Impact of interprofessional collaboration on chronic disease management: Findings from a systematic review of clinical trial and meta-analysis
Abstract
Improvement of chronic disease management demands effective collaborative relationships between health and social-care which is achieved through teamwork. Interprofessional Education (IPE) and Interprofessional Collaboration (IPC) are recognized as essential for the delivery of effective and efficient healthcare. Although IPC and IPE are key components of primary care, evidence of studies evaluating how an IPE intervention prior to IPC improved chronic patient outcomes remains scarce. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of IPC interventions on the management of chronic patients compared to usual care. A systematic review and meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) on IPC interventions on chronicity management and their impact on clinical and process outcomes was conducted. Of the 11,128 papers initially retrieved, 23 met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses results showed the reduction of systolic blood pressure (Mean Difference (MD) -3.70; 95 % CI -7.39, -0.01), glycosylated hemoglobin (MD -0.20; 95 % CI -0.47, -0.07), LDL cholesterol (MD -5.74; 95 % CI -9.34, -2.14), diastolic blood pressure (MD -1.95; 95 % CI -3.18, -0.72), days of hospitalization (MD -2.22; 95 % CI -4.30, -0.140). A number of positive findings for outcomes related to IPC were found reflecting an improvement of quality of care and an enhancement in the delivery of patient-centered and coordinated care. Moreover, the need for a purposeful systemic approach linking interprofessional…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Interprofessional education and interprofessional collaboration have a positive impact on chronic disease management including type 2 diabetes mellitus, resulting in quality-of-care improvement and enhanced delivery of patient care.
“Interprofessional education (IPE) and interprofessional collaboration (IPC) have a positive impact on chronic disease management including T2DM, which results in quality-of-care improvement and an enhancement in the delivery of patient care [44].”
From Clinical Inertia in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review (2023) · cites this paper as [44]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 74 · Cited by 102
- Authors
- Pascucci, D., Sassano, M., Nurchis, M. C., Cicconi, M., Acampora, A., Park, D., Morano, C., & Damiani, G.
- Affiliations
- Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore (IT)
- Agostino Gemelli University Polyclinic (IT)
- Ohio University (US)
- University at Albany, State University of New York (US)
- Corresponding author
- Nurchis, Mario Cesare
- ORCID
- Venue
- Health Policy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2021-02
- Volume
- 125
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 191-202
- ISSN
- 0168-8510 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3111967555
- Cited by
- 102
- References
- 74
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 7
- FWCI
- 2.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Health Policy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Archivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Chronic Disease Management Strategies
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Interdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
- Keywords
- interprofessional collaboration, interprofessional education, chronic disease management, primary care, integrated care, blood pressure, HbA1c, LDL cholesterol, hospitalization, quality of care, care coordination, patient-centered care
- MeSH terms
- Chronic Disease, Delivery of Health Care, Humans, Interprofessional Relations, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review