Individual care plans for chronically ill patients within primary care in the Netherlands: Dissemination and associations with patient characteristics and patient-perceived quality of care

References

• Department of Health. High quality care for all: NHS Next Stage Review final report. London: Stationery Office; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Bjerkan J, Richter M, Grimsmo A, Hellesø R, Brender J. Integrated care in Norway: The state of affairs years after regulation by law. Int J Integr Care 2011;11:e001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministerie van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport. Programmatische aanpak van chronische ziekten, PG/ZP 2.847.918 [Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport. Programmatic approach to chronic conditions, PG/PZ, 2.847.918]. The Hague, Netherlands: Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care. Primary care initiatives: Enhanced Primary Care package. Canberra: Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care; 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Government Department of Health. Chronic disease management (formerly Enhanced Primary Care or EPC) – GP services available at: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/mbIPRImarycare-chronicdiseasemanagement (accessed October 7, 2014).
   Google Scholar
• Russell G, Thille P, Hogg W, Lemelin J. Beyond fighting fires and chasing tails? Chronic illness care plans in Ontario, Canada. Ann Fam Med 2008;6:146–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coulter A, Roberts S, Dixon A. Delivering better services for people with long- term conditions: Building the house of care. London: King's Fund; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Inspectie voor de Gezondheidszorg, Ministerie van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport. Implementatie zorgstandaard Diabetes na vier jaar onvoldoende gevorderd [Dutch Health Care Inspectorate, Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport. Implementation of diabetes care standard shows limited progress after four years]. Utrecht, Netherlands: Dutch Health Care Inspectorate, Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Jansen D, Rijken M. Evaluatie DVN pilotproject rond de implementatie van de Diabetes Zorgwijzer [Evaluation DVN pilot project on the implementation of the “Zorgwijzer” Diabetes]. Utrecht, Netherlands: NIVEL; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Van Dijk CE, Korevaar JC. Integrale bekostiging: eerste ervaringen na één jaar invoering [Bundled payment: Initial experiences after one year]. Utrecht, Netherlands: NIVEL; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Burt J, Roland M, Paddison C, Reeves D, Campbell J, Abel G, et al. Prevalence and benefits of care plans and care planning for people with long-term conditions in England. J Health Serv Res Policy 2012;17:64–71.
   Google Scholar
• Year of Care (YOC) Partnership. Report of findings from the pilot programme. London: Diabetes UK; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Walker R, Davison C, Maher AM, Law J, Reilly P, Fordjour G. Introducing personalized care planning into Newham: Outcomes of a pilot project. Diabet Med 2012;29:1074–78.
   Google Scholar
• Holum LC.“It is a good idea, but…” A qualitative study of implementation of “Individual Plan” in Norwegian mental health care. Int J Integr Care 2012;12:e15.
   Google Scholar
• Rijken M, Van Kerkhof M, Dekker J, Schellevis FG. Comorbidity of chronic diseases: Effects of disease pairs on physical and mental functioning. Qual Life Res 2005;14:45–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC). Seattle, USA: MacColl Center for Health Care Innovation, Group Health Cooperative; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Wagner EH. Chronic disease management: What will it take to improve care for chronic illness? Eff Clin Pract 1998;1:2–4.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chew LD, Bradley KA, Boyko EJ. Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy. Family Med 2004;36:588–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamberts H, Wood M. International classification of primary care. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1987.
   Google Scholar
• Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short form health survey (SF-36), I: Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992;30:473–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Zee K, Sanderman R, Heyink JW, De Haes H. Psychometric qualities of the RAND 36-item Health Survey 1.0: A multidimensional measure of general health status. Int J Behav Med 1996;3:104–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stata [computer programme] Version 12. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP, http://www.stata.com.
   Google Scholar
• Snijders TAB, Bosker RJ. Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modelling. London: Sage Publications; 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Zaslavsky AM, Zaborski LB, Lin Ding MA, Shaul JA, Cioffi MJ, Cleary PD. Adjusting performance measures to ensure equitable plan comparisons. Health Care Financing Rev 2001;22:109–26.
   Google Scholar
• Elliott MN, Swartz R, Adams J, IPRItzer KL, Hays RD. Case-mix adjustment of the National CAHPS benchmarking data 1.0: A violation of model assumptions? Health Serv Res 2001;36:555–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Analysis of Diabetes Primary Care Trust Questionnaire Data 2011. In: State of the nation 2012. London: Diabetes UK; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Reeves D, Hann M, Rick J, Rowe K, Small N, Burt J, et al. Care plans and care planning in the management of long-term conditions in the UK: A controlled prospective cohort study. Br J Gen Pract 2014:e568–75.
   Google Scholar
• RAND Europe. DISMEVAL: Developing and validating disease management evaluation methods for European healthcare systems. Final Report. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• De Maeseneer JM, Van Driel ML, Green LA, Van Weel C. The need for research in primary care. Lancet 2003;362: 1314–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar