Cited by 59Heart Failure Treatment and ManagementChronic Disease Management StrategiesDiabetes Management and Education

The impact of case management on reducing readmission for patients diagnosed with heart failure and diabetes

McCants, Khalilah M., Reid, Kathryn B., Williams, Ishan, Miller, D. Elise, Rubin, Richard, Dutton, Suzanne·2019·Professional Case Management

Abstract

Purpose of the Study: To determine the impact of integrated case management services versus treatment as usual (TAU) for patients diagnosed with diabetes and concomitant heart failure. Primary Setting: This medical chart review was conducted at a single-site facility. The retrospective study design can be implemented at other facilities with a similar landscape. Methods: A retrospective, descriptive, comparative analysis of integrated case management services compared with TAU from a medical chart review of 68 patients from September 1, 2015, through July 31, 2017. A medical chart review was conducted to generate the study sample for data collection and analysis. The data were organized, cleaned, and prepared and then analyzed. The data were analyzed using SPSS and verified with SAS and R. Applied were descriptive statistics and statistical tests—t test, χ 2 test, Mann–Whitney U test, and Logistic Regression. Results: For the integrated case management group, there were 18.4% who readmitted whereas 81.6% did not. For the TAU group, there were 52.6% who readmitted and 47.4% who did not. The association between readmission and case management was χ 2 (1, n = 68) = 6.372, p = .012. Nursing Implications: Integrated case management services were statistically significant in reducing readmission for the sample. Demographics tested in this study were not significant predictors for readmission. Extending length of stay for patients who are not medically ready for discharge should be considered because there is a cost difference, as there is evidence of readmission reduction. Policy and procedural amendments can be obtained from this study.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/ncm.0000000000000359

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McCants, K. M., Reid, K. B., Williams, I., Miller, D. E., Rubin, R., & Dutton, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Virginia (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Fairfield University (US)
Corresponding author
McCants, Khalilah M.
Venue
Professional Case Management
Published
2019-07
Volume
24
Issue
4
Pages
177-193
ISSN
1932-8087 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2947297711
Cited by
59
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 41
FWCI
8.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Professional Case Management (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Failure Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Chronic Disease Management Strategies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
Keywords
case management, heart failure, diabetes mellitus, hospital readmission, integrated care, usual care, length of hospital stay, discharge readiness, predictors of readmission
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Curriculum, Delivery of Health Care, Diabetes Mellitus, Education, Medical, Continuing, Female, Heart Failure, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Readmission, United States, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Case Management

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