Coleman Katie, Mattke Soeren, Perrault Patrick J, Wagner Edward H
MacColl Institute for Healthcare Innovation, Group Health Center for Health Studies Seattle, Washington 98101, USA.
Annu Rev Public Health. 2009;30:385-408. doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.031308.100249.
In the past 10 years, a wide spectrum of chronic care improvement interventions has been tried and evaluated to improve health outcomes and reduce costs for chronically ill individuals. On one end of the spectrum are disease-management interventions--often organized by commercial vendors--that work with patients but do little to engage medical practice. On the other end are quality-improvement efforts aimed at redesigning the organization and delivery of primary care and better supporting patient self-management. This qualitative review finds that carve-out disease management interventions that target only patients may be less effective than those that also work to redesign care delivery. Imprecise nomenclature and poor study design methodology limit quantitative analysis. More innovation and research are needed to understand how disease-management components can be more meaningfully embedded within practice to improve patient care.
在过去10年里,人们尝试并评估了一系列广泛的慢性病护理改善干预措施,以改善健康状况并降低慢性病患者的成本。在这一范围的一端是疾病管理干预措施——通常由商业供应商组织——这些措施与患者合作,但在参与医疗实践方面做得很少。另一端是旨在重新设计初级护理的组织和提供方式并更好地支持患者自我管理的质量改进努力。这项定性综述发现,仅针对患者的分离式疾病管理干预措施可能不如那些同时致力于重新设计护理提供方式的措施有效。不精确的术语和糟糕的研究设计方法限制了定量分析。需要更多的创新和研究来了解如何将疾病管理组件更有意义地融入实践中以改善患者护理。