The challenge of integrating eHealth into healthcare: a systematic literature review on structure, process and outcome (Donabedian model) (Preprint)

Objectives:An overview was produced of indicators currently used to assess disease management programs and, based on these findings, provide a framework regarding sets of indicators that should be used when taking the aims and types of disease management programs into account.Methods:A systematic literature review was performed.Results:Thirty-six studies met the inclusion criteria. It appeared that a link between aims of disease management and evaluated structure, process, as well as outcome indicators does not exist in a substantial part of published studies on disease management of diabetes and asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, especially when efficiency of care is concerned. Furthermore, structure indicators are largely missing from the evaluations, although these are of major importance for the interpretation of outcomes for purposes of decision-making. Efficiency of disease management is mainly evaluated by means ofprocessindicators; the use ofoutcomeindicators is less common. Within a framework, structure, process, and outcome indicators for effectiveness and efficiency are recommended for each type of disease management program.Conclusions:The link between aims of disease management and evaluated structure, process, and outcome indicators does not exist in a substantial part of published studies on disease management. The added value of this study mainly lies in the development of a framework to guide the choice of indicators for health technology assessment of disease management.

Download Full-text

Quality indicators for in-hospital geriatric co-management programmes: a systematic literature review and international Delphi study

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020617 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 8 (3) ◽

pp. e020617 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Bastiaan Van Grootven ◽

Lynn McNicoll ◽

Daniel A Mendelson ◽

Susan M Friedman ◽

Katleen Fagard ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Literature Review ◽

Systematic Literature Review ◽

Delphi Study ◽

Western Europe ◽

Outcome Indicators ◽

Process And Outcome ◽

Stay Time ◽

The Usa ◽

Level Of Agreement ◽

Process And Outcome Indicators

ObjectiveTo find consensus on appropriate and feasible structure, process and outcome indicators for the evaluation of in-hospital geriatric co-management programmes.DesignAn international two-round Delphi study based on a systematic literature review (searching databases, reference lists, prospective citations and trial registers).SettingWestern Europe and the USA.ParticipantsThirty-three people with at least 2 years of clinical experience in geriatric co-management were recruited. Twenty-eight experts (16 from the USA and 12 from Europe) participated in both Delphi rounds (85% response rate).MeasuresParticipants rated the indicators on a nine-point scale for their (1) appropriateness and (2) feasibility to use the indicator for the evaluation of geriatric co-management programmes. Indicators were considered appropriate and feasible based on a median score of seven or higher. Consensus was based on the level of agreement using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method.ResultsIn the first round containing 37 indicators, there was consensus on 14 indicators. In the second round containing 44 indicators, there was consensus on 31 indicators (structure=8, process=7, outcome=16). Experts indicated that co-management should start within 24 hours of hospital admission using defined criteria for selecting appropriate patients. Programmes should focus on the prevention and management of geriatric syndromes and complications. Key areas for comprehensive geriatric assessment included cognition/delirium, functionality/mobility, falls, pain, medication and pressure ulcers. Key outcomes for evaluating the programme included length of stay, time to surgery and the incidence of complications.ConclusionThe indicators can be used to assess the performance of geriatric co-management programmes and identify areas for improvement. Furthermore, the indicators can be used to monitor the implementation and effect of these programmes.

Download Full-text