Cost and effects of integrated care: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Stephen Rocks, Daniela Berntson, Alejandro Gil-Salmerón, Mudathira Kadu, Nieves Ehrenberg, Viktoria Stein and Apostolos Tsiachristas ()
Additional contact information
Stephen Rocks: University of Oxford
Daniela Berntson: University of Oxford
Alejandro Gil-Salmerón: Polibienestar Research Institute, Universitat de València
Mudathira Kadu: University of Toronto
Nieves Ehrenberg: International Foundation for Integrated Care
Viktoria Stein: International Foundation for Integrated Care
Apostolos Tsiachristas: University of Oxford

The European Journal of Health Economics, 2020, vol. 21, issue 8, No 8, 1221 pages

Abstract: Abstract Background Health and care services are becoming increasingly strained and healthcare authorities worldwide are investing in integrated care in the hope of delivering higher-quality services while containing costs. The cost-effectiveness of integrated care, however, remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to appraise current economic evaluations of integrated care and assesses the impact on outcomes and costs. Methods CINAHL, DARE, EMBASE, Medline/PubMed, NHS EED, OECD Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and WHOLIS databases from inception to 31 December 2019 were searched to identify studies assessing the cost-effectiveness of integrated care. Study quality was assessed using an adapted CHEERS checklist and used as weight in a random-effects meta-analysis to estimate mean cost and mean outcomes of integrated care. Results Selected studies achieved a relatively low average quality score of 65.0% (± 18.7%). Overall meta-analyses from 34 studies showed a significant decrease in costs (0.94; CI 0.90–0.99) and a statistically significant improvement in outcomes (1.06; CI 1.05–1.08) associated with integrated care compared to the control. There is substantial heterogeneity in both costs and outcomes across subgroups. Results were significant in studies lasting over 12 months (12 studies), with both a decrease in cost (0.87; CI 0.80–0.94) and improvement in outcomes (1.15; 95% CI 1.11–1.18) for integrated care interventions; whereas, these associations were not significant in studies with follow-up less than a year. Conclusion Our findings suggest that integrated care is likely to reduce cost and improve outcome. However, existing evidence varies largely and is of moderate quality. Future economic evaluation should target methodological issues to aid policy decisions with more robust evidence on the cost-effectiveness of integrated care.

Keywords: Cost-effectiveness, Economic evaluation, Integrated care; meta-analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-020-01217-5 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:21:y:2020:i:8:d:10.1007_s10198-020-01217-5

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... cs/journal/10198/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s10198-020-01217-5

Access Statistics for this article

The European Journal of Health Economics is currently edited by J.-M.G.v.d. Schulenburg

More articles in The European Journal of Health Economics from Springer, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ) Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().