Next Article in Journal
Excess Weight in Relation to Lifestyle Habits in Spanish First-Year University Students: Differences between Pre- and Post-COVID-19—A Serial Cross-Sectional Study Based on uniHcos Project
Next Article in Special Issue
Innovative Integrated Motivational Interviewing for Dual Management in Tuberculosis Patients with Diabetes (MID-DOT) in Malaysia
Previous Article in Journal
The Development of Recommendations for Healthcare Providers to Support Patients Experiencing Medication Self-Management Problems
Previous Article in Special Issue
Current Healthcare Systems in Light of Hyperendemic NCDs and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Time to Change
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Identifying Key Themes of Care Coordination for Patients with Chronic Conditions in Singapore: A Scoping Review

Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore 117549, Singapore
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Healthcare 2023, 11(11), 1546; https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11111546
Submission received: 19 April 2023 / Revised: 19 May 2023 / Accepted: 23 May 2023 / Published: 25 May 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Integrated Care in Chronic Diseases)

Abstract

:
A projected rise in patients with complex health needs and a rapidly ageing population will place an increased burden on the healthcare system. Care coordination can bridge potential gaps during care transitions and across the care continuum to facilitate care integration and the delivery of personalised care. Despite having a national strategic vision of improving care integration across different levels of care and community partners, there is no consolidation of evidence specifically on the salient dimensions of care coordination in the Singapore healthcare context. Hence, this scoping review aims to uncover the key themes that facilitate care coordination for patients with chronic conditions in Singapore to be managed in the community while illuminating under-researched areas in care coordination requiring further exploration. The databases searched were PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Results from Google Scholar were also included. Two independent reviewers screened articles in a two-stage screening process based on the Cochrane scoping review guidelines. Recommendation for inclusion was indicated on a three-point scale and rating conflicts were resolved through discussion. Of the 5792 articles identified, 28 were included in the final review. Key cross-cutting themes such as having standards and guidelines for care programmes, forging stronger partnerships across providers, an interoperable information system across care interfaces, strong programme leadership, financial and technical resource availabilities and patient and provider-specific factors emerged. This review also recommends leveraging these themes to align with Singapore’s national healthcare vision to contain rising healthcare costs.

1. Introduction

The burden brought about by an ageing population is a health system issue that countries are facing globally. The global population aged over 60 is expected to nearly double from 2015 to 2050, with a jump from 12% to 22% [1]. Health systems need to be prepared to manage the swell in chronic diseases attributed to this greying population. Singapore anticipates that one in four residents will be above the age of 65 by 2030, and an old age support ratio of 2.7 [2]. At present, 80% of the total disease burden is attributable to chronic conditions, with three in four aged 65 and above diagnosed with one of the three most common chronic conditions of diabetes, hypertension or high cholesterol, and more than 50% aged 60 and above have more than two such conditions [3,4,5].
As the needs of the population increase in complexity, there is a need to integrate health and social care for patients with multiple chronic conditions. Patients with more than three chronic conditions are 40% more likely to face issues with care coordination as compared to patients suffering from just one [6]. Furthermore, patients in the community face increasing difficulties accessing chronic disease-related care services other than their regular follow-up care [7].
The government’s aspirations of anchoring care in the community birthed the national strategy of the Three Beyonds promulgated in 2017, which aims to nurture a sustainable health ecosystem through the three prongs of Beyond Healthcare to Health, Beyond Quality to Value and Beyond Hospital to Community [8]. The overarching objectives of the Three Beyonds are to contain tertiary care utilisation, deliver cost-effective care and promote patient-centred comprehensive care. This was recently augmented by the Healthier SG strategic vision to be launched in stages from mid-2023, which aims to put primary care at the centre by strengthening links to other levels of care and community providers [9]. This shift firmly positions care coordination at the forefront of this upcoming health system transformation.
Although care coordination has been introduced in Singapore for more than ten years, no available study exists to review the elements of the implemented programmes. Beyond the Singapore context, several studies were conducted to identify the commonalities among programmes focusing on care coordination activities to determine key elements of care coordination that contribute towards improved patient care [10,11]. By identifying the components of effective care coordination, there is huge potential to improve the quality of care, enhance the patient experience and reduce costs to the health system, among other benefits, when patients are managed adequately as they transition across care interfaces [12,13,14,15].
Despite the centrality of care coordination, it has no globally agreed-upon definition. It is generally accepted that care coordination involves two or more parties who arrange patient care activities to facilitate the appropriate delivery of care [16]. Specific to this scoping review, care coordination is operationally defined as activities that bridge potential gaps in chronic disease care transitions to facilitate care integration and delivery of appropriate care targeted at patients’ needs [17,18,19,20]. Aligned with Singapore’s national healthcare strategies, this review will focus on care coordination programmes for community-dwelling patients suffering from chronic diseases.
Broadly, Singapore’s health system is dominated by medically oriented care coordination models with more recent shifts towards patient-centred holistic care. An example is reflected by the comprehensive and coordinated care seen in patient-centred medical homes (PCMHs) offering a suite of services for patients with selected chronic conditions [21]. To that end, the underlying value of care coordination is to offer medical, social and emotional support for care recipients, which can, if implemented in a patient-centric manner, allay patient anxiety, reduce unnecessary healthcare utilisation, and improve clinical outcomes [19,22].
In Singapore, the Agency of Integrated Care (AIC) oversees the majority of care integration in the public healthcare system and manages the funding provided by the Ministry of Health (MOH) for care coordination programmes. Despite having a national strategic vision of improving care integration across different levels of care and community partners, there is no consolidation of evidence specifically on the salient dimensions of care coordination in the Singapore context. Hence, this scoping review aims to identify the key themes that facilitate care coordination activities for patients with chronic conditions in Singapore to be managed in the community while illuminating under-researched areas in care coordination requiring further exploration.

2. Materials and Methods

This scoping review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and with a flow diagram (Figure 1). The PRISMA-ScR in Appendix A guided the entire scoping review process [23].

2.1. Search Strategy

A systematic search of five databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase and Cochrane Library) was conducted from each database’s inception to January 2023. Google Scholar was also searched, and search results were sorted by relevance. Grey literature such as blog posts, unpublished papers, news articles, corporate website postings and conference proceedings were not included as they mainly focused on international studies. A Google search was conducted to identify grey literature. Still, the results returned were mostly corporate websites, conference materials (e.g., abstracts, presentations) with no full text available, online news articles, or recruitment advertisements.
The search strategy only contained terms relevant to ‘care coordination’ and ‘chronic disease’, allowing us to maximise search yields and screen through articles relevant to our research aims. Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms were used, and the exact terms used are summarised in Appendix B.

2.2. Study Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Broadly, quantitative and qualitative articles were included if the study was conducted in Singapore and were programmes that involved care coordination for patients with chronic conditions defined under the Chronic Disease Management Programme (CDMP) but not patients at the end-of-life or undergoing palliative care due to the distinctly different requirements in managing this group of patients. Briefly, the CDMP is a list of the highest-burden chronic conditions in Singapore, with 23 of them at the time of this review [24]. The list of CDMP conditions is mentioned in Appendix C. The complete exclusion criteria are listed in Appendix D.

