Who benefits from a Pediatric Home Care Program?

D. J. Jessop, Ruth E. K. Stein

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

40 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Earlier reports of a randomized controlled trial of the Pediatric Home Care (PHC) program for children with chronic physical illness demonstrated overall benefits for the group enrolled in the PHC program. This paper examines which subgroups benefited most (relative to control subjects) and which benefited least from the PHC intervention. Prior to the randomized controlled trial, PHC served those with the most burdensome medical conditions from the families with the fewest coping resources. However, data from the randomized controlled trial (N = 219) show that these were not the subjects who benefited most. Maximal benefit was evident when illness burden was small, but coping resources were low (social, educational, financial, and personal). Analyses of covariance show that subjects in PHC with both low burden and low resources had consistently better outcomes than similar subjects in Standard Care. When the illness burden was similarly low, but resources were more abundant, those in Standard Care appear to have had better outcomes than those in PHC. For those whose illness burden was more severe, the results were mixed. These findings suggest that the conventional priority of allocating existing intervention resources to the medically most burdensome cases may not always be maximally beneficial. Those with less burdensome conditions may derive greater benefit relative to control subjects from an intervention than those with extreme needs. Both medical and social factors should enter into the decision regarding the allocation of scarce resources.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)497-505
Number of pages9
JournalPediatrics
Volume88
Issue number3
StatePublished - 1991

Fingerprint

Home Care Services
Pediatrics
Cost of Illness
Randomized Controlled Trials
Resource Allocation
Chronic Disease

Keywords

  • chronic illness
  • coping resources
  • home care
  • psychosocial outcomes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health

Cite this

Who benefits from a Pediatric Home Care Program? / Jessop, D. J.; Stein, Ruth E. K.

In: Pediatrics, Vol. 88, No. 3, 1991, p. 497-505.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Jessop, DJ & Stein, REK 1991, 'Who benefits from a Pediatric Home Care Program?', Pediatrics, vol. 88, no. 3, pp. 497-505.
Jessop, D. J. ; Stein, Ruth E. K. / Who benefits from a Pediatric Home Care Program?. In: Pediatrics. 1991 ; Vol. 88, No. 3. pp. 497-505.
@article{b26961166600409f89921c22d4d2b66d,
title = "Who benefits from a Pediatric Home Care Program?",
abstract = "Earlier reports of a randomized controlled trial of the Pediatric Home Care (PHC) program for children with chronic physical illness demonstrated overall benefits for the group enrolled in the PHC program. This paper examines which subgroups benefited most (relative to control subjects) and which benefited least from the PHC intervention. Prior to the randomized controlled trial, PHC served those with the most burdensome medical conditions from the families with the fewest coping resources. However, data from the randomized controlled trial (N = 219) show that these were not the subjects who benefited most. Maximal benefit was evident when illness burden was small, but coping resources were low (social, educational, financial, and personal). Analyses of covariance show that subjects in PHC with both low burden and low resources had consistently better outcomes than similar subjects in Standard Care. When the illness burden was similarly low, but resources were more abundant, those in Standard Care appear to have had better outcomes than those in PHC. For those whose illness burden was more severe, the results were mixed. These findings suggest that the conventional priority of allocating existing intervention resources to the medically most burdensome cases may not always be maximally beneficial. Those with less burdensome conditions may derive greater benefit relative to control subjects from an intervention than those with extreme needs. Both medical and social factors should enter into the decision regarding the allocation of scarce resources.",
keywords = "chronic illness, coping resources, home care, psychosocial outcomes",
author = "Jessop, {D. J.} and Stein, {Ruth E. K.}",
year = "1991",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "88",
pages = "497--505",
journal = "Pediatrics",
issn = "0031-4005",
publisher = "American Academy of Pediatrics",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Who benefits from a Pediatric Home Care Program?

AU - Jessop, D. J.

AU - Stein, Ruth E. K.

PY - 1991

Y1 - 1991

N2 - Earlier reports of a randomized controlled trial of the Pediatric Home Care (PHC) program for children with chronic physical illness demonstrated overall benefits for the group enrolled in the PHC program. This paper examines which subgroups benefited most (relative to control subjects) and which benefited least from the PHC intervention. Prior to the randomized controlled trial, PHC served those with the most burdensome medical conditions from the families with the fewest coping resources. However, data from the randomized controlled trial (N = 219) show that these were not the subjects who benefited most. Maximal benefit was evident when illness burden was small, but coping resources were low (social, educational, financial, and personal). Analyses of covariance show that subjects in PHC with both low burden and low resources had consistently better outcomes than similar subjects in Standard Care. When the illness burden was similarly low, but resources were more abundant, those in Standard Care appear to have had better outcomes than those in PHC. For those whose illness burden was more severe, the results were mixed. These findings suggest that the conventional priority of allocating existing intervention resources to the medically most burdensome cases may not always be maximally beneficial. Those with less burdensome conditions may derive greater benefit relative to control subjects from an intervention than those with extreme needs. Both medical and social factors should enter into the decision regarding the allocation of scarce resources.

AB - Earlier reports of a randomized controlled trial of the Pediatric Home Care (PHC) program for children with chronic physical illness demonstrated overall benefits for the group enrolled in the PHC program. This paper examines which subgroups benefited most (relative to control subjects) and which benefited least from the PHC intervention. Prior to the randomized controlled trial, PHC served those with the most burdensome medical conditions from the families with the fewest coping resources. However, data from the randomized controlled trial (N = 219) show that these were not the subjects who benefited most. Maximal benefit was evident when illness burden was small, but coping resources were low (social, educational, financial, and personal). Analyses of covariance show that subjects in PHC with both low burden and low resources had consistently better outcomes than similar subjects in Standard Care. When the illness burden was similarly low, but resources were more abundant, those in Standard Care appear to have had better outcomes than those in PHC. For those whose illness burden was more severe, the results were mixed. These findings suggest that the conventional priority of allocating existing intervention resources to the medically most burdensome cases may not always be maximally beneficial. Those with less burdensome conditions may derive greater benefit relative to control subjects from an intervention than those with extreme needs. Both medical and social factors should enter into the decision regarding the allocation of scarce resources.

KW - chronic illness

KW - coping resources

KW - home care

KW - psychosocial outcomes

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0025994987&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0025994987&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 1881729

AN - SCOPUS:0025994987

VL - 88

SP - 497

EP - 505

JO - Pediatrics

JF - Pediatrics

SN - 0031-4005

IS - 3

ER -