NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.
Structured Abstract
Background:
In the United States, patients referred to as high-need, high-cost (HNHC) constitute a very small percentage of the patient population but account for a disproportionally high level of healthcare use and cost. Payers, health systems, and providers would like to improve the quality of care and health outcomes for HNHC patients and reduce their costly use of potentially preventable or modifiable healthcare services, including emergency department (ED) and hospital visits.
Methods:
We assessed evidence of criteria that identify HNHC patients (best fit framework synthesis); developed program theories on the relationship among contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes of interventions intended to change HNHC patient behaviors (realist review); and assessed the effectiveness of interventions (systematic review). We searched databases, gray literature, and other sources for evidence available from January 1, 2000, to March 4, 2021. We included quantitative and qualitative studies of HNHC patients (high healthcare use or cost) age 18 and over who received intervention services in a variety of settings.
Results:
We included 110 studies (117 articles). Consistent with our best fit framework, characteristics associated with HNHC include patient chronic clinical conditions, behavioral health factors including depression and substance use disorder, and social risk factors including homelessness and poverty. We also identified prior healthcare use and race as important predictors. We found limited evidence of approaches for distinguishing potentially preventable or modifiable high use from all high use. To understand how and why interventions work, we developed three program theories in our realist review that explain (1) targeting HNHC patients, (2) engaging HNHC patients, and (3) engaging care providers in these interventions. Theories identify the need for individualizing and tailoring services for HNHC patients and the importance of building trusting relationships. For our systematic review, we categorized evidence based on primary setting. We found that ED-, primary care–, and home-based care models result in reduced use of healthcare services (moderate to low strength of evidence [SOE]); ED, ambulatory intensive caring unit, and primary care-based models result in reduced costs (low SOE); and system-level transformation and telephonic/mail models do not result in changes in use or costs (low SOE).
Conclusions:
Patient characteristics can be used to identify patients who are potentially HNHC. Evidence focusing specifically on potentially preventable or modifiable high use was limited. Based on our program theories, we conclude that individualized and tailored patient engagement and resources to support care providers are critical to the success of interventions. Although we found evidence of intervention effectiveness in relation to cost and use, the studies identified in this review reported little information for determining why individual programs work, for whom, and when.
Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Key Informants
- Technical Expert Panel
- Peer Reviewers
- Evidence Summary
- Chapter 1. Introduction
- Chapter 2. Methods
- Chapter 3. Results
- Literature Searches and Study Characteristics
- Description of Included Evidence
- KQ 1. What criteria identify or predict that patients will be HNHC?
- KQ 1a. How do criteria incorporate patient clinical characteristics?
- KQ 1b. How do criteria incorporate patient demographic, behavioral health, and social risk factors?
- KQ 1c. How do criteria incorporate types, amount, duration, and patterns of healthcare use?
- KQ 1d. Do criteria differ when HNHC is identified at the population, payer, healthcare system, and provider levels?
- KQ 1e. How can potentially preventable or modifiable high use of healthcare be differentiated from necessary and appropriate high use?
- KQ 2. What are the mechanisms that lead to reductions in potentially preventable or modifiable healthcare use and result in improved health outcomes and cost savings in interventions serving HNHC patients?
- KQ 3. Overall, what is the effectiveness and what are the harms of interventions for HNHC patients in reducing potentially preventable or modifiable healthcare use and costs and in improving health outcomes?
- Chapter 4. Discussion
- References
- Appendixes
Suggested citation:
Berkman ND, Chang E, Seibert J, Ali R, Porterfield D, Jiang L, Wines R, Rains C, Viswanathan M. Management of High-Need, High-Cost Patients: A “Best Fit” Framework Synthesis, Realist Review, and Systematic Review. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 246. (Prepared by the RTI International–University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2015-00011-I.) AHRQ Publication No. 21(22)-EHC028. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; October 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23970/AHRQEPCCER246. Posted final reports are located on the Effective Health Care Program search page.
This report is based on research conducted by the RTI International–University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, MD (Contract No. 290-2015-00011-I). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its contents; the findings and conclusions do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. Therefore, no statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
None of the investigators have any affiliations or financial involvement that conflicts with the material presented in this report.
The information in this report is intended to help healthcare decision makers—patients and clinicians, health system leaders, and policymakers, among others—make well-informed decisions and thereby improve the quality of healthcare services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for the application of clinical judgment. Anyone who makes decisions concerning the provision of clinical care should consider this report in the same way as any medical reference and in conjunction with all other pertinent information, i.e., in the context of available resources and circumstances presented by individual patients.
This report is made available to the public under the terms of a licensing agreement between the author and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. This report may be used and reprinted without permission except those copyrighted materials that are clearly noted in the report. Further reproduction of those copyrighted materials is prohibited without the express permission of copyright holders.
AHRQ or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services endorsement of any derivative products that may be developed from this report, such as clinical practice guidelines, other quality enhancement tools, or reimbursement or coverage policies, may not be stated or implied.
AHRQ appreciates appropriate acknowledgment and citation of its work. Suggested language for acknowledgment: This work was based on an evidence report, Management of High-Need, High-Cost Patients: A “Best Fit” Framework Synthesis, Realist Review, and Systematic Review, by the Evidence-based Practice Center Program at the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ).
- NLM CatalogRelated NLM Catalog Entries
- Review Unpacking complex interventions that manage care for high-need, high-cost patients: a realist review.[BMJ Open. 2022]Review Unpacking complex interventions that manage care for high-need, high-cost patients: a realist review.Chang E, Ali R, Berkman ND. BMJ Open. 2022 Jun 9; 12(6):e058539. Epub 2022 Jun 9.
- Interventions to Improve Outcomes for High-Need, High-Cost Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.[J Gen Intern Med. 2023]Interventions to Improve Outcomes for High-Need, High-Cost Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Chang E, Ali R, Seibert J, Berkman ND. J Gen Intern Med. 2023 Jan; 38(1):185-194. Epub 2022 Oct 11.
- Review Characteristics of High-Need, High-Cost Patients : A "Best-Fit" Framework Synthesis.[Ann Intern Med. 2022]Review Characteristics of High-Need, High-Cost Patients : A "Best-Fit" Framework Synthesis.Berkman ND, Chang E, Seibert J, Ali R. Ann Intern Med. 2022 Dec; 175(12):1728-1741. Epub 2022 Nov 8.
- Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.[Med J Aust. 2020]Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.Osborne SR, Alston LV, Bolton KA, Whelan J, Reeve E, Wong Shee A, Browne J, Walker T, Versace VL, Allender S, et al. Med J Aust. 2020 Dec; 213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1.
- The Effectiveness of Integrated Care Pathways for Adults and Children in Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review.[JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2009]The Effectiveness of Integrated Care Pathways for Adults and Children in Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review.Allen D, Gillen E, Rixson L. JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2009; 7(3):80-129.
- Management of High-Need, High-Cost Patients: A “Best Fit” Framework Synthesis, R...Management of High-Need, High-Cost Patients: A “Best Fit” Framework Synthesis, Realist Review, and Systematic Review
Your browsing activity is empty.
Activity recording is turned off.
See more...