2.3. Study Selection, Data Extraction and Analysis

The search strategy was applied to all five databases and the identified articles were exported and managed in Microsoft Excel. Two independent reviewers (JYY and ACSL) assessed the eligibility of articles for inclusion through a two-stage screening process based on the Cochrane scoping review guidelines. In the first stage, the title and abstract of the articles were reviewed. Full-text articles were reviewed in the second stage. The screening was done independently by both reviewers to minimise potential bias. At the end of each stage, both reviewers discussed agreement on their ratings. Additional points of contention were clarified on an ad hoc basis. Reviewers’ recommendations were indicated using a three-point scale “yes”, “no” and “maybe”. For articles rated as “maybe”, reviewers appraised the articles again. The consensus was achieved after discussion without needing a third reviewer as a tiebreaker. Agreement was measured using Cohen’s weighted Kappa.
Data on authors, year of publication, sample characteristics and specific details on care coordination models were extracted and detailed in Table 1 below. Thematic analysis of data sets was used to identify the subthemes that emerged from the programmes, focusing on care coordination elements.
However, as the programmes are highly pluralistic, the team required a framework to anchor the initial thematic analysis to facilitate the analysis process. To that end, the PESTLE framework was employed to rapidly identify the political/organisational, economic, sociocultural, technology-related/technical, legal, and environmental aspects in Table 2. Broadly, we operationalize political/organizational dimensions as elements that capture political, leadership or structural factors that facilitate the running of care models or programmes, economic dimensions as fiscal resources or financial commitments that go into the operationalisation of a programme, sociocultural dimensions as behavioural factors between stakeholders and associated perceptions harboured by stakeholders, technological/ technical dimensions as technological utilities and human resource capacities that enhance the efficiency of a programme and environmental dimensions as ecological factors that are beyond the individual stakeholder that often involve changes at the meso and macro levels. No legal factors were identified from the articles reviewed, and hence will not be discussed. This framework was chosen as it is widely used to guide logical and strategic examination of a specific programmatic issue and can be used to generate a deeper understanding of various elements surrounding organisational changes [25].
Fundamentally, we performed a validated multi-step approach to execute the framework analysis which comprises of the steps: (1) familiarisation of data sets, i.e., existing literature extracted, (2) identifying a framework, i.e., PESTLE, (3) coding and indexing, (4) charting by arranging indexed data into a framework matrix and (5) mapping and interpretation to obtain a representation of each key subtheme [26]. The emerging subthemes obtained from the framework analysis were subsequently organised into cross-cutting key themes which reached thematic saturation [27]. The emerging themes served as the foundational dimensions drawn from care coordination activities in Singapore.
Table 1. Characteristics of articles reviewed.
Table 1. Characteristics of articles reviewed.
Author and Year of PublicationActivities ConductedMean Age of Study ParticipantsEligibility CriteriaAim of ProgrammeFinancing ModelCost to PatientTraining of Care CoordinatorsTeam CompositionCare SettingType of Chronic DiseaseLength of Follow-UpMode of ContactFrequency of Follow-Up
Ang et al. [28]
(2019)
Book appointments
Provide programme information
Provide financial counselling
Referral to appropriate resources
58 ± 16 years
  • Patients with chronic conditions who had at least 1 NUH SOC appt in the past year
  • Clinically stable to be right-sited
Reduce hospital resource utilisation (Right-siting of care)Not reportedNot reportedNot reportedSpecialist physician + Primary care physician + Nurse + Allied health professionalBoth Primary care & HospitalMixedNot reportedFace-to-faceNot reported
Chandran et al. [29]
(2013)
Assess clinical needs
Assess medication compliance
Conduct case finding
Deliver disease-specific education
Document care in electronic medical record systems
Monitor patient’s progress
Provide programme information
Refer to appropriate resources
Reinforce treatment compliance
Screen for eligibility to enrol
72 ± 10 years
  • Aged > 50 years old
  • History of low trauma fragility fracture
  • Agree for at least 2 years follow-up
Optimise disease managementNot reportedNot reportedNurseSpecialist physicianHospital (Outpatient + Inpatient)Osteoporosis2 yearsPhone call + Face-to-Face6 follow-ups over 2 years
Chow et al. [30]
(2014)
Act as a resource point for patients to call in for assistance/clarification
Deliver tailored disease-specific education
Deliver psychoeducation
Deliver self-management education
Escalate to physician
Identify red flags
Monitor patient’s progress
Provide psychosocial support
63 ± 13 years
  • Patients aged ≥21 years old
  • Recently discharged for diabetes-related hospitalisation with HbA1c >7%
  • Agree to phone follow-ups
Reduce hospital resource utilisation (Transition from ward to home)Not reportedNot reportedNurseSpecialist physicianHospital (Outpatient)Diabetes6 monthsPhone call4 follow-ups over 6 months
George et al. [31]
(2016)
Deliver self-management education
Identify red flags
Monitor patients’ progress
Provide smoking cessation counselling
Reinforce appointment and medication compliance
73 ± 10 years
  • Patients clinically diagnosed with COPD or possible COPD
  • Agree to be enrolled in a Disease Management Programme
Optimise disease managementNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedSpecialist physician + Primary care physician Both Primary care & HospitalChronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseNot reportedPhone callWeekly or every 2 months depending on acuity
Ha et al. [32]
(2020)
  • Advocate for patients’ preferences
  • Collaborate with other care providers and with caregivers
  • Deliver patient education
  • Develop personalised care plans
  • Liaise with and coordinate care processes between various stakeholders
  • Empower caregivers
  • Referral to appropriate resources
Not reported
  • Disease severity
  • Extent of caregiver support
Reduce hospital resource utilisation (Right-siting of care), support caregivers and optimise disease managementFunded by MOHNo charges to patientNot reportedSpecialist physician + nurse + allied health professional + primary care physicianBoth Primary care & HospitalDementiaNot reportedPhone calls + home visitsNot reported
Ha et al. [33]
(2020)
  • Acts as a resource point for patients to call in for assistance/clarification
Deliver patient education
Monitor patients’ progress
78 ± 7.72 years
  • Patients with dementia identified with behaviours deemed challenging by caregivers and/or caregivers with caregiver burden
  • Condition not stable/not suitable to receive care in the ambulatory dementia clinic
Reduce hospital resource utilisation (Right-siting of care) and support caregiversPartially charity dollar fundedYesNot reportedSpecialist physician + case manager + community-based counsellorsOff-site (ambulatory community clinic + at home)Dementia4 monthsHome visitsNot reported
Jafar et al. [34]
(2016)
Identify red flags
Provide psychosocial support
Reinforce treatment compliance
66 ± 10 years
  • Patients ≥ 40 years old
  • Diagnosed with hypertension
  • Uncontrolled BP
  • Visited a participating polyclinic ≥ 2 times in the past 1 year
  • Have no admission 4 months prior to recruitment
  • Agreed to be enrolled
Optimise disease managementNot reportedNot reportedNurseSpecialist physician + Primary care physician + Nurse Primary careHypertension3 monthsPhone call2 follow-ups over 3 months
Jafar et al.
[35]
(2022)
  • Coordinate with physician for care
