Disease Management and Its Implications for Outpatient Physician Practice
While disease management may be viewed with skepticism, suspicion, or outright hostility, there are several reasons why this approach to care may warrant physician support. The care of patients with chronic illness in usual primary care practice is beset by significant quality gaps, and significant improvement due to other initiatives such as the electronic health record, pay for performance, or consumer-directed healthcare insurance has yet to be consistently demonstrated. In contrast, an emerging body of peer-reviewed literature is demonstrating that disease management does lead to improvements in clinical quality.
Disease management is also an intervention that is closely linked to primary care and, thanks to its willingness to assume many of the tasks of patient engagement, can offload and improve practice efficiency. If successful, it can lead to greater reimbursement from pay for performance, and future iterations of disease management may also reimburse physicians for work effort and quality achievements that support its programs. The electronic health record may introduce new challenges, such as a greater reliance on remote messaging, that can also be addressed by this approach to care. It is also possible that future versions of consumer-directed plans will accommodate disease management approaches in an attempt to protect the healthcare consumer with chronic disease from high out-of-pocket expenses. Last but not least, as disease management and the chronic care model evolve, physicians and the sponsors and suppliers of disease management services may find approaches to care that adopt the best elements of each.
KeywordsDisease Management Electronic Health Record Disease Management Program Chronic Care Model Patient Engagement
The author is on the Board of Directors of the Disease Management Association of America, a non-compensated role in a not-for-profit entity. The author has no other potential conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this review. No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of the review.
- 2.Disease Management Association of America. DMAA definition of disease management [online]. Available from URL: http://www.dmaa.org/definition.html [Accessed 2006 Sep 21]
- 4.Sprague L. Disease management to population-based health: steps in the right direction?. National Health Policy Forum issue brief no. 791 [online]. Washington, DC: National Health Policy Forum, 2003. Available from URL: http://www.nhpf.org/pdfs_ib/IB791%5FDiseaseMgmt%5F5%2D16%2D03%2Epdf [Accessed 2006 Sep 21]Google Scholar
- 5.Matheson D, Wilkins A, Psacharopoulos D. Realizing the promise of disease management: payer trends and opportunities in the United States [online]. Boston (MA): Boston Consulting Group, 2006. Available from URL: http://www.bcg.com/publications/files/Realizing_the_Promise_of_Disease_Management_Feb06.pdf [Accessed 2006 Sep 21]Google Scholar
- 6.Rothman AA, Wagner EH. Chronic illness management: what is the role of primary care? Ann Intern Med 2003; 138: 254–61Google Scholar
- 7.Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS. Institute of Medicine Committee on the Quality of Health Care in America. To err is human: building a safer health system [online]. Washington DC: National Academies Press, 2000. Available from URL: http://www.nap.edu/books/0309068371/html [Accessed 2006 Sep 21]Google Scholar
- 10.Maguire P. Strategies to tackle outpatient errors [online]. ACP-ASIM Observer 2002 Jun. Available from URL: http://www.acponline.org/journals/news/jun02/errors.htm [Accessed 2006 Sep 21]
- 14.US National Committee for Quality Assurance. NCQA’s disease management accreditation and certification programs: do you want to rise above the crowd? [online] Washington, DC: National Committee for Quality Assurance, 2000. Available from URL: http://www.ncqa.org/Programs/Accreditation/Certification/DMAA/DM%20Brochure.pdf [Accessed 2006 Sep 21]
- 15.URAC. Disease Management Accreditation Program Overview [online]. Available from URL: http://www.urac.org/prog_accred_DM_po.asp?.navid=accreditation&pagename=prog_accred_DM [Accessed 2006 Sep 21]
- 16.Maguire P. Boom times for disease management leave doctors wanting more control [online]. ACP-ASIM Observer 2000 Oct. Available from URL: http://www.acponline.org/journals/news/oct00/boom_dis_mgmt.htm [Accessed 2006 Sep 21]
- 18.Jantos LD, Holmes JL, ECG Management Consultants. IT tools for chronic disease management: how do they measure up? [online] Oakland (CA): California HealthCare Foundation, 2006. Available from URL: http://www.chcf.org/documents/chronicdisease/ITToolsForChronicDiseaseManagement.pdf [Accessed 2006 Sep 21]
- 19.Access Plus provider handbook [online]. Pittsburgh (PA): Access Plus, 2005. Available from URL: http://www.accessplus.org/presentations/FinalProvider-Handbook02_08_06.pdf [Accessed 2006 Sep 21]
- 21.Von Korff M, Gruman J, Schaefer S, et al. Collaborative management of chronic illness. Ann Intern Med 1997; 127: 97–1102Google Scholar
- 25.Babbott SF, Bigby JA, Day SC, et al. The Blue Ribbon Panel of the Society of General Internal Medicine. Redesigning the practice model for general internal medicine: a proposal for coordinated care [online]. Washington, DC: Society of General Internal Medicine, 2006. Available from URL: http://www.sgim.org/BRPFinalReport71106.pdf [Accessed 2006 Sep 21]Google Scholar
- 27.American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes — 2006. Diabetes Care 2006; 20 Suppl. 1: S1–42Google Scholar