic Control in Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Weighted Regression Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Quality improvement (QI) interventions can improve glycemic control, but little is known about their value. We systematically reviewed economic evaluations of QI interventions for glycemic control among adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We used English-language studies from high-income countries that evaluated organizational changes and reported program and utilization-related costs, chosen from PubMed, EconLit, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, New York Academy of Medicine's Grey Literature Report, and WorldCat (January 2004 to August 2016). We extracted data regarding intervention, study design, change in HbA1c, time horizon, perspective, incremental net cost (studies lasting ≤3 years), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) (studies lasting ≥20 years), and study quality. Weighted least-squares regression analysis was used to estimate mean changes in HbA1c and incremental net cost.

RESULTS

Of 3,646 records, 46 unique studies were eligible. Across 19 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), HbA1c declined by 0.26% (95% CI 0.17-0.35) or 3 mmol/mol (2 to 4) relative to usual care. In 8 RCTs lasting ≤3 years, incremental net costs were $116 (95% CI -$612 to $843) per patient annually. Long-term ICERs were $100,000-$115,000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in 3 RCTs, $50,000-$99,999/QALY in 1 RCT, $0-$49,999/QALY in 4 RCTs, and dominant in 1 RCT. Results were more favorable in non-RCTs. Our limitations include the fact that the studies had diverse designs and involved moderate risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Diverse multifaceted QI interventions that lower HbA1c appear to be a fair-to-good value relative to usual care, depending on society's willingness to pay for improvements in health.

Relevant models and elements of integrated care for multi-morbidity: Results of a scoping review

BACKGROUND

In order to provide adequate care for the growing group of persons with multi-morbidity, innovative integrated care programmes are appearing. The aims of the current scoping review were to i) identify relevant models and elements of integrated care for multi-morbidity and ii) to subsequently identify which of these models and elements are applied in integrated care programmes for multi-morbidity.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted in the following scientific databases: Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, PsycInfo, Scopus, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, and Web of Science. A search strategy encompassing a) models, elements and programmes, b) integrated care, and c) multi-morbidity was used to identify both models and elements (aim 1) and implemented programmes of integrated care for multi-morbidity (aim 2). Data extraction was done by two independent reviewers. Besides general information on publications (e.g. publication year, geographical region, study design, and target group), data was extracted on models and elements that publications refer to, as well as which models and elements are applied in recently implemented programmes in the EU and US.

RESULTS

In the review 11,641 articles were identified. After title and abstract screening, 272 articles remained. Full text screening resulted in the inclusion of 92 articles on models and elements, and 50 articles on programmes, of which 16 were unique programmes in the EU (n=11) and US (n=5). Wagner's Chronic Care Model (CCM) and the Guided Care Model (GCM) were most often referred to (CCM n=31; GCM n=6); the majority of the other models found were only referred to once (aim 1). Both the CCM and GCM focus on integrated care in general and do not explicitly focus on multi-morbidity. Identified elements of integrated care were clustered according to the WHO health system building blocks. Most elements pertained to 'service delivery'. Across all components, the five elements referred to most often are person-centred care, holistic or needs assessment, integration and coordination of care services and/or professionals, collaboration, and self-management (aim 1). Most (n=10) of the 16 identified implemented programmes for multi-morbidity referred to the CCM (aim 2). Of all identified programmes, the elements most often included were self-management, comprehensive assessment, interdisciplinary care or collaboration, person-centred care and electronic information system (aim 2).

CONCLUSION

Most models and elements found in the literature focus on integrated care in general and do not explicitly focus on multi-morbidity. In line with this, most programmes identified in the literature build on the CCM. A comprehensive framework that better accounts for the complexities resulting from multi-morbidity is needed.

Non-communicable diseases and HIV care and treatment: models of integrated service delivery

OBJECTIVES

Non-communicable diseases (NCD) are a growing cause of morbidity in low-income countries including in people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Integration of NCD and HIV services can build upon experience with chronic care models from HIV programmes. We describe models of NCD and HIV integration, challenges and lessons learned.