  • Collect requisite outcome data (clinical + patient reported health status)
  • Empower patients
  • Monitor patients’ progress
  • Reinforce treatment compliance
64.5 ± 9.8 years
  • Patient aged ≥40 years with previously diagnosed hypertension
  • Visited an enrolled clinic ≥2 times during prior 12 months
  • Singaporean citizens or permanent residents
Optimise disease managementPartially subsidised by MOHYesNursePrimary care physician + nurse + research coordinatorPrimary careHypertension2 yearsPhone callMonthly for first 3 months, then 3-monthly thereafter
Jiang et al. [36]
(2019)
  • Conduct home visits
  • Coordinate appointments
  • Deliver disease-specific education
  • Monitor patients’ progress
  • Promote self-care
  • Use of mobile application to educate, monitor and engage with nurse if needed
69.7 ± 11.04 years
  • Patients aged ≥ 21 years old
  • Clinically diagnosed with chronic heart failure
  • Able to read and understand English or Chinese
  • Owned and used smartphones in their everyday lives
  • Able to be followed up at home after discharge from hospital
Optimise disease management through self-careNot reportedNot reportedNurseNurseOff-site (post-discharge)Chronic heart failure6 weeksHome visitsBi-weekly
Lai et al. [37]
(2019)
Assess clinical needs
Assess caregiver needs
Conduct home visits
Identify red flags
Refer to appropriate resources
Not reported
  • Patients aged ≥ 65 years old and their caregiver
  • Had uncomplicated memory loss for ≥6 months
Optimise disease managementNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedSpecialist physician + Primary care physician + Nurse + Allied health professionalPrimary careDementiaNot reportedPhone call + Home visitsNot reported
Lee et al. [38]
(2015)
Act as a resource point for patients to call in for assistance/clarification
Assess clinical and social needs
Assess compliance to care plans
Assess level of health literacy
Assess medication compliance
Coach caregivers and assess their competency
Conduct home visits
Coordinate follow-up visits with specialist care providers
Deliver patient education
Identify red flags
Monitor patients’ progress
Provide medication reconciliation
Provide psychosocial support
Refer to appropriate resources
68 ± 15 years
  • Patients aged > 21 years old
  • Recently discharged home with high readmission risk
  • ≥2 unplanned admissions within the past 90 days
Reduce hospital resource utilisation (Transition from ward to home)Not reportedNot reportedNurse with specialised training in care coordinationSpecialist physician + Primary care physician + Nurse + Allied health professionalOff-site (Post-discharge only)Mixed3 monthsPhone callWeekly
Lim et al. [39]
(2015)
Act as a resource point for patients to call in for assistance/clarification
Collect data for programme evaluation
Coordinate appointments
Counsel patients on care process
Liaise with and coordinate care processes between various stakeholders
Monitor communication gaps between stakeholders
Provide financial counselling
Track prescriptions
54 ± 14 years
  • Patients who attend a tertiary rheumatology clinic
  • Clinically stable to be right-sited
Reduce hospital resource utilisation (Right-siting of care)Not reportedNot reportedNot reportedSpecialist physician + Primary care physician + Nurse Hospital (Outpatient)Musculoskeletal diseaseNot reportedPhone callNot reported
Lim et al. [40]
(2018)
Act as a resource point for patients to call in for assistance/clarification
Book appointments
Coach caregivers
Coordinate with physician for care
Coordinate transfer of care from SOC to Family Medicine Clinic
Monitor patients’ progress
Provide psychosocial support
Recruit eligible patients to programme
64 ± 14 years
  • Patients with stable chronic diseases on follow-up at Family Medicine Clinic
  • Patients with complex care needs on shared care between hospital and Family Medicine Clinic
Reduce hospital resource utilisation (Right-siting of care)Not reportedNot reportedNurseNot reportedPrimary careMixedNot reportedPhone callNot reported
Low et al. [41]
(2017)
Act as a resource point for patients to call in for assistance/clarification
Assess caregiver competency
Assess compliance to care plans
Assess level of health literacy
Assess medication compliance
Coordinate follow-up visits with specialist care providers
Deliver patient education
Enable patient activation
Identify red flags
Monitor patients’ progress
Provide tailored care planning
Referral to appropriate resources
71 ± 14 years
  • Patients aged ≥ 21 years old
  • Have high risk of readmission
  • Have ≥ 1 admission in the past 90 days
  • Planned for discharge home
  • Admitted in participating wards
Reduce hospital resource utilisation (Transition from ward to home)Not reportedNot reportedNurseSpecialist physician + Primary care physician + Nurse + Allied health professionalOff-site (Pre- and post-discharge)Mixed3 monthsPhone call + Home visitsWeekly
Low et al. [42]
(2015)
Act as a resource point for patients to call in for assistance/clarification
Coordinate care with hospital specialists
Conduct home visits
Conduct medication reconciliation
Deliver self-management education
Monitor patients’ progress
Provide nursing care
Provide recommendations for physician reviews
Refer to appropriate resources
Not reported
  • Patients with sub-acute or ≥3 chronic conditions requiring follow-up, or those with limited mobility that restricts access to healthcare services
  • Not enrolled in other transitional care interventions
  • ADL independent
  • Do not have a caregiver at home
Reduce hospital resource utilisation (Transition from ward to home)Fee for serviceYesNurseSpecialist physician + Primary care physician + Nurse + Allied health professionalOff-site (Post-discharge only)Mixed6 monthsPhone call + Home visitsNot reported
Mustapha et al. [43]
(2016)
Assess clinical needs
Coach caregivers
Coordinate family conference
Deliver disease-specific education
Monitor patients’ progress
Provide psychosocial support
Refer to appropriate resources
Not reported
  • Patients with chronic diseases or have end-of-life care issues
Reduce hospital resource utilisation (Transition from ward to home)Not reportedNot reportedNurse with specialised training in care coordinationNot reportedOff-site (Pre- and post-discharge)MixedNot reportedPhone callNot reported
Nurjono et al. [44]
(2019)
Act as a resource point for patients to call in for assistance/clarification
Assess clinical and social needs
Coach caregivers
Develop personalised care plans
Deliver psychoeducation
Manage patients’ social issues
Monitor patients’ progress
Promote self-care
Provide psychological support
Refer to appropriate resources
Not reported
  • Patients who are elderly and/or with complex healthcare needs
  • Diagnosed with multiple chronic conditions
  • Have limited mobility
  • Presence of a caregiver at home
Reduce hospital resource utilisation (Transition from ward to home)Funded by MOHYesNurseNot reportedOff-site (Post-discharge only)Mixed3–12 monthsPhone callNot reported
Prabhakaran et al. [45]
(2019)
Assess clinical needs
Deliver tailored psychoeducation
Develop tailored care plan
Empower patients
Identify red flags
Monitor patients’ progress
Referral to appropriate resources
Reinforce compliance to care plans
37 ± 13 years
  • Patients aged ≥ 21 years old
  • Discharged from ED with poorly controlled asthma
  • Did not have complex comorbidities
  • Own a mobile phone and able to use SMS
  • Agree to enrol in the programme
Optimise disease managementNot reportedNot reportedNurseNot reportedHospital (Outpatient)Asthma3 monthsPhone call + algorithm-based automated text messagesAd hoc
Verma et al. [46]
(2012)
-
Coordinate resources and services
-
Deliver psychoeducation
-
Identify strengths and resources and improve coping skills
-
Mediate or negotiate with stakeholders on patients’ behalf
-
Provide crisis management
-
Provide supportive counselling
-
Refer to appropriate resources
-
Set care goals
-
Support stress management
27 ± 7 years
  • Patients aged 16–40 years old
  • Have first-episode psychotic disorder, not secondary to substance abuse or medical conditions
