Iiris Riippa*, Aalto University, Espoo, Finland Miika Linna*, Aalto University, Espoo, Finland Track: Research Presentation Topic: Participatory health care Presentation Type: Oral presentation Submission Type: Single Presentation Building: Mermaid Room: Room 3 - Upper River Room Date: 2013-09-24 04:00 PM – 04:45 PM Last modified: 2013-09-25

If you are the presenter of this abstract (or if you cite this abstract in a talk or on a poster), please show the QR code in your slide or poster (QR code contains this URL).

Background: Engaging patients in self-management of their chronic conditions is essential in terms of cost-effectiveness of care. To encourage patient engagement, health care providers have implemented patient-centered care models as well as tools for self-management of health. The effectiveness of these practices and tools is typically evaluated through randomized controlled trials. It is, however, noted that the results achieved in RCTs are not always realized at the implementation of the practice or tool. A suggested reason for this lies in the complex and socially bound nature of these interventions which confounds their replication and evaluation.
Objective: To give practical insight on 1) how complex, socially bound interventions can be replicated in real-life setting and 2) How these interventions can be monitored through routine clinical data.
Methods: We present two intervention evaluation cases in two Finnish health centers serving populations of c. 250 000 and c. 70 000 people respectively. The effects of allegedly empowering interventions on cost-effectiveness were evaluated in two different study settings. In the other health center, routinely gathered clinical data was used to evaluate cost-effectiveness of CCM (Chronic Care Model) and in the other health center a block randomized controlled trial was set up to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a personal health record (PHR).
Results: We present the learnings from these two study settings in terms of the use of routine clinical data in the evaluation of an allegedly empowering intervention. The possibilities as well as the deficiencies of existing clinical routine data in the evaluation of empowering interventions are identified.
Conclusions: Routine clinical data offers overlooked possibilities for evaluation of empowering interventions. However, process and intermediate measures for monitoring the realization of empowering interventions are needed to efficiently manage patient-centered care.