title: Targeting patients for multimorbid care management interventions: the case for equity in high-risk patient identification.
abstract: Targeting patients for multimorbid care management interventions requires accurate and comprehensive assessment of patients' need in order to direct resources to those who need and can benefit from them the most. Multimorbid patient selection is complicated due to the lack of clear criteria--unlike disease management programs for which patients with a specific condition are identified. This ambiguity can potentially result in inequitable selection, as biases in selection may differentially affect patients from disadvantaged population groups. Patient selection could in principal be performed in three ways: physician referral, patient screening surveys, or by statistical prediction algorithms. This paper discusses equity issues related to each method. We conclude that each method may result in inequitable selection and bias, such as physicians' attentiveness or familiarity, or prediction models' reliance on prior resource use, potentially affected by socio-cultural and economic barriers. These biases should be acknowledged and dealt with. We recommend combining patient selection approaches to achieve high care sensitivity, efficiency and equity.
authors: Faculty of Social Welfare and Health Sciences, University of Haifa, Mount Carmel 31905, Israel. eshadmi@univ.haifa.ac.il.
authors: Efrat
authors: E
authors: Shadmi
authors: Tobias
authors: T
authors: Freund
mesh_terms: D019090:Case Management; D015897:Comorbidity; D003695:Delivery of Health Care / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards; D054625:Healthcare Disparities; D006801:Humans; D020380:Needs Assessment; D018579:Patient Selection
references: Health Care Financ Rev. 2008 Fall;30(1):61-74
references: 19040174
references: J Am Geriatr Soc. 2006 Feb;54(2):330-4
references: 16460387
references: Health Hum Rights. 2010 Dec 15;12(2):3-16
references: 21178186
references: J Am Geriatr Soc. 2004 Feb;52(2):290-6
references: 14728643
references: Am J Manag Care. 2011 May;17(5):345-52
references: 21718082
references: Ann Fam Med. 2012 Mar-Apr;10(2):134-41
references: 22412005
references: Dis Manag. 2006 Feb;9(1):56-62
references: 16466342
references: Gerontologist. 2007 Oct;47(5):697-704
references: 17989412
references: Milbank Q. 2010 Jun;88(2):240-55
references: 20579284
references: Int J Equity Health. 2011 Apr 20;10:15
references: 21507245
references: Am J Manag Care. 2012 Apr 01;18(4):e155-61
references: 22554041
references: Gerontologist. 1997 Dec;37(6):777-84
references: 9432994
references: Int J Health Serv. 1992;22(3):429-45
references: 1644507
references: Am J Manag Care. 1998 Aug;4(8):1137-46
references: 10182889
references: JAMA. 2012 Jun 20;307(23):2493-4
references: 22797447
references: Health Serv Res. 2001 Dec;36(6 Pt 2):194-206
references: 16148969
references: Health Aff (Millwood). 2003 May-Jun;22(3):106-21
references: 12757276
references: Int J Equity Health. 2008 May 02;7:12
references: 18454849
references: Med Decis Making. 2006 Jan-Feb;26(1):76-85
references: 16495203
references: Int J Equity Health. 2004 Jun 28;3(1):8
references: 15222885
references: BMC Public Health. 2011 Aug 01;11:609
references: 21801459
references: J Health Econ. 2000 Sep;19(5):553-83
references: 11184794
references: Lancet. 1971 Feb 27;1(7696):405-12
references: 4100731
references: Med Care Res Rev. 2011 Aug;68(4):387-420
references: 21813576
references: Int J Equity Health. 2012 Oct 13;11:59
references: 23061433
references: Health Serv Res. 2010 Apr;45(2):532-52
references: 20132341
references: Am J Manag Care. 2009 Jan;15(1):41-8
references: 19146363
references: Ann Fam Med. 2009 Jul-Aug;7(4):357-63
references: 19597174
references: J Card Fail. 2011 May;17(5):431-9
references: 21549302
references: Trials. 2011 Jun 29;12:163
references: 21714883