Optimise disease managementFunded by MOHNot reportedCombination of nurse and non-nurseSpecialist physician + Primary care physician + Nurse + Allied health professionalHospital (Outpatient)Psychosis2 yearsPhone callNot reported
Wee et al. [47]
(2014)
-
Coach patients and families
-
Collaborate closely with hospital physicians to plan and deliver care
-
Conduct home visits
-
Develop care plan
-
Enable self-management
-
Monitor patients’ progress
-
Refer to appropriate resources
-
Screen eligibility for programme enrolment
79 ± 8 years
  • Elderly adults discharged home
  • Have complex care needs
  • Have limited social support
  • Not on follow-up with other case management or disease management programmes
Reduce hospital resource utilisation (Transition from ward to home)Funded by MOHNoCombination of nurse and non-nurseSpecialist physician Off-site (Pre- and post-discharge)Mixed2 monthsPhone call + Home visitsNot reported
Wee et al. [48]
(2015)
-
Conduct home visits
-
Deliver psychoeducation
-
Develop tailored care and medication plan
-
Monitor patients’ progress
-
Refer to appropriate resources
-
Screen eligibility for programme enrolment
Not reported
  • Elderly adults discharged home
  • Have complex care needs
  • Have limited social support
  • Not on follow-up with other case management or disease management programmes
Reduce hospital resource utilisation (Transition from ward to home)Funded by MOHNoNot reportedNot reportedOff-site (Pre- and post-discharge)Mixed2 monthsPhone call + Home visitsNot reported
Wong et al. [49]
(2019)
-
Act as a resource point for patients to call in for assistance/clarification
-
Collaborate with other care providers and with family members
-
Conduct home visits
-
Deliver psychoeducation
-
Deliver self-management education
-
Facilitate hospital admission
-
Monitor patients’ progress
-
Provide crisis management and support
-
Provide psychosocial support
-
Refer to appropriate resources
Patients: 27 ± 5 years
Caregivers: 51 ± 14 years
  • Patients aged 16–40 years old
  • Diagnosed with first-episode psychotic disorder, not secondary to substance abuse or medical conditions
Optimise disease managementNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedSpecialist physician + Primary care physician + Nurse + Allied health professionalHospital (Outpatient)Psychosis3 yearsPhone call + Home visitsNot reported
Wong et al. [50]
(2019)
-
Advocate for patients’ preferences
-
Conduct home visits
-
Deliver psychoeducation
-
Develop tailored care plan
-
Empower patients and encourage strength building
-
Partner with other care providers and/or caregivers
-
Provide psychosocial support
-
Mediate conflict between patient and caregiver
-
Monitor patients’ progress
-
Refer to appropriate resources
-
Support crisis management
Case managers: 37 ± 9 years
  • Patients aged 16–40 years old
  • Diagnosed with first-episode psychotic disorder, not secondary to substance abuse or medical conditions
Optimise disease managementNot reportedNot reportedCombination of nurse and non-nurseSpecialist physician Hospital (Outpatient)Psychosis3 yearsPhone call + Home visitsNot reported
Wong et al. [51]
(2016)
-
Act as a resource point for patients to call in for assistance/clarification
-
Deliver psychoeducation
-
Monitor patients’ progress
-
Identify red flags
-
Provide psychosocial support
-
Refer to appropriate resources
-
Reinforce compliance to care plans and medication
-
Screen eligibility for right-siting of care
59 ± 10 years
  • Post-elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention patients
  • Did not have a myocardial infarction 2 months prior to enrolment
Reduce hospital resource utilisation (Right-siting of care)Not reportedNot reportedNurseSpecialist physician Off-site (Pre- and post-discharge)Coronary artery diseaseNot reportedPhone callNot reported
Wu et al. [52]
(2015)
-
Assess clinical needs
-
Collect data for programme evaluation
-
Deliver psychoeducation
-
Develop tailored care plan
-
Encourage influenza vaccination
-
Liaise between step-down care partners, primary care physicians and patients
-
Offer advance care planning
-
Optimise patients’ medication regime
-
Refer to appropriate resources
-
Reinforce compliance to care plan
Not reported
  • Patients ≥ 40 years old
  • Current/ex-smokers
  • Have persistent/recurrent COPD-related respiratory complaints
  • Not enrolled in other disease management programmes
Optimise disease managementNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedSpecialist physician + Primary care physician + Nurse + Allied health professionalOff-site (Post-discharge only)Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseNot reportedPhone callNot reported
Wu et al. [53]
(2018)
-
Assess clinical needs
-
Coordinate appointments
-
Empower patients
-
Encourage influenza vaccination
-
Deliver psychoeducation
-
Deliver self-management education
-
Offer advance care planning
-
Optimise patients’ medication regime
-
Refer to appropriate resources
-
Reinforce compliance to care plan
72 ± 9 years
  • Patients ≥ 40 years old
  • Current/ex-smokers
  • Have persistent/recurrent COPD-related respiratory complaints
  • Not enrolled in other disease management programmes
Optimise disease managementFunded by MOHNot reportedNot reportedSpecialist physician + Primary care physician + Nurse + Allied health professionalOff-site (Post-discharge only)Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseNot reportedPhone callEvery 3–4 months
Yeo et al. [54]
(2012)
-
Facilitate transition between care settings
-
Monitor patients’ progress
-
Participate in care quality audit
-
Provide programme information
-
Refer to appropriate resources
Not reported
  • Diabetes patients seen at SGH Diabetes Centre
  • Clinically stable for right-siting of care
Optimise disease managementNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedSpecialist physician Hospital (Outpatient)Diabetes1 yearPhone callNot reported
Xu et al. [55]
(2022)
  • Health and geriatric assessment
  • Health coaching for disease prevention
  • Chronic disease monitoring
  • Education on self-care, medication and disease management
  • Advanced care planning facilitation
  • Refer to community health and social care agencies
71.4 ± 10.6
  • Patients with multiple chronic conditions
  • Patients aged ≥ 60 years old
  • Require assistance managing their chronic conditions
Reduce hospital resource utilisation (Transition from ward to home)Not reportedNot reported Nurse Nurses with different experiences and qualificationsOff-site (community nursing post or patient home)Mixed 2 years Phone calls + home visitsNot reported
Table 2. Table of subthemes that are mapped into the PESTLE framework.
Table 2. Table of subthemes that are mapped into the PESTLE framework.
(P)olitical/ organizational
-Clarity of programme direction and agenda setting
-Standardisation of care model and processes across levels of care and at the national level
-Support and commitment from senior leadership
-Provider stakeholder interests and willingness to run the programme
-Presence of programmatic champions
(E)conomic
-Financial gradients across care settings for patients
-Availability of resources to support programme implementation and staff development
(S)ociocultural
-Quality of partnership with other care providers within the team and across different care settings
-Interdisciplinary collaboration to deliver team-based care across care settings
-Patients’ motivation towards the uptake of care at primary or community levels
-Patients’ perceptions and understanding of services on offer
-Quality of partnership between providers and patients and/or caregivers
(T)echnology/technical
-Use of information systems that link patient data across care entities
-Availability of alternative forms of communication between providers across various entities
-Existing professional and technical capacities of providers in the community
-Training opportunities and upskilling of care coordinators
(E)nvironmental
-Flexibility to develop localised practices or protocols that suit contextualised needs
-Proximity of provider location that can facilitate collaboration