METHODS

A literature review of published articles on integrated NCD and HIV programs in low-income countries and key informant interviews were conducted with leaders of identified integrated NCD and HIV programs. Information was synthesised to identify models of NCD and HIV service delivery integration.

RESULTS

Three models of integration were identified as follows: NCD services integrated into centres originally providing HIV care; HIV care integrated into primary health care (PHC) already offering NCD services; and simultaneous introduction of integrated HIV and NCD services. Major challenges identified included NCD supply chain, human resources, referral systems, patient education, stigma, patient records and monitoring and evaluation. The range of HIV and NCD services varied widely within and across models.

CONCLUSIONS

Regardless of model of integration, leveraging experience from HIV care models and adapting existing systems and tools is a feasible method to provide efficient care and treatment for the growing numbers of patients with NCDs. Operational research should be conducted to further study how successful models of HIV and NCD integration can be expanded in scope and scaled-up by managers and policymakers seeking to address all the chronic care needs of their patients.

Effectiveness of chronic care models: opportunities for improving healthcare practice and health outcomes: a systematic review

Background

The increasing prevalence of chronic disease and even multiple chronic diseases faced by both developed and developing countries is of considerable concern. Many of the interventions to address this within primary healthcare settings are based on a chronic care model first developed by MacColl Institute for Healthcare Innovation at Group Health Cooperative.

Methods

This systematic literature review aimed to identify and synthesise international evidence on the effectiveness of elements that have been included in a chronic care model for improving healthcare practices and health outcomes within primary healthcare settings. The review broadens the work of other similar reviews by focusing on effectiveness of healthcare practice as well as health outcomes associated with implementing a chronic care model. In addition, relevant case series and case studies were also included.

Results

Of the 77 papers which met the inclusion criteria, all but two reported improvements to healthcare practice or health outcomes for people living with chronic disease. While the most commonly used elements of a chronic care model were self-management support and delivery system design, there were considerable variations between studies regarding what combination of elements were included as well as the way in which chronic care model elements were implemented. This meant that it was impossible to clearly identify any optimal combination of chronic care model elements that led to the reported improvements.

Conclusions

While the main argument for excluding papers reporting case studies and case series in systematic literature reviews is that they are not of sufficient quality or generalizability, we found that they provided a more detailed account of how various chronic care models were developed and implemented. In particular, these papers suggested that several factors including supporting reflective healthcare practice, sending clear messages about the importance of chronic disease care and ensuring that leaders support the implementation and sustainability of interventions may have been just as important as a chronic care model’s elements in contributing to the improvements in healthcare practice or health outcomes for people living with chronic disease.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-015-0854-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Better health outcomes at lower costs: the benefits of primary care utilisation for chronic disease management in remote Indigenous communities in Australia's Northern Territory

Background

Indigenous residents living in remote communities in Australia’s Northern Territory experience higher rates of preventable chronic disease and have poorer access to appropriate health services compared to other Australians. This study compared health outcomes and costs at different levels of primary care utilisation to determine if primary care represents an efficient use of resources for Indigenous patients with common chronic diseases namely hypertension, diabetes, ischaemic heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and renal disease.

Methods

This was an historical cohort study involving a total of 14,184 Indigenous residents, aged 15 years and over, who lived in remote communities and used a remote clinic or public hospital from 2002 to 2011. Individual level demographic and clinical data were drawn from primary care and hospital care information systems using a unique patient identifier. A propensity score was used to improve comparability between high, medium and low primary care utilisation groups. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and acceptability curves were used to analyse four health outcome measures: total and, avoidable hospital admissions, deaths and years of life lost.

