Editorials

Care for chronic diseases

The efficacy of coordinated and patient centred care is established, but now is the time to test its effectiveness

See pp 954, 914, 925, 961

This is the third in the BMJ's series of theme issues on managing chronic diseases. This focus reflects the increasing demands on practitioners and health systems around the globe posed by mounting numbers of chronically ill patients.¹ The term "chronic disease" usually connotes the prevalent chronic degenerative diseases such as diabetes, coronary artery disease, hypertension, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. But papers in the three theme issues argue that a much broader array of health problems generate similar needs for patients and similar challenges for health servicesthese include diseases such as chronic uveitis, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, multiple sclerosis, depression, and osteoporosis.

Despite the clinical differences across these chronic conditions, each illness confronts patients and their families with the same spectrum of needs: to alter their behaviour; to deal with the social and emotional impacts of symptoms, disabilities, and approaching death; to take medicines; and to interact with medical care over time. In return, healthcare must ensure that patients receive the best treatment regimens to control disease and mitigate symptoms, as well as the information and support needed effectively to self manage their health and, in many instances, their death. Evidence shows that we are not doing very well, and that the fault lies less in ourselves and more in our systems of care.²

All three BMJ issues have presented or reviewed evidence showing that changes to the organisation and delivery of care can improve the quality of care and certain outcomes of chronic disease. The most successful interventions are complex and have many components. Their aims include increasing clinical expertise and decision support; improving patients' self management; increasing the effectiveness of practice teams and their interactions with patients; and having more accessible and useful clinical information (p 925). ^{3 4} Such changes can reduce unwarranted variations in care (p 961),⁵ encourage patients to engage and stay with care programmes, and encourage more appropriate patient behaviour and decision making.⁶ In an editorial in the second BMJ issue on managing chronic disease, one of us (EHW) expressed the hope that by the third issue more widespread dissemination of these changes would be seen in practice.⁷

That hope seems to have been overly optimistic. Although research has shown the efficacy of these promising interventions, the effectivenessthe benefit in real clinical practicehas only begun to be tested. Will system changes tested for one disease be readily adaptable to other illnesses, to much younger patients, or to the many older ones with multiple chronic conditions? Will changes that improve healthcare delivery in Europe and the United Kingdom also work in less developed countriesfor example, for AIDS care (pp 854 and 914)? ^{8 9} We can't answer these questions yet, because we need further evidence that a common set of practice enhancements and systems will meet the needs of patients with one or more chronic conditions, wherever they live.

Furthermore, although the commonest chronic illnesses last for decades, most tested interventions for improving self managementan essential component of quality care for chronic illnesshave been of relatively short duration and delivered outside usual medical practice. A recent meta-analysis of self management programmes for diabetes found that many succeeded in lowering serum concentrations of glycosylated haemoglobin, but their benefits diminished over the ensuing 6-12 months.¹⁰ How can the effect be sustained? Collaborative counselling and problem solving provided by primary care teams, as recommended or tested in these theme issues,⁶ may maintain and extend the benefits of these programmes over time, but this important hypothesis needs further study.

Meanwhile, the ideal drug treatment for most chronic illnesses gets more complicated every day, as trials of new agents and more complex regimens show both benefits and harms. Evidence based care for diabetes, heart failure, coronary artery disease, AIDS, and other chronic conditions now includes more complex drug regimens and the associated risks of adverse effects and potential interactions. Yet very few drug trials include patients with multiple chronic diseases, leaving an important gap in the evidence. Effective and safe chronic illness care will assure that practice teams prescribing and managing drug therapy have adequate knowledge and experience with these more complex drug regimens. This may entail the more active involvement of specialists with primary care teams.

So, there is much more to do. We hope that the evidence collected in these three special issues of the BMJ will provide a solid foundation on which to build. They have, at least, uncovered a new generation of research questions needing urgent study. Such evidence, and the growing burden of chronic diseases, particularly in the world's poorest regions, should make researchers, funders, and policy makers think a lot harder about testing better, more effective, and more relevant ways to deliver care.

Edward H Wagner, director (guest editor of theme issue). 

MacColl Institute for Healthcare Innovation, Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, Seattle, WA 98101-1448, USA (wagner.e{at}ghc.org)

Trish Groves, assistant editor. 

BMJ, (tgroves{at}bmj.com)

Footnotes

Competing interests: None declared.

The easiest way to find the two previous BMJ theme issues on managing chronic diseases is by going to bmj.com/collections/specials.shtml. They were published on 27 October 2001 and 26 February 2000.

1.	Murray CJL, Lopez AD, eds. The global burden of disease: a comprehensive assessment of mortality and disability from diseases, injuries, and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2020. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996.
2.	Berwick DM. A user's manual for the IOM's "Quality Chasm" report. Health Affairs 2002; 1: 80-90.
3.	Bodenheimer T, Wagner EH, Grumbach K. Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness. JAMA 2002; 288: 1775-1779[Abstract/Free Full Text].
4.	Weingarten SR, Henning JM, Badamgarav E, Knight K, Hasselblad V, Gano A, Ofman JJ. Interventions used in disease management programmes for patients with chronic illnesswhich ones work? Meta-analysis of published reports. BMJ 2002; 325: 925-928[Abstract/Free Full Text].
5.	Wennberg JE. Unwarranted variations in healthcare delivery: implications for academic medical centres. BMJ 2002; 325: 961-964[Free Full Text].
6.	Clark NM, Gong M. Management of chronic disease by practitioners and patients: are we teaching the wrong things? BMJ 2000; 320: 572-575[Free Full Text].
7.	Wagner EW. Meeting the needs of chronically ill people. BMJ 2001; 323: 945-946[Free Full Text].
8.	Kitahata MM, Tegger MK, Wagner EW, Holmes KK. Comprehensive health care for people infected with HIV in developing countries. BMJ 2002; 325: 954-957[Free Full Text].
9.	Swartz L, Dick J. Managing chronic diseases in less developed countries. BMJ 2002; 325: 914-915[Free Full Text].
10.	Norris SL, Lau J, Smith SJ, Schmid CH, Engelgau MM. Self-management education for adults with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of the effect on glycemic control. Diabetes Care 2002; 25: 1159-1171[Abstract/Free Full Text].