3. Results

3.1. Summary of Article Characteristics

Through systematically reviewing available articles, this review distilled 28 articles relevant to care coordination in the Singapore context summarised in Table 1 [28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55]. Out of the articles included, care coordination was specifically examined as part of the research question in four articles [43,44,49,50], of which two articles presented the perspectives of care coordinators [44,50], whereas 24 articles comprised relevant information on care coordination for a spectrum of programmes as part of broader interventions. A complete summary of the characteristics of all 28 articles reviewed is appended in Table 1.
The articles reviewed were published between 2012 and 2022. No eligible articles were published between 2010 and 2012. This suggests a greater focus on studying care coordination and related initiatives in recent years due to the unveiling of the Three Beyonds national strategy and the need to contain rising healthcare costs brought about by increased tertiary care usage.

3.2. Operational Characteristics of Programmes Reviewed

The aims of the programmes vary. A handful of programmes described a focus on lowering hospital resource utilisation by supporting patients during care transitions (36%) [28,31,39,42,43,45,46,50,55,56], and facilitating referrals from the specialist outpatient clinics (SOCs) to primary care providers (PCPs) (18%) [28,39,40,51,54]. The remaining 13 articles (46%) aimed to optimise the management of specific chronic diseases [29,31,32,33,34,35,37,45,46,49,50,52,53]. Importantly, heightened emphasis on reducing hospital resource utilisation and facilitating care transitions to lower levels of care aligns with the local vision of shifting care Beyond Hospital to Community.
All programmes require a sustainable form of funding. Only six articles (21%) reported a financing model [42,44,46,47,48,53] and all except one, by Low et al., explicitly indicated funding from MOH [42]. In only two out of six articles, by Low et al. and Nurjono et al., reported that patients were required to pay fees, mainly for providers to conduct home visitations [42,44].
Building technical capacity by training new care coordinators is paramount for programme success. Nurses served as care coordinators in 46% of articles reviewed [29,30,34,37,38,40,41,42,43,44,45,51,55], out of which only 11% reported specialised training in care coordination [37,38,44], while only three articles cited a mix of staff with nursing and non-nursing backgrounds being equipped to discharge their care coordination duties [46,47,50].
The settings in which care services are offered play a crucial role in determining where, how and by whom the services will be provided. Congruent to shifting care Beyond Hospital to Community, most of the initiatives reviewed provide care off-site, i.e., via phone calls or at patients’ homes. Half of the articles reviewed depicted off-site care delivery [30,32,36,38,41,42,43,44,47,48,51,52,53,55], nine in the hospital setting [29,31,39,40,45,46,49,50,54] and three in primary care settings [34,35,37]. Only Ang et al. and Ha et al., reported care delivery occurring in both hospital and primary care settings under the same respective programme [28,33].
In addition, Singapore places heightened focus on key chronic diseases identified as high burden based on CMDP, as elaborated above. During the time of review, there were 23 chronic conditions listed under CDMP [24]. Nine out of 23 chronic conditions on the CDMP list were covered in the articles reviewed. A handful of articles (36%) described care coordination for a mix of chronic diseases [28,38,40,41,42,43,44,47,48,55].
Moreover, duplication of care may be a concern as patients with multiple chronic diseases may be enrolled in more than one care coordination programme. This imposes an additional burden on patients and their caregivers, who already interact with multiple healthcare providers. Our review found three articles (11%) reporting that patients enrolled in another ongoing care coordination programme were not eligible for the recruitment [43,52,54].
Importantly, continuity of care needs to be upheld in care coordination programmes. Robust follow-up processes reduce fragmentation of care as patients transition from hospital to community. Reviewed articles point to varying lengths of follow-up care. Most initiatives (57%) discussed were duration-bound and operated on follow-up periods spanning two months to three years [29,30,34,35,36,38,41,42,44,45,46,47,48,50,54,55].
Despite most care coordination models operating on a predominant disease-focused perspective, many articles also reported providing care coordination services to link patients to preventive care services and psychosocial support [30,36,38,40,43,44,45,46,49,50,51,52,53,55]. This reflects a shift Beyond Healthcare to Health as patients’ needs are being considered holistically. A broad view of the services conducted in the programmes is summarised in Table 1.
Crucially, activities such as process optimisation and care innovation allow care coordination to be delivered cost-effectively and longitudinally while working within the constraints of limited programme funding [39,44,45,52,54]. Besides improving internal processes, collaborations with appropriate care partners across the care interfaces enhance accessibility to care for patients residing in the community requiring a range of services and can contain the cost of healthcare delivery [31,32,35,37,39]. This enables a shift beyond quality to value.

