Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Annals of Family Medicine
  • My alerts
Annals of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Follow annalsfm on Twitter
  • Visit annalsfm on Facebook
Research ArticleOriginal ResearchA

Case Management in Primary Care for Frequent Users of Health Care Services: A Mixed Methods Study

Catherine Hudon, Maud-Christine Chouinard, Marie-France Dubois, Pasquale Roberge, Christine Loignon, Éric Tchouaket, Mireille Lambert, Émilie Hudon, Fatoumata Diadiou and Danielle Bouliane
The Annals of Family Medicine May 2018, 16 (3) 232-239; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2233
Catherine Hudon
1Département de médecine de famille et de médecine d’urgence, Université de Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada
2Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada
MD, PhD, CFPC
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Maud-Christine Chouinard
3Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux du Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean, Québec, Canada
4Département des sciences de la santé, Université du Québec à Chicoutimi, Québec, Canada
5Centre de recherche de l’Hôpital Charles-LeMoyne, Québec, Canada
RN, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Marie-France Dubois
6Département des sciences de la santé communautaire, Université de Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Pasquale Roberge
1Département de médecine de famille et de médecine d’urgence, Université de Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada
2Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christine Loignon
1Département de médecine de famille et de médecine d’urgence, Université de Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Éric Tchouaket
7Département des sciences infirmières, Université du Québec en Outaouais, Québec, Canada
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mireille Lambert
3Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux du Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean, Québec, Canada
MA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Émilie Hudon
3Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux du Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean, Québec, Canada
4Département des sciences de la santé, Université du Québec à Chicoutimi, Québec, Canada
RN, MSc(c)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Fatoumata Diadiou
3Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux du Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean, Québec, Canada
MA(c)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Danielle Bouliane
3Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux du Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean, Québec, Canada
MA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Additional Files
  • Figure 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1

    Flow of patients through the randomized trial.

    ED = emergency department.

Tables

  • Figures
  • Additional Files
    • View popup
    Table 1

    Patients’ Characteristics at Baseline, by Group

    CharacteristicIntervention Group (n = 126)Control Group (n = 121)P Valuea
    Age, mean (SD), y61 (13.5)59 (12.9).14
    Sex, male, No. (%)58 (46.0)44 (36.4).12
    Chronic conditions, mean (SD), No.5.8 (2.7)6.1 (2.7).38
    Disease burden, DBMA score, mean (SD)b12.6 (7.9)14.3 (9.0).13
    Married/living with a partner, No. (%)80 (63.5)75 (62.5).22
    Education, No. (%).51
     Not graduated from high school52 (41.3)45 (37.2)
     Graduated from high school or higher education74 (58.7)76 (62.8)
    Occupation, No. (%).34
     Work32 (25.8)26 (22.0)
     Without work35 (28.2)46 (39.0)
     Retired57 (46.0)46 (39.0)
    Annual household income, No. (%).11
     <Can$20,00032 (26.4)38 (31.4)
     Can$20,000–Can$49,99962 (51.2)46 (38.0)
     ≥Can$50,00027 (22.3)37 (30.6)
    Perception of economic situation, No. (%).20
     Comfortable23 (18.3)28 (23.1)
     Sufficient to meet their needs73 (57.9)57 (47.1)
     Poor/very poor30 (23.8)36 (29.8)
    At risk for mental health problems (HADS score ≥16)c, No. (%)39 (31.2)47 (38.8).21
    Low health literacy (NVS score <4),d No. (%)84 (68.3)80 (66.7).79
    • Can$ = Canadian dollars; DBMA = Disease Burden Morbidity Assessment; HADS = Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; NVS = Newest Vital Sign.

    • ↵a Difference between groups assessed with a t test.

    • ↵b DBMA scores range from 1 to 48, with higher scores indicating greater disease burden.

    • ↵c HADS scores range from 0 to 21, with higher scores indicating more severe anxiety and depression.

    • ↵d NVS scores range from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater health literacy.

    • View popup
    Table 2

    Patients’ Psychological Distress and Activation

    Measure and GroupTime PointAOR (95% CI)a or Cohen dbP Value
    Baseline6 Mo
    Psychological distress (K6 score ≥13)c
     Intervention group, No. (%)33 (26.2)20 (15.9)0.43 (0.19–0.95).04
     Control group, No. (%)35 (28.9)31 (25.6)(reference)
    Activation (PAM score)d
     Intervention group, mean (SD) score60.5 (15.1)65.5 (16.8)0.17.43
     Control group, mean (SD) score63.0 (15.6)65.4 (16.3)(reference)
    • AOR = adjusted odds ratio; K6 = Psychological Distress Scale; PAM = Patient Activation Measure.

