Integrated care in Western Europe: a wise solution for the future?

INTRODUCTION: IC is a term commonly adopted across the world underpinning a positive attitude against fragmentation of healthcare service provision. While the principles supporting IC are simple, their implementation is more controversial. AREAS COVERED: The growing number of IC definitions is related to the increasing domains of applications, which reflect the increasing demand induced by aging multi-morbid patients. A comprehensive definition of IC should now include the coordination of health and social services useful to deliver continuous care across organizational boundaries. The recent debate on IC is largely influenced by the mismatch between the increasing burden of health and social needs for chronic conditions from the demand side, and the design of health-care systems still focused on acute care from the supply side. EXPERT OPINION: The major reasons of persisting IC weakness in European countries stem from arguable choices of health policy taken in the recent past. The political creed in 'market competition' is probably the most emblematic. All initiatives encouraging health-care providers to compete with each other are likely to discourage IC. Since most European GPs are still self-employed professionals working in their own cabinets, the anachronistic professional status of GPs is another historically rooted reason of IC weakness.

Integrated care: easy in theory, harder in practice?

Integrated care (IC) is a term now commonly adopted across the world, which implies a positive attitude towards addressing fragmentation of service provision inside health systems. While the principles of IC are simple, their implementation is more controversial. The ever growing number of IC definitions is related to the increasing domains of applications, which reflect the increasing demand induced by ageing multi-morbid patients. An exhaustive definition of IC should now enclose the coordination of health and social services useful to deliver seamless care across organizational boundaries. The current debate on IC is largely fueled by the modern mismatch between the growing burden of health needs for chronic conditions from the demand side and the design of health systems still largely centered on acute care from the supply side. The major reasons of persisting IC weakness in Western European nations stem from arguable choices of health policy taken in a quite recent past. The political creed in 'market competition' is likely to be the most emblematic. All initiatives encouraging healthcare providers to compete with each other are likely to discourage IC. Another historically rooted reason of IC weakness is the occupational status of European general practitioners (GPs). While single large-scale organizations have become a pressing priority for a modern primary care, most GPs are still selfemployed professionals working in their own cabinets. It is time to reconsider the anachronistic status of GPs so as to enhance IC in the future.

[Integrated care: the right way for the future?] / Integrated care: la strada giusta per il futuro?

Integrated Care (IC) is an "umbrella" term, under which numerous definitions are collected, which implies an attempt to coordinate and integrate fragmented and piecemeal health systems with new organizational arrangements. In fact, poor coordination of care is often a major obstacle for patients who access to health services. This adds on concern to the increasing demand for health and the greater proportion of healthcare expenditure induced by aging and chronic multiple comorbidity of patients. IC therefore sets itself the ambitious goal of harmonizing and optimizing patient care, both physical-mental and social, in order to obtain a continuous multi-organizational assistance. Although the principles on which IC is based are intuitive and simple, its extensive application is complicated and difficult to achieve. Within this article, we first try to define the concept of IC through a general review of the scientific literature on the subject. Then, we analyze the main economic and political criticalities of IC. Finally, we try to suggest recommendations about IC that can be extended to the health services of the member countries of the European Union.

Risk sharing agreements: what lessons from Italy?

Italy is one of the few countries that have matured substantial experience of risk-sharing agreements so far. The first performance-based arrangement was agreed in July 2006, and as of October 2010, eighteen contracts have been in force.The complex management of discount schemes is entirely based on Web registries run by AIFA, the Italian drug agency. The system validates each prescription and automatically requests the hospital pharmacy by e-mail to release the drug. If a patient meets nonresponder criteria, the hospital pharmacist should apply for pay-back to the manufacturer. There are still some important question marks to address. First of all, nonresponders have to be documented by health authorities, otherwise any undocumented nonresponder will be paid as a success. Another question concerns pre-set timing. Although the scientific rationale of the nonresponder criteria for each drug has not been made public, time frames appear too short to allow a reliable assessment. Another question is whether regions, which are financially accountable in Italy for pharmaceutical expenditure, are really able to claw back refunds from manufacturers. Unfortunately here again there are no official figures, and regions do not seem yet able to quantify the amount of pay-back matured in the 4 previous years. The delayed and incomplete availability of pay-back procedures may be one explanation.