Advancing current approaches to disease management evaluation: capitalizing on heterogeneity to understand what works and for whom

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Hubertus JM Vrijhoef⁴  Ariel Linden³  Cor Spreeuwenberg⁵  Inge GP Duimel-Peeters²  Marieke Spreeuwenberg⁵  John L Adams¹  Arianne MJ Elissen⁵ 

[1] Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Center for Effectiveness and Safety Research, Pasadena, CA, USA;Department of Patient and Care, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands;Department of Health Management and Policy, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA;Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore;Department of Health Services Research, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, MaastrichtUniversity, Duboisdomein 30, PO Box 616 6200MD, Maastricht, the Netherlands

关键词: Statistical heterogeneity;    Multilevel regression methods;    Evaluation methodology;    Quality measurement;    Chronic disease management;   

Others  :  1126032
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2288-13-40

 received in 2012-09-21, accepted in 2013-03-08,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Evaluating large-scale disease management interventions implemented in actual health care settings is a complex undertaking for which universally accepted methods do not exist. Fundamental issues, such as a lack of control patients and limited generalizability, hamper the use of the ‘gold-standard’ randomized controlled trial, while methodological shortcomings restrict the value of observational designs. Advancing methods for disease management evaluation in practice is pivotal to learn more about the impact of population-wide approaches. Methods must account for the presence of heterogeneity in effects, which necessitates a more granular assessment of outcomes.

Methods

This paper introduces multilevel regression methods as valuable techniques to evaluate ‘real-world’ disease management approaches in a manner that produces meaningful findings for everyday practice. In a worked example, these methods are applied to retrospectively gathered routine health care data covering a cohort of 105,056 diabetes patients who receive disease management for type 2 diabetes mellitus in the Netherlands. Multivariable, multilevel regression models are fitted to identify trends in clinical outcomes and correct for differences in characteristics of patients (age, disease duration, health status, diabetes complications, smoking status) and the intervention (measurement frequency and range, length of follow-up).

Results

After a median one year follow-up, the Dutch disease management approach was associated with small average improvements in systolic blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein, while a slight deterioration occurred in glycated hemoglobin. Differential findings suggest that patients with poorly controlled diabetes tend to benefit most from disease management in terms of improved clinical measures. Additionally, a greater measurement frequency was associated with better outcomes, while longer length of follow-up was accompanied by less positive results.