Results

Compared to the low utilisation group, medium and high levels of primary care utilisation were associated with decreases in total and avoidable hospitalisations, deaths and years of life lost. Higher levels of primary care utilisation for renal disease reduced avoidable hospitalisations by 82-85%, deaths 72-75%, and years of life lost 78-81%. For patients with ischaemic heart disease, the reduction in avoidable hospitalisations was 63-78%, deaths 63-66% and years of life lost 69-73%. In terms of cost-effectiveness, primary care for renal disease and diabetes ranked as more cost-effective, followed by hypertension and ischaemic heart disease. Primary care for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was the least cost-effective of the five conditions.

Conclusion

Primary care in remote Indigenous communities was shown to be associated with cost-savings to public hospitals and health benefits to individual patients. Investing $1 in primary care in remote Indigenous communities could save $3.95-$11.75 in hospital costs, in addition to health benefits for individual patients. These findings may have wider applicability in strengthening primary care in the face of high chronic disease prevalence globally.

An evaluation of the quality of evidence underpinning diabetes management models: a review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

There is a paucity of research on the quality of evidence relating to primary care workforce models. Thus, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the quality of evidence on diabetes primary care workforce models in Australia.

METHODS

The National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia's (National Health and Medical Reseach Council; 2000, 2001) frameworks for evaluating scientific evidence and economic evaluations were used to assess the quality of studies involving primary care workforce models for diabetes care involving Australian adults. A search of medical databases (MEDLINE, AMED, RURAL, Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet and The Cochrane Institute), journals for diabetes care (Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice, Diabetes Care, Diabetic Medicine, Population Health Management, Rural and Remote Health, Australian Journal of Primary Health, PLoS Medicine, Medical Journal of Australia, BMC Health Services Research, BMC Public Health, BMC Family Practice) and Commonwealth and state government health websites was undertaken to acquire Australian studies of diabetes workforce models published 2005-13. Various diabetes workforce models were examined, including 'one-stop shops', pharmacy care, Aboriginal services and telephone-delivered interventions. The quality of evidence was evaluated against several criteria, including relevance and replication, strength of evidence, effect size, transferability and representativeness, and value for money.

RESULTS

Of the 14 studies found, four were randomised controlled trials and one was a systematic review (i.e. Level II and I (best) evidence). Only three provided a replicable protocol or detailed intervention delivery. Eleven lacked a theoretical framework. Twelve reported significant improvements in clinical (patient) outcomes, commonly HbA1c, cholesterol and blood pressure; only four reported changes in short- and long-term outcomes (e.g. quality of life). Most studies used a small or targeted population. Only two studies assessed both benefits and costs of their intervention compared with usual care and cost effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

More rigorous studies of diabetes workforce models are needed to determine whether these interventions improve patient outcomes and, if they do, represent value for money. WHAT IS KNOWN ABOUT THE TOPIC?: Although health systems with strong primary care orientations have been associated with enhanced access, equity and population health, the primary care workforce is facing several challenges. These include a mal-distribution of resources (supply side) and health outcomes (demand side), inconsistent support for teamwork care models, and a lack of enhanced clinical inter-professional education and/or training opportunities. These challenges are exacerbated by an ageing health workforce and general population, as well as a population that has increased prevalence of chronic conditions and multi-morbidity. Although several policy directions have been advocated to address these challenges, there is a lack of high-quality evidence about which primary care workforce models are best (and which models represent better value for money than current practice) and what the health effects are for patients. WHAT DOES THIS PAPER ADD?: This study demonstrated several strengths and weaknesses of Australian diabetes models of care studies. In particular, only five of the 14 studies assessed were designed in a way that enabled them to achieve a Level II or I rating (and hence the 'best' level of evidence), based on the NHMRC's (2000, 2001) frameworks for assessing scientific evidence. The majority of studies risked the introduction of bias and thus may have incorrect conclusions. Only a few studies described clearly what the intervention and the comparator were and thus could be easily replicated. Only two studies included cost-effectiveness studies of their interventions compared with usual care. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTITIONERS?: Although there has been an increase in the number of primary care workforce models implemented in Australia, there is a need for more rigorous research to assess whether these interventions are effective in producing improved health outcomes and represent better value for money than current practice. Researchers and policymakers need to make decisions based on high-quality evidence; it is not obvious what effect the evidence is having on primary care workforce reform.

