BackgroundCommunity engagement is increasingly seen as crucial to achieving high quality, efficient and collaborative care. However, organisations are still searching for the best and most effective ways to engage citizens in the shaping of health and care services. This review highlights the barriers and enablers for engaging communities in the planning, designing, governing, and/or delivering of health and care services on the macro or meso level. It provides policymakers and professionals with evidence-based guiding principles to implement their own effective community engagement (CE) strategies.MethodsA Rapid Realist Review was conducted to investigate how interventions interact with contexts and mechanisms to influence the effectiveness of CE. A local reference panel, consisting of health and care professionals and experts, assisted in the development of the research questions and search strategy. The panel’s input helped to refine the review’s findings. A systematic search of the peer-reviewed literature was conducted.ResultsEight action-oriented guiding principles were identified:Ensure staff provide supportive and facilitative leadership to citizens based on transparency;foster a safe and trusting environment enabling citizens to provide input;ensure citizens’ early involvement;share decision-making and governance control with citizens;acknowledge and address citizens’ experiences of power imbalances between citizens and professionals;invest in citizens who feel they lack the skills and confidence to engage;create quick and tangible wins;take into account both citizens’ and organisations’ motivations.ConclusionsAn especially important thread throughout the CE literature is the influence of power imbalances and organisations’ willingness, or not, to address such imbalances. The literature suggests that ‘meaningful participation’ of citizens can only be achieved if organisational processes are adapted to ensure that they are inclusive, accessible and supportive of citizens.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3090-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The outcomes of chronic care management for diabetes are generally positive, yet differ considerably across trials. The most promising results are attained in studies with limited follow-up (<1 year) and by programmes including more than two CCM components. These factors can, however, explain only part of the heterogeneity in effectiveness between studies. Other potential sources of heterogeneity should be investigated to ensure implementation of evidence-based improvements in diabetes care.

IntroductionReturn to work (RTW) of employees on sick leave for common mental disorders may require a multidisciplinary approach. This article aims to assess time to RTW after a psychiatric consultation providing treatment advice to the occupational physician (OP) for employees on sick leave for common mental disorders in the occupational health (OH) setting, compared to care as usual (CAU).MethodsCluster randomized clinical trial evaluating patients of 12 OPs receiving consultation by a psychiatrist, compared to CAU delivered by 12 OPs in the control group. 60 patients suffering from common mental disorders and ≥ six weeks sicklisted were included. Follow up three and six months after inclusion. Primary outcome measure was time to RTW. Intention- to-treat multilevel analysis and a survival analysis were performed to evaluate time to RTW in both groups.ResultsIn CAU, referral was the main intervention. Both groups improved in terms of symptom severity and quality of life, but time to RTW was significantly shorter in the psychiatric consultation group. At three months follow up, 58% of the psychiatric consultation group had full RTW versus 44% of the control group, a significant finding (P = 0.0093). Survival analysis showed 68 days earlier RTW after intervention in the psychiatric consultation group (P = 0.078) compared to CAU.ConclusionPsychiatric consultation for employees on sick leave in the OH setting improves time to RTW in patients with common mental disorders as compared to CAU. In further research, focus should be on early intervention in patients with common mental disorders on short sick leave duration. Psychiatric consultation might be particularly promising for improvement of RTW in those patients.Trial registration numberISRCTN: 86722376

Objective. To support decision making on how to best redesign chronic care by studying the heterogeneity in effectiveness across chronic care management evaluations for heart failure. Data Sources. Reviews and primary studies that evaluated chronic care management interventions. Study Design. A systematic review including meta-regression analyses to investigate three potential sources of heterogeneity in effectiveness: study quality, length of followup, and number of chronic care model components. Principal Findings. Our meta-analysis showed that chronic care management reduces mortality by a mean of 18 percent (95 percent CI: 0.72-0.94) and hospitalization by a mean of 18 percent (95 percent CI: 0.76-0.93) and improves quality of life by 7.14 points (95 percent CI: À9.55 to À4.72) on the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire. We could not explain the considerable differences in hospitalization and quality of life across the studies. Conclusion. Chronic care management significantly reduces mortality. Positive effects on hospitalization and quality of life were shown, however, with substantial heterogeneity in effectiveness. This heterogeneity is not explained by study quality, length of follow-up, or the number of chronic care model components. More attention to the development and implementation of chronic care management is needed to support informed decision making on how to best redesign chronic care.

Population health management (PHM) has increasingly been mentioned as a concept to realize improvements in population health and quality of care while reducing cost growth (the so-called Triple Aim). The concept of PHM has been used in various settings and has been defined in different ways. This study compared the definitions of PHM used in the literature in order to improve the understanding and interpretation of the concept of PHM. A scoping literature search was performed for papers published between January 2000 and January 2015 that defined PHM. PHM definitions were summarized, focusing on: (1) overall aim, (2) PHM activities, and (3) contextual factors. Eighteen articles were retrieved. The overall aim was defined in terms of health (N = 14), costs (N = 8), and/or quality of care (N = 10). Definitions varied regarding the description of PHM activities, though all definitions contained elements in common with disease management and health promotion. Data management, Triple Aim assessment, risk stratification, evaluation, and feedback cycles were less likely to be mentioned. Contextual factors were scarcely brought forward in the definitions. Moderate variations were found across definitions in the way PHM was conceptualized. Frequently, essential elements of PHM were not specified. Differences in conceptualizations of PHM should be taken into account when comparing PHM initiatives that are working toward improvements in population health, (experienced) quality of care, and reduction of costs.