Skip to main content
. 2016 Nov 25;113(47):791–798. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2016.0791

Table 4. Secondary comparative outcomes (difference in differences [DiD]) for care coordination.

Outcome measure (secondary) t1 t2 t2 vs t1 DiD
Care coordination IG
(SD)
CG
(SD)
IG
(SD)
CG
(SD)
IG CG Absolute
intervention effect*3
(p-value [95% CI])
Relative
change*4
%
Share of patients consulting more than one GP*1 19.0% 20.9% 13.5% 21.1% −5.42*5 0.23*5 0.59
(<0.001 [0.56; 0.61])
−41.4
Share of specialist consultations without referral*2 15.5% 18.0% 15.6% 18.9% 0.04*5 0.95*5 −0.01
(<0.001
[−0.013; −0.006])
−5.8
Number of different specialist groups consulted per
patient (mean)*2
3.68
(2.15)
3.62
(2.19)
3.69
(2.15)
3.57
(2.21)
0.01 −0.05 0.06
(<0.001 [0.04; 0.08])
1.6
Number of home visits by GPs per patient
(mean)*2
1.63
(5.19)
1.41
(4.67)
1.93
(5.30)
1.64
(4.83)
0.31 0.23 0.08
(<0.001 [0.04; 0.13])
5.0
Number of DMP participants
(mean value per patient)*2
0.38
(0.61)
0.36
(0.59)
0.44
(0.66)
0.35
(0.59)
0.06 −0.01 0.07
(<0.001 [0.06; 0.07])
17.7
Number of medical check-ups
(mean value per patient)*2
0.45
(0.61)
0.31
(0.53)
0.42
(0.59)
0.29
(0.51)
−0.04 −0.02 −0.016
(<0.001
[−0.024; −0.008])
−3.5
Number of emergency hospitalizations
(mean value per patient)*2
0.24
(0.64)
0.25
(0.68)
0.31
(0.77)
0.31
(0.80)
0.07 0.06 0.001
(0.868
[−0.011; 0.013])
0.4
Increase in nursery care level (0. 1. 2. 3) 0: 91.1%
1: 5.6%
2: 2.7%
3: 0.7%
0: 86.8%
1: 7.6%
2: 4.3%
3: 1.3%
0: 90.9%
1: 5.6%
2: 2.8%
3: 0.6%
0: 86.9%
1: 7.6%
2: 4.3%
3: 1.3%
5.9% 5.8% 0.1*5
(0.578 [−0.3; 0.5])
0.1*6

p<0.05. statistically significant difference (t-test respectively chi square test); *1 binary variable; *2 metric variable; *3 intervention effect for metric variables: mean difference; intervention effect for binary variables: odds ratio; *4 relative change for metric variables: share of intervention effect in IG t1 in %; relative change for binary variables: odds ratio –1. i.e. percentage change in odds;

*5 percentage points; *6 relative change equals absolute intervention effect because of equal denominator (n = 40 298 patients of IG); DMP. disease management program; IG. intervention group;

CG. control group; CI. confidence interval; SD. standard deviation