Impact Evaluation of a System-Wide Chronic Disease Management Program on Health Service Utilisation: A Propensity-Matched Cohort Study

Abstract

BackgroundThe New South Wales Health (NSW Health) Chronic Disease Management Program (CDMP) delivers interventions to adults at risk of hospitalisation for five target chronic conditions that respond well to ambulatory care: diabetes, hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, and coronary artery disease. The intervention consists of two main components: (1) care coordination across sectors (acute, ambulatory, and community care from both public and private sectors) and clinical specialties, facilitated by program care coordinators, and (2) health coaching including management of lifestyle risk factors and medications and self-management. These components were broadly prescribed by the head office of NSW Health, which funded the program, and were implemented by regional health services (local health districts) in ways that best suited their own history, environment, workforce, and patient need. We used a propensity-matched cohort study to evaluate health service utilisation after enrolment in the CDMP.Methods and FindingsThe evaluation cohort included 41,303 CDMP participants enrolled between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2013 who experienced at least one hospital admission or emergency department (ED) presentation for a target condition in the 12 mo preceding enrolment. Potential controls were selected from patients not enrolled in the CDMP but experiencing at least one hospital admission or ED presentation over the same period. Each CDMP patient in the evaluation cohort was matched to one control using 1:1 propensity score matching. The primary outcome was avoidable hospitalisations. Secondary outcomes included avoidable readmissions, avoidable bed days, unplanned hospitalisations, unplanned readmissions, unplanned bed days, ED presentations, and all-cause death.The primary analysis consisted of 30,057 CDMP participants and 30,057 matched controls with a median follow-up of 15 mo. Of those, 25,638 (85.3%) and 25,597 (85.2%) were alive by the end of follow-up in the CDMP and control groups, respectively. Baseline characteristics (including history of health service utilisation) were well balanced between the matched groups. In both groups, utilisation peaked just before the time of enrolment/matching, declined sharply immediately following enrolment, and then continued to decrease more gradually; however, after enrolment, avoidable and unplanned health service utilisation remained higher for CDMP participants compared to controls. The adjusted yearly rate of avoidable hospital admissions was 0.57 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.62) in the CDMP group versus 0.33 (95% CI 0.31 to 0.37) in the control group (adjusted rate ratio 1.70, 95% CI 1.62 to 1.79, p < 0.001). Significant increases in service utilisation were also observed for unplanned hospitalisations (1.42, 95% CI 1.37 to 1.47, p < 0.001) and ED presentations (1.37, 95% CI 1.32 to 1.42, p < 0.001) as well as avoidable (2.00, 95% CI 1.80 to 2.22, p < 0.001) and unplanned (1.51, 95% CI 1.40 to 1.62, p < 0.001) readmissions and avoidable...

Eight‐year post‐trial follow‐up of health care and long‐term care costs of tele‐based health coaching

“…To our knowledge, this study has the longest follow-up of the effects of health coaching on health care and LTC costs reported in the literature. Similarly, to previously reported health coaching interventions, 13,[15][16][17] this intervention showed no reductions in health care costs in the first 12-month period. 19 As there is a delay from changes in patients' empowerment, learning, and behavioral changes to changes in physiological outcomes and following use of health services, a long-term follow-up of costs over 8 years after the intervention was conducted.…”

A self‐management support program for older Australians with multiple chronic conditions: a randomised controlled trial

“…In absolute terms, CDSMS participants reported more general practice visits, emergency department visits, and hospital admissions than control group participants, but the differences were not statistically significant. Greater health service utilisation by CDSMS participants was also recently found by a large New South Wales CDSMS evaluation 21 and in the Integrated Care pilot studies in the United Kingdom. 22 Our study was conducted in the ideal circumstances of a university-based trial focused on achieving high levels of fidelity and very high proportions of participants receiving the intended interventions.…”

Examining the high users of hospital resources: implications of a profile developed from Australian health insurance claims data

“…26 There is a strong focus within the Australian health sector at present on reducing potentially preventable hospital admissions and moving care for chronic conditions outside of hospitals to the community. 27 Although the results of both insurer-and government-funded chronic disease management programs in Australia have been mixed, [28][29][30] the findings of the present study indicate that the heaviest users of hospital services are seeking services for a narrow range of conditions that are not the target of traditional disease management programs. hospitalisation -including chemotherapy, dialysis and most rehabilitation -in the top 1% of privately insured hospital users are not preventable.…”