Resource use and costs of type 2 diabetes patients receiving managed or protocolized primary care: a controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The increasing prevalence of diabetes is associated with increased health care use and costs. Innovations to improve the quality of care, manage the increasing demand for health care and control the growth of health care costs are needed. The aim of this study is to evaluate the care process and costs of managed, protocolized and usual care for type 2 diabetes patients from a societal perspective.

METHODS

In two distinct regions of the Netherlands, both managed and protocolized diabetes care were implemented. Managed care was characterized by centralized organization, coordination, responsibility and centralized annual assessment. Protocolized care had a partly centralized organizational structure. Usual care was characterized by a decentralized organizational structure. Using a quasi-experimental control group pretest-posttest design, the care process (guideline adherence) and costs were compared between managed (n = 253), protocolized (n = 197), and usual care (n = 333). We made a distinction between direct health care costs, direct non-health care costs and indirect costs. Multivariate regression models were used to estimate differences in costs adjusted for confounding factors. Because of the skewed distribution of the costs, bootstrapping methods (5000 replications) with a bias-corrected and accelerated approach were used to estimate 95% confidence intervals (CI) around the differences in costs.

RESULTS

Compared to usual and protocolized care, in managed care more patients were treated according to diabetes guidelines. Secondary health care use was higher in patients under usual care compared to managed and protocolized care. Compared to usual care, direct costs were significantly lower in managed care (€-1.181 (95% CI: -2.597 to -334)) while indirect costs were higher (€ 758 (95% CI: -353 to 2.701), although not significant. Direct, indirect and total costs were lower in protocolized care compared to usual care (though not significantly).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to usual care, managed care was significantly associated with better process in terms of diabetes care, fewer secondary care consultations and lower health care costs. The same trends were seen for protocolized care, however they were not statistically significant.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled trials: ISRCTN66124817.

A model-based economic evaluation of improved primary care management of patients with type 2 diabetes in Australia

BACKGROUND

There are few studies investigating the economic value of the Australian practice nurse workforce on the management of chronic conditions. This is particularly important in Australia, where the government needs evidence to inform decisions on whether to maintain or redirect current financial incentives that encourage practices to recruit practice nurses.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to estimate the lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) associated with two models of practice nurse involvement in clinical-based activities (high and low level) in the management of type 2 diabetes within the primary care setting.

METHODS

A previously validated state transition model (the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model) was adapted, which uses baseline prognostic factors (e.g. gender, haemoglobin A1c [HbA1c]) to predict the risk of occurrence of diabetes-related complications (e.g. stroke). The model was populated by data from Australian and UK observational studies. Costs and utility values associated with complications were summed over patients' lifetimes to estimate costs and QALY gains from the perspective of the health care system. All costs were expressed in 2011 Australian dollars (AU$). The base-case analysis assumed a 40-year time horizon with an annual discount rate of 5 %.

RESULTS

Relative to low-level involvement of practice nurses in the provision of clinical-based activities, the high-level model was associated with lower mean lifetime costs of management of complications (-AU$8,738; 95 % confidence interval [CI] -AU$12,522 to -AU$4,954), and a greater average gain in QALYs (0.3; 95 % CI 0.2-0.4). A range of sensitivity analyses were performed, in which the high-level model was dominant in all cases.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that the high-level model is a dominant management strategy over the low-level model in all modelled scenarios. These findings indicate the need for effective primary care-based incentives to encourage general practices not only to employ practice nurses, but to better integrate them into the provision of clinical services.

The effects of quality of care on costs: a conceptual framework

CONTEXT

The quality of health care and the financial costs affected by receiving care represent two fundamental dimensions for judging health care performance. No existing conceptual framework appears to have described how quality influences costs.

