Integrated care programmes for adults with chronic conditions: a meta-review.

OBJECTIVE To review systematic reviews and meta-analyses of integrated care programmes in chronically ill patients, with a focus on methodological quality, elements of integration assessed and effects reported. DESIGN Meta-review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses identified in Medline (1946-March 2012), Embase (1980-March 2012), CINHAL (1981-March 2012) and the Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews (issue 1, 2012). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Methodological quality assessed by the 11-item Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) checklist; elements of integration assessed using a published list of 10 key principles of integration; effects on patient-centred outcomes, process quality, use of healthcare and costs. RESULTS Twenty-seven systematic reviews were identified; conditions included chronic heart failure (CHF; 12 reviews), diabetes mellitus (DM; seven reviews), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; seven reviews) and asthma (five reviews). The median number of AMSTAR checklist items met was five: few reviewers searched for unpublished literature or described the primary studies and interventions in detail. Most reviews covered comprehensive services across the care continuum or standardization of care through inter-professional teams, but organizational culture, governance structure or financial management were rarely assessed. A majority of reviews found beneficial effects of integration, including reduced hospital admissions and re-admissions (in CHF and DM), improved adherence to treatment guidelines (DM, COPD and asthma) or quality of life (DM). Few reviews showed reductions in costs. CONCLUSIONS Systematic reviews of integrated care programmes were of mixed quality, assessed only some components of integration of care, and showed consistent benefits for some outcomes but not others.

Socialism and intrafirm asset allocation

We rely on a survey of Swiss firms to document deviation from first-best for reasons of internal 'fairness' when allicating resources. This 'socialist' practice is more widespread in smaller than in larger firms. It ignores the reputation and past performance of the managers who apply for dunding, but takes into account their hierarchical position and their past use of resources. Socialism is only partially explained by concerns about empire building and managerial optimism, and it is not meant to benefit shareholders.

Board Overlap, Seat Accumulation and Share Prices

We examine the board overlap among firms listed in Switzerland. Collusion, managerial entrenchment, and financial participation cannot explain it. The overlap appears to be induced by banks and by the accumulation of seats by the most popular directors. We also document that seat accumulation is negatively related to firm value, possibly because of the conflicts of interest that multiple directorships induce and the time constraints directors face. Contrary to popular beliefs, however, the directors of traded firms do not generally hold more than one mandate in other traded firms. They do hold multiple seats in non-traded firms.