3.3. Broad Mapping of Key Subthemes from Articles Reviewed

The subthemes from the PESTLE framework were distilled into seven cross-cutting main themes relevant to the operational success of care coordination of reviewed programmes in Singapore.
Standards and guidelines are fundamental in setting the overarching objectives and quality of care coordination initiatives. Having aligned a standardised set of guidelines on the model of care provision directly affects how programmes are implemented across institutions and improves programme fidelity. Heterogeneity in care models is evident from the diverse range of care coordination activities cited in the articles reviewed, even when comparing models managing patients with similar conditions and having similar programme goals. Some care coordination programmes had general disease-specific care management standards outlined by national working groups [29,36,46,53], while others developed standardised care and assessment protocols limited to individual institutions [34,44,45]. In contrast, an article by Wee et al., explicated that permitting flexibility in defining an institution-specific focus and processes facilitated care coordination, implying that differences in care models and standards should be tailored to suit the needs and culture of specific institutions or programmes [47].
Singapore harbours a repository of clinical practice guidelines for chronic diseases, but the recommendations largely focus on the clinical aspect of care. A Singapore study reflected the need to improve patient-centred care that encapsulates elements beyond the disease, emphasizing the need to cocreate guidelines and standards with providers from different care entities [56]. An absence of care coordination standards and their accompanying accredited guidelines creates operational challenges in programme implementation, especially when there is little clarity on the programmes’ expected outcomes and prospective lifespan [44,57]. However, it was unclear in most articles reviewed whether such standards were consistently implemented on the ground.
Strong partnerships with other care providers can aid in fostering positive working relationships within the care coordination team to manage patient care holistically and effectively. Minting vertical and horizontal relationships are vital for successful care coordination workflows. Therefore, the strength of partnership and trust between providers in the community and hospital specialists impact the uptake of care coordination initiatives and alignment of outcomes for both providers and patients [41,47]. Moreover, leveraging partnerships between private and community stakeholders, streamlining referral processes and adopting collaborative care models encompassing mutually agreed upon right-siting workstreams empowers the shift of care Beyond Hospital to Community [32,33,37,39,44,46,51,54,55].
An interoperable information system which can come in the form of a synchronised digital patient dashboard is a key catalyst that facilitates the linkage of patients and their data from tertiary to primary and community care points [33]. A study by Wee et al., evaluating various transitional care initiatives pointed to the utility of appropriate and integrated information systems to aid transitional processes across different care venues and gather data for programme evaluation purposes [48]. Furthermore, another article by Nurjono et al. reported that having multiple independent information systems at different care delivery points made sourcing for patient records by providers from different healthcare organisations a manually tedious process [44].
Strong leadership surfaced as a prominent meso-level attribute for care services offered by various entities to be delivered optimally and collaboratively across various healthcare entities. Essentially, quality and consistency of leadership both within the organisation and at the individual programme level affect the implementation of care coordination services. A change in leadership and unclear programme direction was found to impact staff morale, especially regarding concerns about the future of their employment [44]. Leadership also heavily influences the amount of political and fiscal support for care coordination programmes in terms of strategic direction and resources. Different stakeholders within the hospital may have varying priorities and perceptions of care coordination, making it challenging to garner traction without strong leadership support to consolidate consensus when introducing new initiatives [48]. Getting buy-ins from organisational leaders signals organisational commitment to care coordination activities and aids in resolving role conflicts with other departments and programmes as highlighted by Chandran et al. and Ha et al. [29,33]. One study by Wee et al. had shown that the organisation readily channelled additional resources to fund the continuation of the care coordination programme after MOH funding ceased, which was only possible as senior leaders within the organization provided continued support for the initiative [48].
Presence of resource availability determines the lifespan of the programme. Most care coordination programmes reviewed run on MOH programme funding, such that a fixed quantum allocated to the programme limits the duration and type of care model implemented. As a result, the lack of certainty for programme longevity influences the hiring of human resources, retention of manpower capacity and affects programme expansion [30]. This was reported to hinder access to multi-disciplinary expertise and for early review clinics to deliver responsive and holistic care as noted by Prabhakaran et al. [45]. Although community care providers are available, the perceived lack of technical and operational resources meant that care coordinators hesitated to refer their patients for continued care [44]. This observation may have resulted from the disparity in resources available at the hospital and community levels and hence led to a gap in the capacity to offer quality care [44]. On the other hand, Lai et al. discussed that collaborative care models with hospital specialists that comprise training modules and technical resources were introduced to upskill community providers to manage complex cases [37].
Another resource availability issue stems from the patient’s point of view, where the financial gradients between SOCs and private general practitioners (GPs) make the right-siting of care challenging [28,40,44]. Although the Community Health Assistance Scheme (CHAS), a portable medical subsidy scheme by the government that can be used at private GPs which provides additional subsidies for selected CDMP medications, the amount of financial subsidy was reported to be inadequate for CDMP patients who are on multiple medications to continue receiving long-term care within the private primary care sector [58].
Patient-specific related factors include certain sociocultural factors, such as patients’ perceptions of certain care providers and unique motivations to seek care influence their acceptance of care coordination interventions [30]. For example, Ang et al. and Lim et al. highlighted that patients were disinclined to be referred to GPs to be followed up in the community if they viewed the quality of care as inferior to that provided in SOCs [28,39]. Patients’ understanding of care coordinators’ roles and capabilities also affects the perceived value of care coordination services [40,44]. This may result from infrequent contact between patients and care coordinators in traditional “more siloed” medical settings in Singapore, causing a lack of understanding of what care coordination entails [44].
Another patient-relevant factor is the presence of a supportive caregiver, especially for patients who are less independent in their daily activities. Care coordinators partner with this support network to monitor patients in the community by ensuring judicious follow-up attendance and medication reconciliation, among other responsibilities [32,43,49,50]. Mustapha et al. further reflected that simple care delivery and monitoring could be performed by trained caregivers who are competent care partners [43]. Williams et al. added that this reduces co-dependency on care coordinators and promotes care continuity after discharge from duration-limited care coordination programmes [59].
As many programmes harness patient empowerment through improved health literacy and self-efficacy, it is central to view care processes from the patients’ lens by considering their various commitments, the amount of effort required for behaviour change, and the physical barriers required to perform care tasks [36,60]. Most participants in care coordination programmes are reportedly older adults. They are more predisposed to suffer from multiple chronic diseases; hence, they may receive conflicting care instructions or be overwhelmed by different care regimens prescribed by multiple care providers [17].
Provider-specific related factors include factors articulated from the providers’ point of departure. The presence of a passionate clinical stalwart was cited as a strong driver for programme success by bringing staff from within the organisation and across entities on board and overseeing their concerns [29,33]. Additionally, the proximity of location between providers and by having care coordinators embedded in the same practice venue were mentioned by Williams et al., as a facilitator that bolsters collaboration within the remit of care programmes [59]. As most care coordinators are sited in hospitals, this physical closeness allows hospital specialists to better understand the capabilities and duties of care coordinators and their roles in the patients’ journey. This colocation was highlighted to have enhanced the quality of their partnership by leveraging care coordinators to optimise the use of trans-disciplinary services, outside the ambit of a single speciality department, to meet the multi-dimensional needs of patients in the community [41,47,49].
Inarguably, care coordinators must be skilled in providing quality care coordination services and be comfortable communicating and operating across different levels of care and other care disciplines as noted by Vargas et al. [61]. While most care coordinators are nurses by profession, they cited challenges in delivering holistic care due to a lack of interdisciplinary training, especially related to the social aspects of care that extend beyond traditional nursing curriculums [44]. Fortunately, care coordinators function in multi-disciplinary teams. This means that care coordinators can refer older patients with more complex care needs to an appropriate teammate, such as a specialty nurse or social worker, to address the issues comprehensively within a readily available pool of expertise [37,43,50,55].