METHODS

We developed the Quality-Cost Framework, drawing from the work of Donabedian, the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method, reports by the Institute of Medicine, and other sources.

FINDINGS

The Quality-Cost Framework describes how health-related quality of care (aspects of quality that influence health status) affects health care and other costs. Structure influences process, which, in turn, affects proximate and ultimate outcomes. Within structure, subdomains include general structural characteristics, circumstance-specific (e.g., disease-specific) structural characteristics, and quality-improvement systems. Process subdomains include appropriateness of care and medical errors. Proximate outcomes consist of disease progression, disease complications, and care complications. Each of the preceding subdomains influences health care costs. For example, quality improvement systems often create costs associated with monitoring and feedback. Providing appropriate care frequently requires additional physician visits and medications. Care complications may result in costly hospitalizations or procedures. Ultimate outcomes include functional status as well as length and quality of life; the economic value of these outcomes can be measured in terms of health utility or health-status-related costs. We illustrate our framework using examples related to glycemic control for type 2 diabetes mellitus or the appropriateness of care for low back pain.

CONCLUSIONS

The Quality-Cost Framework describes the mechanisms by which health-related quality of care affects health care and health status-related costs. Additional work will need to validate the framework by applying it to multiple clinical conditions. Applicability could be assessed by using the framework to classify the measures of quality and cost reported in published studies. Usefulness could be demonstrated by employing the framework to identify design flaws in published cost analyses, such as omitting the costs attributable to a relevant subdomain of quality.

The role of the care model in modifying prognosis in diabetes

Organizational factors in diabetes care can influence long- and medium-term outcomes, affecting the prognosis to the same extent as new therapies. A growing body of evidence supports the hypothesis that diabetes team consultation can favorably impact on hospital utilization, the costliest item in diabetes management, as well as on hospitalization rates, inpatient hospital length of stay, and re-admission rates. Moreover, the model of diabetes care has been reported to influence guidelines adherence, an additional factor linked to the variability in the quality of diabetes care. The strongest predictor and effect modifier of the quality of diabetes care is specialist referral. Compared to patients seen in primary care or other settings, those visiting a diabetes center are more likely to be monitored according to guidelines, regardless of the severity-of-disease effect, and to receive structured education, as well as more aggressive treatment when needed. Finally, at least eight published studies suggest that when continuity of care is shared with diabetes clinics, all-cause mortality and major cardiovascular events are both reduced. The sharing of care pathways between primary care providers and diabetes teams is likely to be the best and most affordable solution in the complex management of this chronic condition.

Increased Cardiovascular and Renal Disease but not Reduced Life Expectancy Among Diabetic Participants in the General Northern Greek Population

We compared life expectancy and causes of death based on death certificates of 269 diabetic participants (group A) and 5659 nondiabetic participants (group B) who died from January 1, 1991 to December 31, 2010, in 3 small towns of Northern Greece. Age at death was significantly ( P = .011) higher in group A (77.2 ± 8.7 years) than in group B (75.7 ± 18.9 years). Males with diabetes lived longer with a mean difference of 4.7 (2.8-6.6) years ( P < .001), whereas females without diabetes lived longer, with a mean difference of 2.3 (1.1-5.6) years ( P = .004). Diabetic participants died more frequently of myocardial infarction ( P = .001), chronic renal failure ( P < .001), followed by pneumonia ( P = .010) and hyperosmolar non-ketotic coma ( P < .001). Nondiabetic participants died more frequently of lung cancer ( P < .001), old age ( P < .001), and car accidents ( P = .004). In conclusion, the cardiovascular and renal disease burden among diabetic participants did not reduce life expectancy, especially in men.

