Introducing co-ordinated care (1): A randomised trial assessing client and cost outcomes

Leonie Segal, David Dunt, Susan E. Day, Neil Atherton Day, Iain Robertson, Graeme Hawthorne

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    11 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    A program of care co-ordination (CC) in Melbourne for individuals with a history of high use of in-patient services was evaluated. The intervention involved care planning by a general practitioner (GP) and graduated case management depending on client health status. Services were purchased from pooled funds of participating health care agencies. A randomised control trial of 2,742 participants demonstrated no significant differences between the intervention and usual care group for two quality of life measures, the SF-36 and the AQoL (assessment of quality of life), and no difference in mortality rates. Total resource usage in the CC group was substantially higher, principally due to the extra costs for care planning and case management and for administering the CC model. Results conform to the higher costs typically found in other CC trials, although the failure to demonstrate improved client outcomes is less often reported. The reasons for this failure, whether in trial design, implementation, or theoretical underpinnings are explored in a companion paper.

    LanguageEnglish
    Pages201-213
    Number of pages13
    JournalHealth Policy
    Volume69
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Aug 2004

    Keywords

    • Care co-ordination
    • Case management
    • Funds pooling
    • Randomised control trial

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Health Policy

    Cite this

    Segal, Leonie ; Dunt, David ; Day, Susan E. ; Day, Neil Atherton ; Robertson, Iain ; Hawthorne, Graeme. / Introducing co-ordinated care (1) : A randomised trial assessing client and cost outcomes. In: Health Policy. 2004 ; Vol. 69, No. 2. pp. 201-213.
    @article{64b96c33e3f74e698e8f3be3a8b78706,
    title = "Introducing co-ordinated care (1): A randomised trial assessing client and cost outcomes",
    abstract = "A program of care co-ordination (CC) in Melbourne for individuals with a history of high use of in-patient services was evaluated. The intervention involved care planning by a general practitioner (GP) and graduated case management depending on client health status. Services were purchased from pooled funds of participating health care agencies. A randomised control trial of 2,742 participants demonstrated no significant differences between the intervention and usual care group for two quality of life measures, the SF-36 and the AQoL (assessment of quality of life), and no difference in mortality rates. Total resource usage in the CC group was substantially higher, principally due to the extra costs for care planning and case management and for administering the CC model. Results conform to the higher costs typically found in other CC trials, although the failure to demonstrate improved client outcomes is less often reported. The reasons for this failure, whether in trial design, implementation, or theoretical underpinnings are explored in a companion paper.",
    keywords = "Care co-ordination, Case management, Funds pooling, Randomised control trial",
    author = "Leonie Segal and David Dunt and Day, {Susan E.} and Day, {Neil Atherton} and Iain Robertson and Graeme Hawthorne",
    year = "2004",
    month = "8",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1016/j.healthpol.2003.12.016",
    language = "English",
    volume = "69",
    pages = "201--213",
    journal = "Health Policy",
    issn = "0168-8510",
    publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",
    number = "2",

    }

    Introducing co-ordinated care (1) : A randomised trial assessing client and cost outcomes. / Segal, Leonie; Dunt, David; Day, Susan E.; Day, Neil Atherton; Robertson, Iain; Hawthorne, Graeme.

    In: Health Policy, Vol. 69, No. 2, 01.08.2004, p. 201-213.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Introducing co-ordinated care (1)

    T2 - Health Policy

    AU - Segal, Leonie

    AU - Dunt, David

    AU - Day, Susan E.

    AU - Day, Neil Atherton

    AU - Robertson, Iain

    AU - Hawthorne, Graeme

    PY - 2004/8/1

    Y1 - 2004/8/1

    N2 - A program of care co-ordination (CC) in Melbourne for individuals with a history of high use of in-patient services was evaluated. The intervention involved care planning by a general practitioner (GP) and graduated case management depending on client health status. Services were purchased from pooled funds of participating health care agencies. A randomised control trial of 2,742 participants demonstrated no significant differences between the intervention and usual care group for two quality of life measures, the SF-36 and the AQoL (assessment of quality of life), and no difference in mortality rates. Total resource usage in the CC group was substantially higher, principally due to the extra costs for care planning and case management and for administering the CC model. Results conform to the higher costs typically found in other CC trials, although the failure to demonstrate improved client outcomes is less often reported. The reasons for this failure, whether in trial design, implementation, or theoretical underpinnings are explored in a companion paper.

    AB - A program of care co-ordination (CC) in Melbourne for individuals with a history of high use of in-patient services was evaluated. The intervention involved care planning by a general practitioner (GP) and graduated case management depending on client health status. Services were purchased from pooled funds of participating health care agencies. A randomised control trial of 2,742 participants demonstrated no significant differences between the intervention and usual care group for two quality of life measures, the SF-36 and the AQoL (assessment of quality of life), and no difference in mortality rates. Total resource usage in the CC group was substantially higher, principally due to the extra costs for care planning and case management and for administering the CC model. Results conform to the higher costs typically found in other CC trials, although the failure to demonstrate improved client outcomes is less often reported. The reasons for this failure, whether in trial design, implementation, or theoretical underpinnings are explored in a companion paper.

    KW - Care co-ordination

    KW - Case management

    KW - Funds pooling

    KW - Randomised control trial

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=2942703747&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1016/j.healthpol.2003.12.016

    DO - 10.1016/j.healthpol.2003.12.016

    M3 - Article

    VL - 69

    SP - 201

    EP - 213

    JO - Health Policy

    JF - Health Policy

    SN - 0168-8510

    IS - 2

    ER -