Prioritization of implementation barriers related to integrated care models in Central and Eastern European countries.

The importance of integrated care will increase in future health systems due to aging populations and patients with chronic multimorbidity, however, such complex healthcare interventions are often developed and implemented in higher income countries. For Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries it is important to investigate which integrated care models are transferable to their setting and facilitate the implementation of relevant models by identifying barriers to their implementation. This study investigates the relative importance of integrated care models and the most critical barriers for their implementation in CEE countries. Experts from Croatia, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Serbia were invited to complete an online survey within the SELFIE H2020 project. 81 respondents completed the survey. Although experts indicated that some integrated care models were already being implemented in CEE countries, the survey revealed a great need for further improvement in the integration of care, especially the managed care of oncology patients, coordinated palliative care of terminally ill patients, and nursing care of elderly with multimorbidity. Lack of long-term financial sustainability as well as of dedicated financing schemes were seen the most critical implementation barriers, followed by the lack of integration between health and social care providers and insufficient availability of human resources. These insights can guide future policy making on integrated care in CEE countries.

[Patients, Partners, Professionals, Payers and Policy Makers Preferences for Integrated Care for Multimorbidity in Germany: A Discrete Choice Experiment]. / Präferenzen von Patienten, pflegenden Angehörigen, Leistungserbringern, Kostenträgern und politischen Entscheidungsträgern bei der integrierten Versorgung in Deutschland: Ein Discrete Choice Experiment.

AIM OF THE WORK: The aim of this study was to measure and compare the relative importance that patients with multimorbidity, partners and other informal caregivers, professionals, payers and policy makers attribute to different outcome measures of integrated care (IC) programmes in Germany. METHODS: A DCE was conducted, asking respondents to choose between two IC programmes for persons with multimorbidity. Each IC programme was presented by means of attributes or outcomes reflecting the Triple Aim. They were divided into the outcomes health/ wellbeing, experience with care and costs with in total eight attributes and three levels of performance. RESULTS: The results of n=676 questionnaires showed that the attributes "enjoyment of life" and "continuity of care" received the highest ratings across all stakeholder groups. The lowest relative scores remained for the attribute "total costs" for all stakeholders. The preferences of professionals and informal caregivers differed most distinctly from the patients' preferences. The differences mostly concerned "physical functioning", which was rated highest by patients, and "person centeredness" and "continuity of care", which received the highest ratings from professionals. CONCLUSIONS: The preference heterogeneities identified in relation to the outcomes of IC programmes between different stakeholders highlight the importance of informing professionals and policy makers about the different perspectives in order to optimise the design of IC programmes. The results also support the relevance of joint decision-making and coordination processes between professionals, informal caregivers and patients.

Bundled payments for chronic diseases increased health care expenditure in the Netherlands, especially for multimorbid patients.

Bundled payments aim to stimulate the integration of healthcare services and ultimately reduce healthcare expenditure growth through improved quality of care. The Netherlands introduced bundled payments for chronic diseases in 2010 by reimbursing providers annually for a bundle of primary care services related to COPD, Diabetes, or Vascular Risk Management. We aimed to assess the long-term effects of these bundled payments on healthcare expenditure. We used health insurance claims data from 2008 to 2015 to compare the healthcare expenditure between everyone who was included in bundled payments and a control group. We performed a difference-in-difference analysis in combination with propensity score matching and found that bundled payments consistently increased health care expenditure over seven years. The average half-year increase was €233 (95%CI: 204-262) for DM2, €609 (95%CI: 533-686) for COPD, and €231 (95%CI: 208-254) for VRM, representing 13%, 52%, and 20% of 2008 half-year cost. The increase was higher for those with multimorbidity compared to those without multimorbidity. This suggests that the expectations of the bundled payments are yet to be fulfilled.

Drivers of successful implementation of integrated care for multi-morbidity: Mechanisms identified in 17 case studies from 8 European countries.

