Smith S M, Allwright S, O'Dowd T
Trinity College Centre for Health Sciences, Tallaught Hospital, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Dublin, Ireland.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Jul 18(3):CD004910. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004910.pub2.
Shared care has been used in the management of many chronic conditions with the assumption that it delivers better care than either primary or specialty care alone. It has been defined as the joint participation of primary care physicians and specialty care physicians in the planned delivery of care, informed by an enhanced information exchange over and above routine discharge and referral notices. It has the potential to offer improved quality and coordination of care delivery across the primary-specialty care interface and to improve outcomes for patients.
To determine the effectiveness of shared-care health service interventions designed to improve the management of chronic disease across the primary-specialty care interface.
We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group (EPOC) Specialised Register (and the database of studies awaiting assessment); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE); MEDLINE (from 1966); EMBASE (from 1980) and CINAHL (from 1982). We also searched the reference lists of included studies.
Randomised controlled trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series analyses of shared-care interventions for chronic disease management. The participants were primary care providers, specialty care providers and patients. The outcomes included physical health outcomes, mental health outcomes, and psychosocial health outcomes, treatment satisfaction, measures of care delivery including participation in services, delivery of care and prescribing of appropriate medications, and costs of shared care.
Three review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed study quality.
Twenty studies of shared care interventions for chronic disease management were identified, 19 of which were randomised controlled trials. The majority of studies examined complex multifaceted interventions and were of relatively short duration. The results were mixed. Overall there were no consistent improvements in physical or mental health outcomes, psychosocial outcomes, psychosocial measures including measures of disability and functioning, hospital admissions, default or participation rates, recording of risk factors and satisfaction with treatment. However, there were clear improvements in prescribing in the studies that considered this outcome. The methodological quality of studies varied considerably with only a minority of studies of high-quality design. Cost data were limited and difficult to interpret across studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review indicates that there is, at present, insufficient evidence to demonstrate significant benefits from shared care apart from improved prescribing. Methodological shortcomings, particularly inadequate length of follow-up, may partially account for this lack of evidence. This review indicates that there is no evidence to support the widespread introduction of shared care services at present. Future shared-care interventions should only be developed within research settings and with account taken of the complexity of such interventions and the need to carry out longer studies to test the effectiveness and sustainability of shared care over time.
共享医疗已被用于多种慢性病的管理中,其假设是它能提供比单纯的初级医疗或专科医疗更好的护理。它被定义为初级保健医生和专科保健医生共同参与有计划的护理服务,这种参与是基于比常规出院通知和转诊通知更多的信息交流。它有可能在初级 - 专科护理界面上提高护理质量和协调性,并改善患者的治疗效果。
确定旨在改善初级 - 专科护理界面慢性病管理的共享医疗服务干预措施的有效性。
我们检索了Cochrane有效实践与护理组织组(EPOC)专门注册库(以及待评估研究数据库);Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(CENTRAL);效果评价文摘数据库(DARE);MEDLINE(自1966年起);EMBASE(自1980年起)和CINAHL(自1982年起)。我们还检索了纳入研究的参考文献列表。
关于慢性病管理共享医疗干预措施的随机对照试验、前后对照研究和中断时间序列分析。参与者为初级保健提供者、专科保健提供者和患者。结局包括身体健康结局、心理健康结局和社会心理健康结局、治疗满意度、护理服务措施(包括服务参与度、护理提供情况和适当药物处方)以及共享医疗的成本。
三位综述作者独立评估研究的纳入资格、提取数据并评估研究质量。
共确定了20项关于慢性病管理共享医疗干预措施的研究,其中19项为随机对照试验。大多数研究考察的是复杂的多方面干预措施,且持续时间相对较短。结果不一。总体而言,在身体健康或心理健康结局、社会心理结局、包括残疾和功能测量在内的社会心理指标、住院率、未就诊或参与率、危险因素记录以及治疗满意度方面,没有持续的改善。然而,在考虑该结局的研究中,处方方面有明显改善。研究的方法学质量差异很大,只有少数研究设计质量高。成本数据有限,且不同研究之间难以解读。
本综述表明,目前除了处方改善外,没有足够证据证明共享医疗有显著益处。方法学上的不足,尤其是随访时间不足,可能部分解释了缺乏此类证据的原因。本综述表明,目前没有证据支持广泛引入共享医疗服务。未来的共享医疗干预措施应仅在研究环境中开展,并考虑到此类干预措施的复杂性以及进行更长时间研究以测试共享医疗长期有效性和可持续性的必要性。