Hisashige Akinori
Institute of Healthcare Technology Assessment, Tokushima, Japan.
Glob J Health Sci. 2012 Nov 26;5(2):27-48. doi: 10.5539/gjhs.v5n2p27.
Disease management (DM) approach is increasingly advocated as a means of improving effectiveness and efficiency of healthcare for chronic diseases. To evaluate the evidence on effectiveness and efficiency of DM, evidence synthesis was carried out.
To locate eligible meta-analyses and systematic reviews, we searched Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, A&HCI, DARE, HTA and NHS EED from 1995 to 2010. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed a study quality.
Twenty-eight meta-analyses and systematic reviews were included for synthesizing evidence. The proportion of articles which observed improvement with a reasonable amount of evidence was the highest at process (69%), followed by health services (63%), QOL (57%), health outcomes (51%), satisfaction (50%), costs (38%) and so on. As to mortality, statistically significant results were observed only in coronary heart disease. Important components in DM, such as a multidisciplinary approach, were identified.
The evidence synthesized shows considerable evidence in the effectiveness and efficiency of DM programs in process, health services, QOL and so on. The question is no longer whether DM programs work, but rather which type or component of DM programs works best and efficiently in the context of each healthcare system or country.
疾病管理(DM)方法作为提高慢性病医疗保健有效性和效率的一种手段,越来越受到提倡。为了评估疾病管理有效性和效率方面的证据,我们进行了证据综合分析。
为了查找合格的荟萃分析和系统评价,我们检索了1995年至2010年期间的Medline、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆、SCI-EXPANDED、SSCI、A&HCI、DARE、HTA和NHS EED。两名评价者独立提取数据并评估研究质量。
纳入了28项荟萃分析和系统评价以综合证据。有合理数量证据表明有改善的文章比例在过程方面最高(69%),其次是卫生服务(63%)、生活质量(57%)、健康结局(51%)、满意度(50%)、成本(38%)等。至于死亡率,仅在冠心病方面观察到具有统计学意义的结果。确定了疾病管理中的重要组成部分,如多学科方法。
综合的证据表明,在过程、卫生服务、生活质量等方面,疾病管理项目的有效性和效率有相当多的证据支持。问题不再是疾病管理项目是否有效,而是在每个医疗保健系统或国家的背景下,哪种类型或组成部分的疾病管理项目效果最佳且效率最高。