    • Note: Analyses based on 126 patients in intervention group, 121 patients in control group.

    • ↵a From logistic regression analysis. Group comparison at 6 months adjusted for baseline psychological distress.

    • ↵b From analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Group comparison at 6 months adjusted for baseline score.

    • ↵c K6 scores range from 0 to 24, with higher scores indicating greater psychological distress.

    • ↵d PAM scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating greater activation. Scores can be categorized into 4 levels: Level 1 (score ≤47), may not yet believe that patient role is important; Level 2 (score 47.1–55.1), lacks confidence and knowledge to take action; Level 3 (score 55.2–66.9), beginning to take action; Level 4 (score ≥67), taking action.

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Supplemental Appendix

    Supplemental materials

    Files in this Data Supplement:

    • Supplemental data: Appendix - PDF file
  • The Article in Brief

    Case Management in Primary Care for Frequent Users of Health Care Services: A Mixed Methods Study

    Catherine Hudon , and colleagues

    Background Frequent users of healthcare services with chronic disease and complex care needs often experience fragmented, uncoordinated and ineffective health care. This study evaluates the effects of a nurse-delivered case management intervention on such frequent users of primary care services, with a focus on psychological distress and patient activation.

    What This Study Found The study finds that case management reduces psychological distress and creates a sense of security in patients who frequently use health services. In this randomized controlled trial of 247 patients, the intervention group (n=126) received six months of case management including evaluation of patients' needs and resources, a service plan tailored to patients' priorities, care coordination between health care and community partners, and self-management support for patients and families. Compared with usual care, the intervention reduced psychological distress (OR 0.43, 95% CI, 0.19-0.95) but had no effect on patient activation. In addition, interviews were conducted with 25 intervention group patients, six case management nurses, and nine health managers, and focus groups were held with eight patients' spouses and 21 participating family physicians. Overall, stakeholders had positive perceptions of the case management intervention. Many noticed that improved accessibility and self-management support led to a sense of security and better self-management of patients' health.

    Implications

    • The authors note that future research is needed to evaluate the effect of a case management intervention on the use and cost of services and to assess if a longer intervention would result in a change in self-management.
  • Annals Journal Club

    May/Jun 2018: Case Management for Frequent Users of Medical Care


    Emily C. Giesler, DO, Grant Family Medicine, and Michael E. Johansen, MD, MS, Associate Editor

    The Annals of Family Medicine encourages readers to develop a learning community to improve health care and health through enhanced primary care. Participate by conducting a RADICAL journal club. RADICAL stands for Read, Ask, Discuss, Inquire, Collaborate, Act, and Learn. We encourage diverse participants to think critically about important issues affecting primary care and act on those discussions.1

    HOW IT WORKS

    In each issue, the Annals selects an article and provides discussion tips and questions. Take a RADICAL approach to these materials and post a summary of your conversation in our online discussion. (Open the article and click on "TRACK Discussion/ Submit a comment.") Discussion questions and information are online at: http://www.AnnFamMed.org/site/AJC/.

    CURRENT SELECTION

    Article for Discussion

    Hudon C, Chouinard M-C, Dubois M-F, et al. Case management in primary care for frequent users of health care services: a mixed methods study. Ann Fam Med. 2018;16(3):232-239..

    Discussion Tips

    Mixed methods studies bring together the complementary strengths of quantitative and qualitative methods and can be quite useful in evaluating complex interventions. As systems of care become more complex, mixed methods will likely be seen more in the literature as they can lead to better understanding about interventions and outcomes. This study uses mixed methods to evaluate a randomized controlled trial of case management in primary care.