Conclusions

Despite concerted efforts to adjust for potential sources of confounding and bias, there ultimately are limits to the validity and reliability of findings from uncontrolled research based on routine intervention data. While our findings are supported by previous randomized research in other settings, the trends in outcome measures presented here may have alternative explanations. Further practice-based research, perhaps using historical data to retrospectively construct a control group, is necessary to confirm results and learn more about the impact of population-wide disease management.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Elissen et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Care Continuum Alliance: Care Continuum Alliance (CCA) definition of disease management. http://www.carecontinuumalliance.org/dm_definition.asp webcite
• [2]Nolte E, Knai C, McKee M: Managing chronic conditions. Experience in eight countries. World Health Organization on behalf of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies: Copenhagen; 2008.
• [3]Mattke S, Seid M, Ma S: Evidence for the effect of disease management: is $1 billion a year a good investment? Am J Manag Care 2007, 13(12):670-676.
• [4]Rothe U, Müller G, Schwarz PEH, Seifert M, Kunath H, Koch R, Bergmann S, Julius U, Bornstein SR, Hanefeld M, Schulze J: Evaluation of a diabetes management system based on practice guidelines, integrated care, and continuous quality management in a Federal State of Germany. A population-based approach to health care research. Diabetes Care 2008, 31(5):863-868.
• [5]Nolte E, Hinrichs S: DISMEVAL. Developing and validating disease management evaluation methods for European healthcare systems. Cambridge: RAND Europe; 2012.
• [6]Mattke S, Bergamo S, Balakrishnan A, Martino S, Vakkur N: Measuring and reporting the performance of disease management programs. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation; 2006.
• [7]Linden A, Roberts N: A users guide to the disease management literature: recommendations for reporting and assessing program outcomes. Am J Manage Care 2005, 11(2):81-90.
• [8]Linden A, Adams JL, Roberts N: Evaluating disease management programme effectiveness: an introduction to the regression discontinuity design. J Eval Clin Pract 2006, 12(2):124-131.
• [9]Conklin A, Nolte E: Disease management evaluation. A comprehensive review of current state of the art. Cambridge: RAND Europe; 2010.
• [10]Pimouguet C, Le Goff M, Thiébaut R, Dartigues JF, Helmer C: Effectiveness of disease-management programs for improving diabetes care: a meta-analysis. Can Med Assoc J 2011, 183(2):E115-E127.
• [11]Elissen AMJ, Steuten LMG, Lemmens LC, Drewes HW, Lemmens KMM, Meeuwissen JAC, Baan CA, Vrijhoef HJM: Meta-analysis of the effectiveness of chronic care management for diabetes: investigating heterogeneity in outcomes. J Eval Clin Pract 2012. epub ahead of print
• [12]Lemmens KMM, Lemmens LC, Boom JHC, Drewes HW, Meeuwissen JAC, Steuten LMG, Vrijhoef HJM, Baan CA: Chronic care management for patients with COPD: A critical review of available evidence. J Eval Clin Pract 2012. epub ahead of print
• [13]Drewes HW, Steuten LMG, Lemmens LC, Baan CA, Boshuizen H, Elissen AMJ, Lemmens KMM, Meeuwissen JAC, Vrijhoef HJM: The effectiveness of chronic care management for heart failure: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis to explain the heterogeneity in outcomes. Health Serv Res 2012. epub ahead of print
• [14]Nolte E, Conklin A, Adams JL, Brunn M, Cadier B, Chevreul K, Durand-Zaleski I, Elissen A, Erler A, Flamm M, Frølich A, Fullerton B, Jacobsen R, Knai C, Krohn R, Pöhlmann B, Saz Parkinson Z, Sarria Santamera A, Sönnichsen A, Vrijhoef H: Evaluating chronic disease management. Recommendations for funders and users. Cambridge: RAND Europe; 2012.
• [15]Austin PC, Goel V, Van Walraven C: An introduction to multilevel regression models. Can J Public Health 2001, 92(2):150-54.
• [16]Dickinson LM, Basu A: Multilevel modeling and practice-based research. Ann Fam Med 2005, 3(Suppl. 1):S52-60.
• [17]Maas CJM, Hox JJ: Robustness issues in multilevel regression analysis. Stat Neerl 2004, 58(2):127-37.
• [18]Hox JJ: Multilevel analysis: techniques and applications. New York, NY: Routledge; 2010.
• [19]Linden A, Adams JL: Determining if disease management saves money: an introduction to meta-analysis. J Eval Clin Pract 2007, 13:400-407.
• [20]Stuck A, Siu A, Wieland G, Adams JL, Rubenstein L: Comprehensive geriatric assessment: a meta-analysis of controlled trials. Lancet 1993, 342(8878):1032-36.
• [21]Struijs JN, De Jong-Van Til JT, Lemmens LC, Drewes HW, De Bruin SR, Baan CA: Bundled payments of diabetes care: effects on care delivery process and quality of care at three-year follow-up. Bilthoven: National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM); 2012.
• [22]Struijs JN, Baan C: Integrating care through bundled payments – lessons from the Netherlands. N Engl J Med 2011, 364:11-12.
• [23]De Bakker DH, Struijs JN, Baan CB, Raams J, De Wildt J, Vrijhoef HJM, Schut FT: Early results from adoption of bundled payment for diabetes care in the Netherlands show improvement in care coordination. Health Aff (Millwood) 2012, 31(2):426-33.
