| Title |
Auswirkungen von Multimorbidität auf die Inanspruchnahme medizinischer Versorgungsleistungen und die Versorgungskosten
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz, April 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00103-012-1475-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
T. Lehnert, H.-H. König |
| Abstract |
Multiple chronic conditions (multimorbidity) are common among elderly patients; however, little is known about the specific effects of multimorbidity on health care utilization and health care costs. This article reviews empirical studies from the international literature that investigated the relationship between multiple chronic conditions and health care utilization (e.g. ambulatory care, stationary care, pharmacotherapy) and/or health care costs in elderly general populations. Although synthesis of studies was complicated, especially because of ambiguous definitions and measurements of multimorbidity, almost all studies observed a positive association of multimorbidity and utilization and costs. Many studies found that utilization and costs significantly increased with each additional chronic condition. In light of these findings coupled with the fear that current care arrangements may be inappropriate for many multimorbid patients, important implications for research and policy are presented and discussed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 23 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 21% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 13% |
| Researcher | 2 | 8% |
| Professor | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 6 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 5 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 13% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 April 2012.
All research outputs
#18,305,773
of 22,664,644 outputs
Outputs from Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz
#730
of 919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,650
of 162,623 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,664,644 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 919 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 162,623 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.