    Discussion Questions

    • What question is asked by this study and why does it matter?
    • How does this study advance beyond previous research and clinical practice on this topic?
    • How strong is the study design for answering the question?
    • To what degree can the findings be accounted for by:
      • How patients were selected, excluded, or lost to follow-up?
      • The entrance criteria for patients into the randomized controlled trial?
      • Who was selected for the qualitative portion of the study and the selection process?
      • How the main variables were measured?
      • Who was blinded in the study?
      • Length of follow-up?
      • Confounding (false attribution of causality because 2 variables discovered to be associated actually are associated with a 3rd factor)?
      • Chance?
      • How the findings were interpreted?
    • What are the main study findings? How do these findings compare with previous evaluations of case management?
    • How do the qualitative findings influence your understanding of the quantitative findings, and vice versa?
    • How comparable is the study sample to similar patients in your practice? Do you think the intervention could be implemented in your office?
    • What contextual factors are important for interpreting the findings?
    • How might this study change case management in your practice? Policy? Education? Research?
    • What are the next steps in interpreting or applying the findings?
    • What researchable questions remain?

    References

    1. Stange KC, Miller WL, McLellan LA, et al. Annals Journal Club: It's time to get RADICAL. Ann Fam Med. 2006;4(3):196-197. http://annfammed.org/content/4/3/196.full.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Annals of Family Medicine: 16 (3)
The Annals of Family Medicine: 16 (3)
Vol. 16, Issue 3
May/June 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
  • In Brief
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Annals of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Case Management in Primary Care for Frequent Users of Health Care Services: A Mixed Methods Study
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Annals of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Annals of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
11 + 1 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Case Management in Primary Care for Frequent Users of Health Care Services: A Mixed Methods Study
Catherine Hudon, Maud-Christine Chouinard, Marie-France Dubois, Pasquale Roberge, Christine Loignon, Éric Tchouaket, Mireille Lambert, Émilie Hudon, Fatoumata Diadiou, Danielle Bouliane
The Annals of Family Medicine May 2018, 16 (3) 232-239; DOI: 10.1370/afm.2233

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Get Permissions
Share
Case Management in Primary Care for Frequent Users of Health Care Services: A Mixed Methods Study
Catherine Hudon, Maud-Christine Chouinard, Marie-France Dubois, Pasquale Roberge, Christine Loignon, Éric Tchouaket, Mireille Lambert, Émilie Hudon, Fatoumata Diadiou, Danielle Bouliane
The Annals of Family Medicine May 2018, 16 (3) 232-239; DOI: 10.1370/afm.2233
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Emerging lessons from experiences at transitions in care among hospitalised patients with cancer with postdischarge frequent emergency department use: a qualitative study using linked clinical and patient-reported interview data from Quebec, Canada
  • Case management in primary healthcare for people with complex needs to improve integrated care: a large-scale implementation study protocol
  • Stakeholders perceptions of a nurse-led telehealth case management intervention in primary care for patients with complex care needs: a qualitative descriptive study
  • Bridging the impactibility gap in population health management: a systematic review
  • Qualitative evaluation of primary care providers experiences caring for frequent users of the emergency department
  • Frequent outpatient attendance among people on the governmental welfare programme in Japan: assessing both patient and supplier characteristics
  • Case management in primary care for frequent users of healthcare services with chronic diseases and complex care needs: an implementation and realist evaluation protocol
  • In This Issue: Sometimes More is Less
  • Case Management for Frequent Users of Medical Care
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Performance-Based Reimbursement, Illegitimate Tasks, Moral Distress, and Quality Care in Primary Care: A Mediation Model of Longitudinal Data
  • Adverse Outcomes Associated With Inhaled Corticosteroid Use in Individuals With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
  • Family-Based Interventions to Promote Weight Management in Adults: Results From a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial in India
Show more Original Research

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Domains of illness & health:
    • Chronic illness
    • Mental health
  • Methods:
    • Mixed methods

Keywords

  • frequent users
  • utilization
  • case management
  • outcomes
  • mixed methods
  • comorbidity
  • practice-based research
  • primary care

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Early Access
  • Plain-Language Summaries
  • Multimedia
  • Podcast
  • Articles by Type
  • Articles by Subject
  • Supplements
  • Calls for Papers

Info for

  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Job Seekers
  • Media

Engage

  • E-mail Alerts
  • e-Letters (Comments)
  • RSS
  • Journal Club
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Subscribe
  • Family Medicine Careers

About

  • About Us
  • Editorial Board & Staff
  • Sponsoring Organizations
  • Copyrights & Permissions
  • Contact Us
  • eLetter/Comments Policy

© 2025 Annals of Family Medicine