Chronic care provision in general practices and association with patient level outcomes: a nationwide cohort study.

IF 7 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Anders Prior, Claus Høstrup Vestergaard, Nynne Bech Utoft, Peter Vedsted, Susan M Smith, Mogens Vestergaard, Morten Fenger-Grøn
{"title":"Chronic care provision in general practices and association with patient level outcomes: a nationwide cohort study.","authors":"Anders Prior, Claus Høstrup Vestergaard, Nynne Bech Utoft, Peter Vedsted, Susan M Smith, Mogens Vestergaard, Morten Fenger-Grøn","doi":"10.1186/s12916-025-04239-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>General practice provides long-term care for most people living with long-term conditions, but the impact of generic chronic care provision on patient outcomes has not been examined on a national level. We aimed to investigate whether the provision of chronic care services in general practice is associated with potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potentially preventable hospitalisations in listed patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Nationwide cohort study using linked health registry data covering 4.42 million patients (18 + years) listed with general practices in Denmark in 2019 (n = 1769). The exposure was the patient's practice listing. Practices were grouped evenly into low, medium, or high level of service provision (chronic care consultations, chronic care procedures, and daytime consultations) after adjustment for patient case-mix and multimorbidity. Sub-group analyses were based on list size, morbidity load, deprivation score, and urbanisation. The outcomes at patient level were number of patient days with PIMs (modified STOPP-START criteria) and number of potentially preventable hospitalisations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In practices providing high levels of chronic care consultations, the listed patients had a 1.2% lower risk of PIMs compared to the medium-level group (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.988, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.977 to 0.999, corresponding to 3600 fewer patient years of PIMs per year) and an IRR of 0.964 (95% CI 0.927 to 1.002) for potentially preventable hospitalisations. In practices providing high levels of chronic care procedures, patients had a 1.7% lower risk of PIMs (IRR 0.983, 95% CI 0.972 to 0.993, 5500 fewer patient years of PIMs) and an 8.6% lower risk of potentially preventable hospitalisations (IRR 0.914, 95% CI 0.879 to 0.950, 3700 fewer potentially preventable hospitalisations per year). High levels of daytime consultations were associated with higher risk of PIMs, but not with potentially preventable hospitalisations. We found an inverse dose-response relationship between chronic care provision and adverse outcomes. The findings were stable between different practice characteristics and patient populations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients experienced fewer potentially inappropriate medications and potentially preventable hospitalisations if listed at a general practice with high chronic care provision, regardless of other practice characteristics.</p>","PeriodicalId":9188,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medicine","volume":"23 1","pages":"403"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12232575/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-025-04239-z","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: General practice provides long-term care for most people living with long-term conditions, but the impact of generic chronic care provision on patient outcomes has not been examined on a national level. We aimed to investigate whether the provision of chronic care services in general practice is associated with potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potentially preventable hospitalisations in listed patients.

Methods: Nationwide cohort study using linked health registry data covering 4.42 million patients (18 + years) listed with general practices in Denmark in 2019 (n = 1769). The exposure was the patient's practice listing. Practices were grouped evenly into low, medium, or high level of service provision (chronic care consultations, chronic care procedures, and daytime consultations) after adjustment for patient case-mix and multimorbidity. Sub-group analyses were based on list size, morbidity load, deprivation score, and urbanisation. The outcomes at patient level were number of patient days with PIMs (modified STOPP-START criteria) and number of potentially preventable hospitalisations.

Results: In practices providing high levels of chronic care consultations, the listed patients had a 1.2% lower risk of PIMs compared to the medium-level group (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.988, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.977 to 0.999, corresponding to 3600 fewer patient years of PIMs per year) and an IRR of 0.964 (95% CI 0.927 to 1.002) for potentially preventable hospitalisations. In practices providing high levels of chronic care procedures, patients had a 1.7% lower risk of PIMs (IRR 0.983, 95% CI 0.972 to 0.993, 5500 fewer patient years of PIMs) and an 8.6% lower risk of potentially preventable hospitalisations (IRR 0.914, 95% CI 0.879 to 0.950, 3700 fewer potentially preventable hospitalisations per year). High levels of daytime consultations were associated with higher risk of PIMs, but not with potentially preventable hospitalisations. We found an inverse dose-response relationship between chronic care provision and adverse outcomes. The findings were stable between different practice characteristics and patient populations.

Conclusions: Patients experienced fewer potentially inappropriate medications and potentially preventable hospitalisations if listed at a general practice with high chronic care provision, regardless of other practice characteristics.

普通医疗中的慢性护理提供及其与患者水平结果的关联:一项全国性队列研究。
背景:一般做法为大多数患有长期疾病的人提供长期护理,但一般慢性护理提供对患者结果的影响尚未在国家层面进行研究。我们的目的是调查在一般实践中提供的慢性护理服务是否与潜在的不适当药物(PIMs)和潜在的可预防的住院有关。方法:使用关联健康登记数据进行全国队列研究,涵盖2019年丹麦全科就诊的442万例患者(18岁以上)(n = 1769)。曝光是病人的执业清单。在调整患者病例组合和多病性后,将实践平均分为低、中、高水平的服务提供(慢性护理咨询、慢性护理程序和日间咨询)。亚组分析基于列表大小、发病率负荷、剥夺评分和城市化程度。患者水平的结果是患者接受pim治疗的天数(修改后的stop - start标准)和可能可预防的住院次数。结果:在提供高水平慢性护理咨询的实践中,与中等水平组相比,所列患者的pim风险降低了1.2%(发病率比[IRR] 0.988, 95%置信区间[CI] 0.977至0.999,对应于每年减少3600例患者的pim年),潜在可预防住院的IRR为0.964 (95% CI 0.927至1.002)。在提供高水平慢性护理程序的实践中,患者的pim风险降低1.7% (IRR 0.983, 95% CI 0.972至0.993,pim患者年减少5500),潜在可预防住院的风险降低8.6% (IRR 0.914, 95% CI 0.879至0.950,潜在可预防住院每年减少3700)。高水平的日间咨询与更高的pim风险相关,但与潜在可预防的住院治疗无关。我们发现慢性护理提供和不良结果之间存在负剂量反应关系。研究结果在不同的实践特征和患者群体之间是稳定的。结论:无论其他实践特征如何,如果患者被列入具有高慢性护理提供的全科实践,则患者经历的潜在不适当药物和潜在可预防的住院治疗较少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Medicine
BMC Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
13.10
自引率
1.10%
发文量
435
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medicine is an open access, transparent peer-reviewed general medical journal. It is the flagship journal of the BMC series and publishes outstanding and influential research in various areas including clinical practice, translational medicine, medical and health advances, public health, global health, policy, and general topics of interest to the biomedical and sociomedical professional communities. In addition to research articles, the journal also publishes stimulating debates, reviews, unique forum articles, and concise tutorials. All articles published in BMC Medicine are included in various databases such as Biological Abstracts, BIOSIS, CAS, Citebase, Current contents, DOAJ, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Science Citation Index Expanded, OAIster, SCImago, Scopus, SOCOLAR, and Zetoc.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信