4. Discussion

To our knowledge, this scoping review is the first to explore the various dimensions that facilitate care coordination in Singapore. This scoping review comprises 28 articles that painted a mixed picture of care coordination programmes but simultaneously revealed various cross-cutting themes that facilitate the care coordination of patients with chronic conditions in the community. Operationally, programmes largely focus on medical care with some dimensions of psychosocial support embedded in them, of which having a standardised set of guidelines was highlighted to improve the quality of care provided across settings. In terms of the operational features of these care models, most care coordinators have a nursing background and work in multi-disciplinary teams both within and across care interfaces. Fostering strong relationships between providers and strong leadership becomes an essential ingredient in collaboration across multiple care organisations so that all parties can manage patients in their respective care venues based on common goals. Having an interoperable information system further facilitates the movement of patients and their data across care settings more seamlessly. Data flow across care points is integral since patient communication often occurs via phone calls as care is generally delivered off-site. Care coordination programmes reviewed are often duration-limited and typically support patients for a period of two months to three years. Despite Singapore being heralded as a health system that offers quality healthcare, patient and provider expectations and perspectives can still hinder both parties’ willingness to manage patients or be managed at lower levels of care. An adverse financial gradient regarding subsidies received between the private and public sectors has also stymied the care-sharing process between public specialists and private primary care providers [62].
For any programme to operate optimally, forging a set of standardised guidelines is needed so that parties executing the programme have aligned principles to adhere to and enhance coherence throughout patient journeys. This is particularly important when faced with patients transitioning across various care levels and sectors, where institutional or organisational structure, financing and workplace culture might influence the quality of patient management [60,63]. Deploying a standard set of indicators and metrics can also provide windows for programmatic evaluations and identify gaps for improvement [64,65]. All programmes share a similar ambition of caring for patients in the community, but some aspects pertaining to the discharge of care coordination activities remain pluralistic, even for programmes that manage the same medical conditions. While programmes for different conditions may vary due to associated pathophysiology and care management requirements, a set of standardised guidelines need to be outlined to ensure consistency in the delivery of care coordination activities at multiple sites. This can be facilitated by adopting streamlined two-way referral processes, developing a collaborative model of care, and having an aligned fee structure agreed upon by all stakeholders along the care journey, embedded into the care programmes [44,66]. Guidelines have to be co-developed not only with fellow providers but patients as well to minimise potential gaps in the referral and right-sitting processes [67].
Conflicts between providers are not uncommon, especially across care entities [68]. Power dynamics between providers might also be a source of conflicting instructions and general dissatisfaction if left unresolved [69]. Installing strong leadership to spearhead such programmes is integral for ensuring that care offered to patients is not disrupted due to team management or interpersonal reasons [70]. Effective leadership is inherently entwined with the ability to cultivate resilient partnerships as mutual buy-ins for key stakeholders will promote commitment to common care coordination agendas [29,33]. Care quality can be enhanced when strong partnerships are forged between providers through intentional fostering of connections initiated by a programme champion [71]. This will strengthen inter-entity linkages and realise a collective agenda across care teams [72]. Multiple studies have shown that having a good pre-existing relationship is a facilitator for clear and collaborative communication channels for the delivery of care within a care team and across care entities [72,73].
Importantly, communication between providers can be heightened with an interoperable IT system. In Singapore, the National Electronic Health Records (NEHR) platform enables patient data to be viewed and inputted across care entities. However, uploading patient data to the NEHR by private providers is not mandatory [74]. This lack of integration of patient data potentially hinders the effectiveness of transitional care programmes and stifles the right-siting of patients from public tertiary hospitals to private sector primary care providers, which comprise the majority of the primary healthcare landscape in Singapore [75]. An interoperable system that allows providers across different care levels to share patient data and communicate with each other in a real-time and data-secured manner should be explored [76].
Undoubtedly, resource availability such as medically relevant infrastructure, equipment and technically trained human resources are frequently viewed as key determinants to providing required care in any programme. However, community or primary care settings have often been seen as less well-resourced than higher care levels. The Singapore government has attempted to bridge this gap through various means, such as the family medicine clinics, which offer needed ancillary services to selected patients, such as diabetes and hypertension-related services [77]. More recently, the promulgation of primary care networks (PCN) has similarly enabled private GPs to do so. Such policy manoeuvres empower PCN care teams to dedicate resources such as nurse counselling, diabetic foot screening and diabetic retinal photography for diabetic patients in the community [62]. Therefore, having a stipulated financial and operational timeline will guide human resource hiring and assure that team-based care will be offered longitudinally to patients when sited in the community. Importantly, a few modifications to the delivery model can augment existing resources, such as replacing home visits with telehealth follow-ups where appropriate [29,30,31,34]. Effectively, telehealthcare can manifest as bringing care closer to patients’ homes, which aligns with the value that patients and caregivers place on convenience and access to care [78]. Such digitally enhanced services can also lower the overall cost to patients and maximise scarce medical resources [79].
Another way to minimise unnecessary healthcare expenditure and firmly anchor patients in the community is to educate and empower them to self-care. Emphasis on nurturing this patient-specific related factor can sow benefits not only for patients but also in terms of lowering provider burden and overall cost to the health system [80]. Research has shown that patients and their caregivers often feel ill-prepared to play a more substantial role in care management after discharge, due to perceived difficulties in managing the condition without direct professional involvement [81,82]. Effective approaches to patient engagement include adopting a patient-centred approach that supports self-management, which is linked to improved overall health outcomes and lower healthcare utilisation rates [83]. Additionally, the ability to self-care allows care to continue regardless of whether patients remain enrolled in a care coordination programme, thereby reducing dependency on care resources. Importantly, patient education on the need for care coordinators and the crucial roles they play in care transitions, need to be emphasised to inspire patient enrolment and adherence to regiments and instructions. Without a sociocultural mindset shift in expectations for these programmes, the desired outcomes might be hampered by a lower willingness to participate.
Looking upstream, one of the provider-specific related factors includes providers’ professional training, which will impact their capacity to proficiently discharge care coordination duties. Therefore, care coordination should be taught more prominently in medical and nursing schools. Besides training clinical staff, expanding the reach to train non-clinical personnel to be care coordinators will grow the pool of skilled persons to perform care coordination activities. Such task-shifting can increase overall human resource capacity when specialised modules on care coordination for both clinical and non-clinical providers are implemented within and beyond the remit of care programmes [84]. Although not explicitly demonstrated in the articles reviewed, many studies point to nurses taking on the primary role of care coordinator on top of their regular duties [85,86,87]. Increased workloads might lead to burnout or a high turnover. Therefore, it might be timely for strategic task-shifting of care coordination duties to non-clinically trained personnel to feature more prominently [88].
Moreover, programmes that aim to have care coordination done well must not be fixated only on the medical elements but also the psychosocial [89]. Thus, it is pivotal to take a team-based care approach so that providers can refer patients to appropriately skilled providers to support patients beyond the traditional medical ambits during their care journey [90]. Simultaneously, moving away from a medically focused lens to a more holistic approach that embraces multi-disciplinarity (e.g., allied health and non-clinical personnel) which better addresses patients’ multi-faceted needs can increase the likelihood of patients remaining within the community [91]. However, there remains a dearth of literature on how care coordination across healthcare and social services differs from coordination within the realm of healthcare alone [63]. Although none of the reviewed articles illustrated how financial incentives can specifically drive the quality of care coordination process in Singapore, many other studies beyond Singapore had illustrated that a pay-for-performance financial incentive structure paid to providers for a particular service dimension, i.e., care coordination, warrants further exploration [92,93,94].

5. Limitations

A limitation is that some programmes may not be covered as articles without full text and grey literature were not reviewed. A broader range of chronic diseases, beyond those on the CDMP list, will also enhance comprehensiveness of the review.

6. Aligning with Singapore’s National Healthcare Strategies and Recommendations

As the national vision of the Three Beyonds paves the way for Healthier SG, more research needs to be done to investigate how other levels of care and sectors can be integrated into the primary healthcare system. There is an impetus to uncover the key facilitators for care teams to perform duties beyond the medical, to include other psychosocial aspects, such as social prescribing to fit into the mould of Singapore’s latest healthcare transformation, Healthier SG. To that end, care coordination processes need to be strengthened such that linkages between primary care providers and community partners are optimised.
This scoping review has excavated the key themes pertinent to care coordination activities in Singapore. Firstly, this review has found several studies that describe how programmes are operationalised on the ground but left out the mechanisms that fund such programmes, including the exploration of optimal provider payment methods. Importantly, adverse financial gradients between public tertiary and private primary care providers need more exploration, as the CHAS subsidy quantum might not be sufficient for patients facing multiple chronic conditions to remain with their private primary care providers when they require more medications. The review also highlighted the need to understand the best methods to train providers in care coordination to manage an ever-growing and increasingly diverse patient population. Currently, most nurses play the role of care coordinator, and more needs to be done to augment the already clinically strained workforce. Crucially, while limiting care coordination services to a specified period may be a way to contain costs, little is known about the optimal duration for care coordination programmes. The frequency and duration of contact between patients and care coordinators may not be sufficient to build a meaningful therapeutic relationship and hence influence health outcomes beyond the programme duration [95]. Most importantly, the Singapore healthcare system requires more investigation of the numerous facets of care coordination and this review serves as a timely starting point.