• [24]Netherlands Diabetes Federation: NDF Care Standard. Transparency and quality of diabetes care for people with type 2 diabetes. Amersfoort: Netherlands Diabetes Federation (NDF); 2007.
• [25]Ham C: The ten characteristics of the high-performing chronic care system. Health Econ Policy Law 2010, 5:71-90.
• [26]Van Til JT, De Wildt J, Struijs JN: De organisatie van zorggroepen anno 2010: huidige stand van zaken en de ontwikkelingen in de afgelopen jaren. Bilthoven: National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM); 2010.
• [27]Berthold HK, Bestehorn KP, Jannowitz C, Krone W, Gouni-Berthold I: Disease management programs in type 2 diabetes: quality of care. Am J Manag Care 2011, 17(6):393-403.
• [28]Victora CG, Habicht J, Bryce J: Evidence-based public health: moving beyond randomized trials. Public Health Matters 2004, 94(3):400-05.
• [29]Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG: Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. Brit Med J 2003, 327:557-60.
• [30]Muthén B, Asparouhov T: Multilevel regression mixture analysis. J R Stat Soc 2009, 172:639-57.
• [31]Martin BC, Warram JH, Krolewski AS, Bergman RN, Soeldner JS, Kahn CR: Role of glucose and insulin resistance in development of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Lancet 1992, 340(8825):925-929.
• [32]Tesfaye S, Stevens LK, Stephenson JM, Fuller JH, Plater M, Ionescu-Tirgoviste C, Nuber A, Pozza G, Ward JD: Prevalence of diabetic peripheral neuropathy and its relation to glycaemic control and potential risk factors: the EURODIAB IDDM Complications Study. Diabetologia 1996, 39(11):1377-1384.
• [33]Berthold MR, Lenz HJ, Bradley E, Kruse R, Borgelt C: Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Intelligent Data Analysis: 28–30 August 2003, Berlin. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer; 2003.
• [34]Kennedy P: A guide to econometrics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1992.
• [35]Linden A, Adams J, Roberts N: Evaluation methods in disease management: determining program effectiveness. Washington, DC: Position paper commissioned by the Disease Management Association of America (DMAA); 2003.
• [36]English M, Schellenberg J, Todd J: Assessing health system interventions: key points when considering the value of randomization. Bull World Health Organ 2011, 89:907-12.
• [37]Gary TL, Batts-Turner M, Yeh HC: The effects of a nurse case manager and a community health worker team on diabetic control, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations among urban African Americans with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med 2009, 169:1788-94.
• [38]Bodenheimer T, Wagner E, Grumbach K: Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness. J Am Med Assoc 2002, 288:1775-9.
• [39]Nolte E, McKee M: Integration and chronic care: a review. In Caring for people with chronic conditions. A health system perspective. European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Series. Edited by Nolte E, McKee M. New York, NY: Open University Press; 2008.
• [40]Barr VJ, Robinson S, Marin-Link B, Underhill L, Dotts A, Ravensdale D, Salivaras S: The expanded chronic care model: an integration of concepts and strategies from population health promotion and the chronic care model. Hosp Q 2003, 7(1):73-82.
• [41]Singh D: How can chronic disease management programmes operate across care settings and providers?. Copenhagen: World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe and European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies; 2008.
• [42]Norris SL, Lau J, Smith SJ, Schmid CH, Engelgau MM: Self-management education for adults with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of the effect on glycaemic control. Diabetes Care 2002, 25(7):1159-71.
• [43]Pincus T, Esther R, DeWalt DA, Callahan LF: Social conditions and self-management are more powerful determinants of health than access to care. Ann Intern Med 1998, 129(5):406-411.
• [44]Diabetes Fonds: Actuele cijfers over diabetes. Factsheet. 2011. http://www.diabetesfonds.nl/sites/default/files/Cijfers%20over%20diabetes%20oktober%202011.pdf webcite
• [45]Limperg K: Rookprevalentie 2004–2008. TNS NIPO: Continu onderzoek rookgewoonten. Amsterdam; 2009.
• [46]Lutgers HL, Gerrits EG, Sluiter WJ, Ubink-Veltmaat LJ, Landman GWD, Links TP, Gans ROB, Smit AJ, Bilo HJG: Life expectancy in a large cohort of type 2 diabetes patients treated in primary care (ZODIAC-10). PLoS One 2009, 4(8):e6817.
• [47]Van Leest LATM, Koek HL, Van Trijp MJCA, Baan CA, Jacobs MAM, Bots ML, Verschuren WMM: Diabetes mellitus. In Hart- en vaatziekten in Nederland 2005, cijfers over risicofactoren, ziekte, behandeling en sterfte. Edited by Van Leest LATM, Koek HL, Van Trijp MJCA, Van Dis SJ, Peters RJG, Bots ML, Verschuren WMM. Nederlandse Hartstichting: Den Haag; 2005:33-59.
• [48]Voorham J, Denig P: Computerized extraction of information on the quality of diabetes from free text in electronic medical patient records of general practitioners. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2007, 14(3):349-354.