Abstract
PURPOSE Multimorbidity challenges health systems globally. New models of care are urgently needed to better manage patients with multimorbidity; however, there is no agreed framework for designing and reporting models of care for multimorbidity and their evaluation.
METHODS Based on findings from a literature search to identify models of care for multimorbidity, we developed a framework to describe these models. We illustrate the application of the framework by identifying the focus and gaps in current models of care, and by describing the evolution of models over time.
RESULTS Our framework describes each model in terms of its theoretical basis and target population (the foundations of the model) and of the elements of care implemented to deliver the model. We categorized elements of care into 3 types: (1) clinical focus, (2) organization of care, (3) support for model delivery. Application of the framework identified a limited use of theory in model design and a strong focus on some patient groups (elderly, high users) more than others (younger patients, deprived populations). We found changes in elements with time, with a decrease in models implementing home care and an increase in models offering extended appointments.
CONCLUSIONS By encouragin greater clarity about the underpinning theory and target population, and by categorizing the wide range of potentially important elements of an intervention to improve care for patients with multimorbidity, the framework may be useful in designing and reporting models of care and help advance the currently limited evidence base.
Footnotes
Conflicts of interest: authors report none.
Funding support: All authors except Dr Stokes were funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research (project No 12/130/15). Dr Stokes was funded by the NIHR Greater Manchester Primary Care Patient Safety Translational Research Centre (NIHR GM PSTRC).
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the HTA program, NIHR, National Health Service, or the Department of Health. The funder played no role in the study design, in the collection, analysis or interpretation of the data, in the writing of the paper, or in the decision to submit the paper for publication. All authors were independent from the funders.
Author contributions: J.S., M-S. M., B.G., S.W.M., C.S., and P.B. conceived the study. J.S. led its development and execution. J.S. and M-S.M. conducted the initial study screening, selection, and extraction. Thereafter, J.S., M-S.M., B.G., S.W.M., C.S., and P.B. contributed to various aspects of the empirical work, analysis and presentation. J.S., M.-S.M., B.G., S.W.M., C.S., and P.B. drafted the manuscript and all authors reviewed it and approved the final version. J.S. is the guarantor.
Supplementary materials: Available at http://www.AnnFamMed.org/content/15/6/570/suppl/DC1/.
- Received for publication December 7, 2016.
- Revision received May 9, 2017.
- Accepted for publication June 15, 2017.
- © 2017 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.