Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine 5/2009

01-05-2009 | Health Policy

Who Gets Disease Management?

Authors: Melinda Beeuwkes Buntin, PhD, Arvind K. Jain, MS, Soeren Mattke, MD, ScD, Nicole Lurie, MD, MSPH

Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine | Issue 5/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Disease management (DM) has been promoted to improve health outcomes and lower costs for patients with chronic disease. Unfortunately, most of the studies that support claims of DM’s success suffer from a number of biases, the most important of which is selection bias, or bias in the type of patients enrolling.

Objective

To quantify the differences between those who do and do not enroll in DM.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was an observational study of the health care use, costs, and quality of care of 27,211 members of a large health insurer who were identified through claims as having asthma, diabetes, or congestive heart failure, were considered to be at high risk for incurring significant claims costs, and were eligible to join a disease management program involving health coaching.

Measurements

We used health coach call records to determine which patients participated in at least one coaching call and which refused to participate. We used claims data for the 12 months before the start of intervention to tabulate costs and utilization metrics. In addition, we calculated HEDIS quality scores for the year prior to the start of intervention.

Results

The patients who enrolled in the DM program differed significantly from those who did not on demographic, cost, utilization and quality parameters prior to enrollment. For example, compared to non-enrollees, diabetes enrollees had nine more prescriptions per year and higher HbA1c HEDIS scores (0.70 vs. 0.61, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

These findings illuminate the serious problem of selection into DM programs and suggest that the effectiveness levels found in prior evaluations using methodologies that don’t address this may be overstated.
Literature
2.
go back to reference Todd W, Nash D, eds. Disease Management: A Systems Approach to Improving Patient Outcomes. San Francisco: Jossey Bass: 2001. Todd W, Nash D, eds. Disease Management: A Systems Approach to Improving Patient Outcomes. San Francisco: Jossey Bass: 2001.
3.
go back to reference Ellrodt G, Cook DJ, Lee J, Cho M, Hunt D, Weingarten S. Evidence-based disease management. JAMA. 1997;278:1687–92.PubMedCrossRef Ellrodt G, Cook DJ, Lee J, Cho M, Hunt D, Weingarten S. Evidence-based disease management. JAMA. 1997;278:1687–92.PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Casalino LP. Disease management and the organization of physician practice. JAMA. 2005;293:485–8.PubMedCrossRef Casalino LP. Disease management and the organization of physician practice. JAMA. 2005;293:485–8.PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Mattke S, Seid M, Ma S. Evidence for the impact of disease management: is $1 billion a year a good investment? Am J Managed Care. 2007;13(12):670–8. Mattke S, Seid M, Ma S. Evidence for the impact of disease management: is $1 billion a year a good investment? Am J Managed Care. 2007;13(12):670–8.
10.
go back to reference Linden A, Roberts N. A user’s guide to the disease management literature: recommendations for reporting and assessing program outcomes. Am J Manag Care. 2005;11:113–20.PubMed Linden A, Roberts N. A user’s guide to the disease management literature: recommendations for reporting and assessing program outcomes. Am J Manag Care. 2005;11:113–20.PubMed
11.
go back to reference Linden A, Adams J. Evaluating disease management programme effectiveness: an introduction to instrumental variables. J Eval Clin Pract. 2006;12:148–54.PubMedCrossRef Linden A, Adams J. Evaluating disease management programme effectiveness: an introduction to instrumental variables. J Eval Clin Pract. 2006;12:148–54.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Beaulieu N, Cutler D, Ho K, et al. The business care for diabetes disease management for managed care organizations. Forum for Health Economics and Policy. 2006;9(1). Beaulieu N, Cutler D, Ho K, et al. The business care for diabetes disease management for managed care organizations. Forum for Health Economics and Policy. 2006;9(1).
13.
go back to reference Fremont AM, Bierman A, Wickstrom SL, et al. Use of geocoding in managed care settings to identify quality disparities. Health Aff. 2005;24:516–26.CrossRef Fremont AM, Bierman A, Wickstrom SL, et al. Use of geocoding in managed care settings to identify quality disparities. Health Aff. 2005;24:516–26.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Elliott MN, Fremont A, Morrison PA, Pantoja P, Abrahamse A, Lurie N. A new method for estimating racial/ethnic disparities where administrative records lack self-reported race/ethnicity. Health Serv Res. 2008;43(5p1):1722–36.CrossRef Elliott MN, Fremont A, Morrison PA, Pantoja P, Abrahamse A, Lurie N. A new method for estimating racial/ethnic disparities where administrative records lack self-reported race/ethnicity. Health Serv Res. 2008;43(5p1):1722–36.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Abrahamse AP, Morrison A, Bolton NM. Surname analysis for estimating local concentration of Hispanics and Asians. Popul Res Policy Rev. 1994;13:383–98.CrossRef Abrahamse AP, Morrison A, Bolton NM. Surname analysis for estimating local concentration of Hispanics and Asians. Popul Res Policy Rev. 1994;13:383–98.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Von Korff M, Gruman J, Schaefer J, Curry S, Wagner E. Collaborative management of chronic illness. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(12):1097–102. Von Korff M, Gruman J, Schaefer J, Curry S, Wagner E. Collaborative management of chronic illness. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(12):1097–102.
18.
go back to reference Linden A, Adams JL, Roberts N. Strengthening the case for disease management effectiveness: un-hiding the hidden bias. J Eval Clin Pract. 2006b;12:140–7.PubMedCrossRef Linden A, Adams JL, Roberts N. Strengthening the case for disease management effectiveness: un-hiding the hidden bias. J Eval Clin Pract. 2006b;12:140–7.PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Linden A, Adams JL, Roberts N. Using propensity scores to construct comparable control groups for disease management program evaluation. Dis Manag Health Outcomes. 2006c;13:107–15.CrossRef Linden A, Adams JL, Roberts N. Using propensity scores to construct comparable control groups for disease management program evaluation. Dis Manag Health Outcomes. 2006c;13:107–15.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference DMAA. Outcomes Guidelines Report Volume II. Washington, DC; 2007. DMAA. Outcomes Guidelines Report Volume II. Washington, DC; 2007.
Metadata
Title
Who Gets Disease Management?
Authors
Melinda Beeuwkes Buntin, PhD
Arvind K. Jain, MS
Soeren Mattke, MD, ScD
Nicole Lurie, MD, MSPH
Publication date
01-05-2009
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine / Issue 5/2009
Print ISSN: 0884-8734
Electronic ISSN: 1525-1497
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-009-0950-8

Other articles of this Issue 5/2009

Journal of General Internal Medicine 5/2009 Go to the issue

Reflection

Stuck

Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.