Karin M.M. Lemmens

The aim of this exploratory study was to investigate to what extent primary care professionals are able to change their systems for delivering care to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients and what professional and organizational factors are associated with the degree of process implementation. Quasi-experimental design with 1 year follow-up after intervention. Three regional COPD management programmes in the Netherlands, in which general practices cooperated with regional hospitals. All participating primary care professionals (n = 52). COPD management programme. Professional commitment, organizational context and degree of process implementation. Professionals significantly changed their systems for delivering care to COPD patients, namely self-management support, decision support, delivery system design and clinical information systems. Associations were found between organizational factors, professional commitment and changes in processes of care. Group culture and professional commitment appeared to be, to a moderate degree, predictors of process implementation. COPD management was effective; all processes improved significantly. Moreover, theoretically expected associations between organizational context and professional factors with the implementation of COPD management were indeed confirmed to some extent. Group culture and professional commitment are important facilitators.

Disease management has emerged as a new strategy to enhance quality of care for patients suffering from chronic conditions, and to control healthcare costs. So far, however, the effects of this strategy remain unclear. Although current models define the concept of disease management, they do not provide a systematic development or an explanatory theory of how disease management affects the outcomes of care. The objective of this paper is to present a framework for valid evaluation of disease-management initiatives. The evaluation model is built on two pillars of disease management: patient-related and professional-directed interventions. The effectiveness of these interventions is thought to be affected by the organisational design of the healthcare system. Disease management requires a multifaceted approach; hence disease-management programme evaluations should focus on the effects of multiple interventions, namely patient-related, professional-directed and organisational interventions. The framework has been built upon the conceptualisation of these disease-management interventions. Analysis of the underlying mechanisms of these interventions revealed that learning and behavioural theories support the core assumptions of disease management. The evaluation model can be used to identify the components of disease-management programmes and the mechanisms behind them, making valid comparison feasible. In addition, this model links the programme interventions to indicators that can be used to evaluate the disease-management programme. Consistent use of this framework will enable comparisons among disease-management programmes and outcomes in evaluation research.