Effectiveness of the German disease management programs: quasi-experimental analyses assessing the population-level health impact

4Citations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: In 2002–2003 disease management programs (DMPs) for type 2 diabetes and coronary heart disease were introduced in Germany to improve the management of these conditions. Today around 6 million Germans aged 56 and older are enrolled in one of the DMPs; however, their effect on health remains unclear. Methods: We estimated the impact of German DMPs on circulatory and all-cause mortality using a synthetic control study. Specifically, using routinely available data, we compared pre and post-intervention trends in mortality of individuals aged 56 and older for 1998–2014 in Germany to trends in other European countries. Results: Average circulatory and all-cause mortality in Germany and the synthetic control was 1.63 and 3.24 deaths per 100 persons. Independent of model choice, circulatory and all-cause mortality decreased non-significantly less in Germany than in the synthetic control; for the model with a 3 year time lag, for example, by 0.12 (95%-CI: − 0.20; 0.44) and 0.22 (95%-CI: − 0.40; 0.66) deaths per 100 persons, respectively. Further main analyses, as well as sensitivity and subgroup analyses supported these results. Conclusions: We observed no effect on circulatory or all-cause mortality at the population-level. However, confidence intervals were wide, meaning we could not reject the possibility of a positive effect. Given the substantial costs for administration and operation of the programs, further comparative effectiveness research is needed to clarify the value of German DMPs for type 2 diabetes and CHD.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Burns, J., Kurz, C., & Laxy, M. (2021). Effectiveness of the German disease management programs: quasi-experimental analyses assessing the population-level health impact. BMC Public Health, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-12050-7

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free