Managing diabetes with integrated teams: maximizing your efforts with limited time

The importance of glycemic control has been well established. In response, the American Diabetes Association has established goals for glycemic control and other cardiovascular parameters, including blood pressure and low-density and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. However, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey has shown that only about half (57%) of patients with diabetes meet a glycated hemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) goal of < 7%, approximately 45% meet blood pressure and total cholesterol goals, and only 12% achieve all 3 treatment goals. While treating hyperglycemia remains the primary treatment goal, careful selection of pharmacotherapies that do not adversely affect cardiovascular risk factors or long-term glycemic control is an important consideration for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. During the past 5 years, the number of treatment options and the complexity of treatment guidelines for diabetes have increased markedly, which makes treatment decisions more complicated and time-consuming, and greatly impacts the workload of the primary care physicians who deliver care to the majority of this population. To provide optimal diabetes care when time and resources are limited, primary care physicians may want to enlist the support of other providers, such as nurse practitioners, physician assistants, diabetes educators, dietitians, and social and case workers. The use of team care, coupled with appropriately chosen pharmacologic therapy and patient education that fosters the development of critical thinking skills and the ability to make self-management decisions, have been shown to improve glycemic control and cardiovascular outcomes.

A model-based evaluation of collaborative care in management of patients with type 2 diabetes in Australia: an initial report

Objectives. To analyse the short- and long-term costs and benefits of alternative models of primary care for the management of patients with type 2 diabetes in Australia. The models of care reflect differential uptake of primary care-based incentive programs, including reminder systems and involvement of practice nurses in management. This paper describes our study protocol and its progress. Methods. We are undertaking an observational study using a cluster sample design that links retrospective patient data from a range of sources to estimate costs and intermediate outcomes (such as the level of glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c)) over a 3-year time horizon. We use the short-term data as a basis to estimate lifetime costs and benefits of alternative models of care using a decision analytic model. Initial report. We recruited 15 practices from a metropolitan area (Adelaide) and allocated them to three models of care. Three hundred and ninety-nine patients agreed to participate. We use multilevel analysis to evaluate the association between different models of care and patient-level outcomes, while controlling for several covariates. Discussion/conclusions. Given the large amount of funding currently used to maintain primary care-based incentives in general practices in Australia, the results of this study generate the knowledge required to promote investment in the most cost-effective incentives. What is known about the topic? Collaborative models of care can improve the outcomes in patients with chronic diseases such as type 2 diabetes (T2D), and the large amount of funding is currently used to maintain primary care-based initiatives to provide incentives for general practices to take a more multidisciplinary approach in management of chronic diseases. What does this paper add? There are few model-based studies of the cost-effectiveness of alternative models of care defined on the basis of the uptake of financial incentives within Australian primary care settings for diabetes management. Using routinely collected data, this project evaluates the effectiveness of alternative models of care and estimates long-term costs and benefits of various models of care. What are the implications for practitioners? This study explores opportunities for the use of linked, routinely collected data to evaluate clinical practice, and identifies the optimal model of care in management of patients with T2D, with respect to differences in long-term costs and outcomes.

South Australian Divisions of General Practice supporting diabetes care: insights from reporting data

The study used public reporting data supplied by the South Australian Divisions of General Practice to examine their role and significance in supporting diabetes care in general practice. Data sources included the Annual Survey of Divisions 2002–07, and Divisions 12-month reports against National Performance Indicators for 2006–07. Results showed that Divisions combine collaboration, practice support and GP education approaches to support optimal diabetes care within general practice. Divisions commonly described their collaborative achievements in terms of connecting general practice with other diabetes providers, services, information and resources. Practice support and educational activities, which were highly interrelated, often focussed on strengthening use of chronic disease Medical Benefit Schedule items, practice nurse roles and computer and information management systems. In this way, Divisions strengthened primary care team functioning to achieve good communication and consistent standards of care between team members. Divisions detailed a range of strategies that worked well in delivering these practice-level outcomes, with implications for wider Network learning and development. These publicly available data sources provide scope for decision makers and researchers to explore other aspects of Divisions’ roles and performance.