This paper provides a deeper understanding of the mechanisms underlying implementation strategies for integrated care. As part of the SELFIE project, 17 integrated care programmes addressing multi-morbidity from eight European countries were selected and studied. Data was extracted from 'thick descriptions' of the 17 programmes and analysed both inductively and deductively using implementation theory. The following ten mechanisms for successful implementation of integrated care were identified. With regards to service delivery, successful implementers (1) commonly adopted an incremental growth model rather than a disruptive innovation approach, and found (2) a balance between flexibility and formal structures of integration. For leadership & governance, they (3) applied collaborative governance by engaging all stakeholders, and (4) distributed leadership throughout all levels of the system. For the workforce, these implementers (5) were able to build a multidisciplinary team culture with mutual recognition of each other's roles, and (6) stimulated the development of new roles and competencies for integrated care. With respect to financing, (7) secured long-term funding and innovative payments were applied as means to overcome fragmented financing of health and social care. Implementers emphasised (8) the implementation of ICT that was specifically developed to support collaboration and communication rather than administrative procedures (technology & medical devices), and (9) created feedback loops and a continuous monitoring system (information & research). The overarching mechanism was that implementers (10) engaged in alignment work across the different components and levels of the health and social care system. These evidence-based mechanisms for implementation are applicable in different local, regional and national contexts.

Comparing patients' and other stakeholders' preferences for outcomes of integrated care for multimorbidity: a discrete choice experiment in eight European countries.

OBJECTIVES: To measure relative preferences for outcomes of integrated care of patients with multimorbidity from eight European countries and compare them to the preferences of other stakeholders within these countries. DESIGN: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted in each country, asking respondents to choose between two integrated care programmes for persons with multimorbidity. SETTING: Preference data collected in Austria (AT), Croatia (HR), Germany (DE), Hungary (HU), the Netherlands (NL), Norway (NO), Spain (ES), and UK. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with multimorbidity, partners and other informal caregivers, professionals, payers and policymakers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Preferences of participants regarding outcomes of integrated care described as health/well-being, experience with care and cost outcomes, that is, physical functioning, psychological well-being, social relationships and participation, enjoyment of life, resilience, person-centredness, continuity of care and total costs. Each outcome had three levels of performance. RESULTS: 5122 respondents completed the DCE. In all countries, patients with multimorbidity, as well as most other stakeholder groups, assigned the (second) highest preference to enjoyment of life. The patients top-three most frequently included physical functioning, psychological well-being and continuity of care. Continuity of care also entered the top-three of professionals, payers and policymakers in four countries (AT, DE, HR and HU). Of the five stakeholder groups, preferences of professionals differed most often from preferences of patients. Professionals assigned lower weights to physical functioning in AT, DE, ES, NL and NO and higher weights to person-centredness in AT, DE, ES and HU. Payers and policymakers assigned higher weights than patients to costs, but these weights were relatively low. CONCLUSION: The well-being outcome enjoyment of life is the most important outcome of integrated care in multimorbidity. This calls for a greater involvement of social and mental care providers. The difference in opinion between patients and professionals calls for shared decision-making, whereby efforts to improve well-being and person-centredness should not divert attention from improving physical functioning.

Development of transferability guidance for integrated care models with special focus on Central and Eastern European countries.

AIM: To develop pragmatic recommendations for Central and Eastern European (CEE) policymakers about transferability assessment of integrated care models established in higher income European Union (EU) countries. METHODS: Draft recommendations were developed based on Horizon 2020-funded SELFIE project deliverables related to 17 promising integrated care models for multimorbid patients throughout Europe, as well as on an online survey among CEE stakeholders on the relevance of implementation barriers. Draft recommendations were discussed at the SELFIE transferability workshop and finalized together with 22 experts from 12 CEE countries. RESULTS: Thirteen transferability recommendations are provided in three areas. Feasibility of local implementation covers the identification and prioritization of implementation barriers and proposals for potential solutions. Performance measurement of potentially transferable models focuses on the selection of models with proven benefits and assurance of performance monitoring. Transferability of financing methods for integrated care explores the relevance of financing methodologies and planning of adequate initial and long-term financing. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of international integrated care models cannot be recommended without evidence on its local feasibility or scientifically sound and locally relevant performance assessment in the country of origin. However, if the original financing method is not transferable to the target region, development of a locally relevant alternative financing method can be considered.

Integrated Care for Frail Elderly: A Qualitative Study of a Promising Approach in The Netherlands.

INTRODUCTION: Increasingly, frail elderly need to live at home for longer, relying on support from informal caregivers and community-based health- and social care professionals. To align care and avoid fragmentation, integrated care programmes are arising. A promising example of such a programme is the Care Chain Frail Elderly (CCFE) in the Netherlands, which supports elderly with case and care complexity living at home with the best possible health and quality of life. The goal of the current study was to gain a deeper understanding of this programme and how it was successfully put into practice in order to contribute to the evidence-base surrounding complex integrated care programmes for persons with multi-morbidity. METHODS: Document analyses and semi-structured interviews with stakeholders were used to create a 'thick description' that provides insights into the programme. RESULTS: Through case finding, the CCFE-programme targets the frailest primary care population. The person-centred care approach is reflected by the presence of frail elderly at multidisciplinary team meetings. The innovative way of financing by bundling payments of multiple providers is one of the main facilitators for the success of this programme. Other critical success factors are the holistic assessment of unmet health and social care needs, strong leadership by the care groups, close collaboration with the healthcare insurer, a shared ICT-system and continuous improvements. CONCLUSION: The CCFE is an exemplary initiative to integrate care for the frailest elderly living at home. Its innovative components and critical success factors are likely to be transferable to other settings when providers can take on similar roles and work closely with payers who provide integrated funding.

Unravelling complex primary-care programs to maintain independent living in older people: a systematic overview.

OBJECTIVES: Complex interventions are criticized for being a "black box", which makes it difficult to determine why they succeed or fail. Recently, nine proactive primary-care programs aiming to prevent functional decline in older adults showed inconclusive effects. The aim of this study was to systematically unravel, compare, and synthesize the development and evaluation of nine primary-care programs within a controlled trial to further improve the development and evaluation of complex interventions. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic overview of all written data on the nine proactive primary-care programs was conducted using a validated item list. The nine proactive primary-care programs involved 214 general practices throughout the Netherlands. RESULTS: There was little or no focus on the (1) context surrounding the care program, (2) modeling of processes and outcomes, (3) intervention fidelity and adaptation, and (4) content and evaluation of training for interventionists. CONCLUSIONS: An in-depth analysis of the context, modeling of the processes and outcomes, measurement and reporting of intervention fidelity, and implementation of effective training for interventionists is needed to enhance the development and replication of future complex interventions.

Formal and informal care for community-dwelling frail elderly people over time: A comparison of integrated and usual care in the Netherlands.

While integration has become a central tenet of community-based care for frail elderly people, little is known about its impact on formal and informal care and their dynamics over time. The aim of this study was therefore to examine how an integrated care intervention for community-dwelling frail elderly people affects the amount and type of formal and informal care over 12 months as compared to usual care. A quasi-experimental design with a control group was used. Data regarding formal and informal care were collected from frail elderly patients (n = 207) and informal caregivers (n = 74) with pre/post-questionnaires. Within- and between-group comparisons and multiple linear regression analyses were performed. The results showed marginal changes over time in the amount of formal and informal care in both integrated care and usual care. However, different associations between changes in formal and informal care were found in integrated and usual care. Most notably, informal caregivers provided more instrumental assistance over time if formal caregivers provided less personal care (and vice versa) in integrated care but not in usual care. These results suggest that integrated care does not necessarily change the contribution of formal or informal care, but changes the interaction between formal (personal care) and informal (instrumental) activities. Implications and recommendations for research and practice are discussed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRNT05748494.

Cost-effectiveness of integrated care in frail elderly using the ICECAP-O and EQ-5D: does choice of instrument matter?

Economic evaluations likely undervalue the benefits of interventions in populations receiving both health and social services, such as frail elderly, by measuring only health-related quality of life. For this reason, alternative preference-based instruments have been developed for economic evaluations in the elderly, such as the ICECAP-O. The aim of this paper is twofold: (1) to evaluate the cost-effectiveness using a short run time frame for an integrated care model for frail elderly, and (2) to investigate whether using a broader measure of (capability) wellbeing in an economic evaluation leads to a different outcome in terms of cost-effectiveness. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses on costs and outcomes separately. We also performed incremental net monetary benefit regressions using quality adjusted life years (QALYs) based on the ICECAP-O and EQ-5D. In terms of QALYs as measured with the EQ-5D and the ICECAP-O, there were small and insignificant differences between the instruments, due to negligible effect size. Therefore, widespread implementation of the Walcheren integrated care model would be premature based on these results. All results suggest that, using the ICECAP-O, the intervention has a higher probability of cost-effectiveness than with the EQ-5D at the same level of WTP. In case an intervention's health and wellbeing effects are not significant, as in this study, using the ICECAP-O will not lead to a false claim of cost-effectiveness of the intervention. On the other hand, if differences in capability QALYs are meaningful and significant, the ICECAP-O may have the potential to measure broader outcomes and be more sensitive to differences between intervention and comparators.