7. Conclusions

This review highlighted the need for standards and guidelines, strong partnerships across stakeholders, interoperable information systems across entities, strong leadership, presence of resource availability, patient-specific factors such as sociocultural factors and provider-specific factors such as training, which can have an impact on care coordination when it comes to managing patients with chronic conditions in the community in Singapore.
Overall, care coordination activities are aligned with the national strategies, but implementation on the ground requires further refinement. With an ageing population and increasing chronic disease burden, more needs to be done to ensure effective and quality care coordination such that stable patients can be safely provided with the required care not only at the tertiary care level but also in the community. Lack of care coordination might cause patients to drift up the health system towards the hospital level.

Author Contributions

C.D.F., J.Y.Y. and J.C.H.Y. conceptualised the paper, while C.D.F., J.Y.Y. and A.S.L.C. performed data extraction of relevant articles and conducted the formal analysis. Original draft writing was done with C.D.F. and J.Y.Y. All authors reviewed the final manuscript and J.C.H.Y. provided the funding. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

CDF is funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Investment ID INV-005598.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not needed as this is a scoping review with publicly available data.

Informed Consent Statement

Not needed as this is a scoping review with publicly available data.

Data Availability Statement

These data sets will be made available by the research team only upon reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A. PRISMA-ScR Checklist

SectionItemPRISMA-ScR Checklist ItemReported on Page #
Title
Title1Identify the report as a scoping review.This has been stated in the introduction and methodology sections
Abstract
Structured summary2Provide a structured summary that includes (as applicable): background, objectives, eligibility criteria, sources of evidence, charting methods, results and conclusions that relate to the review questions and objectives.All these points are reported in the abstract.
Introduction
Rationale3Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. Explain why the review questions/objectives lend themselves to a scoping review approach.This is stated in the introduction section whereby the reason for this review is to surface key elements of care coordination as more patients with chronic diseases need to be firmly anchored in the community.
Objectives4Provide an explicit statement of the questions and objectives being addressed with reference to their key elements (e.g., population or participants, concepts and context) or other relevant key elements used to conceptualize the review questions and/or objectives.This is mentioned in the introduction which aims to uncover the broad themes surrounding chronic disease management programmes with significant care coordination components while illuminating the under-researched areas requiring further exploration.
Methods
Protocol and registration5Indicate whether a review protocol exists; state if and where it can be accessed (e.g., a Web address); and if available, provide registration information, including the registration number.The entire review protocol is elaborated in the methodology section.
Eligibility criteria6Specify characteristics of the sources of evidence used as eligibility criteria (e.g., years considered, language and publication status), and provide a rationale.This is fully mentioned in the methodology section.
Information sources7Describe all information sources in the search (e.g., databases with dates of coverage and contact with authors to identify additional sources), as well as the date the most recent search was executed.This is fully mentioned in the methodology section.
Search8Present the full electronic search strategy for at least 1 database, including any limits used, such that it could be repeated.This is fully mentioned in the methodology section and Appendix D.
Selection of sources of evidence9State the process for selecting sources of evidence (i.e., screening and eligibility) included in the scoping review.This is mentioned in Appendix B and Appendix D.
Data charting process10Describe the methods of charting data from the included sources of evidence (e.g., calibrated forms or forms that have been tested by the team before their use, and whether data charting was done independently or in duplicate) and any processes for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.This is fully mentioned in the methodology section and the PRISMA diagram shows how the team managed repeated and non-relevant articles.
Data items11List and define all variables for which data were sought and any assumptions and simplifications made.This is highlighted in both the introduction and methodology sections which also includes our operational definition of care coordination.
Critical appraisal of individual sources of evidence12If done, provide a rationale for conducting a critical appraisal of included sources of evidence; describe the methods used and how this information was used in any data synthesis (if appropriate).NA
Synthesis of results13Describe the methods of handling and summarising the data that were charted.This is mentioned in the methodology section in terms of how data is extracted and thematically analysed by the study team. A PESTLE framework was used to guide the initial analysis.
Results
Selection of sources of evidence14Give numbers of sources of evidence screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at each stage, ideally using a flow diagram.The inclusion and exclusion criteria are reported in Appendix B and in Figure 1.
Characteristics of sources of evidence15For each source of evidence, present characteristics for which data were charted and provide the citations.The summary of programmatic characteristics is stated in the results section with the associated references.
Critical appraisal within sources of evidence16If done, present data on critical appraisal of included sources of evidence (see item 12).NA
Results of individual sources of evidence17For each included source of evidence, present the relevant data that were charted that relate to the review questions and objectives.The summary of programmatic characteristics is stated in the results section with the associated references and in Table 1.
Synthesis of results18Summarize and/or present the charting results as they relate to the review questions and objectives.The summary of programmatic characteristics is stated in the results section with the associated references and Table 1.
Discussion
Summary of evidence19Summarize the main results (including an overview of concepts, themes and types of evidence available), link to the review questions and objectives, and consider the relevance to key groups.The summary of programmatic characteristics is stated in the results section with the associated references and Table 1.
Limitations20Discuss the limitations of the scoping review process.This is discussed in the limitation section of the manuscript.
Conclusions21Provide a general interpretation of the results with respect to the review questions and objectives, as well as potential implications and/or next steps.This is elaborated in the discussion and “Aligning with Singapore’s national healthcare strategies and recommendations” section.
Funding
Funding22Describe sources of funding for the included sources of evidence, as well as sources of funding for the scoping review. Describe the role of the funders of the scoping review.This is mentioned under the funding section.

Appendix B. Sample Search Strategy Used for PubMed

Appendix B.1. Steps Taken to Search Database

Step 1: Concepts 1–3 were searched individually.
Step 2: Results from Step 1 were combined by including a BOOLEAN term “AND” between search keywords for each concept.

Appendix B.2. Search Filters Applied

1. Results by year: 2010–2023
2. Species: Humans
3. Language: English
NumberConceptSubject HeadingsSearch Keywords
1Care coordination “Case Management” [Mesh]care coordination OR care coordinator OR care coordinations OR care coordinators OR case management OR case manager OR case managers OR chronic care management OR chronic care manager OR care manager OR care managers
“Transitional Care” [Mesh]integrated care OR Integrated Health Care OR Integrated Delivery System OR Transitional Care OR care integration OR post-discharge care
“Continuity of Patient Care” [Mesh]Continuity of care OR patient handoff OR patient handover OR Patient transfer
“Patient Care Management” [Mesh]Patient Care Planning OR care management
“Patient Navigation” [Mesh]Patient Navigators OR Patient Navigator OR Patient Navigation OR Patient Navigations OR Care Navigator OR Care Navigators OR Health care navigator OR Health care navigators OR patient navigator program OR patient navigator programme
“Delivery of Health Care, Integrated” [Mesh]Integrated Delivery System OR integrated care OR care integration OR integrated health care OR health care integration
2Chronic disease“Chronic Disease” [Mesh]Chronic diseases OR chronic disease OR chronic illness OR chronic illnesses OR chronically ill OR progressive disease OR progressive diseases OR progressive illness OR progressive illnesses OR chronic condition OR chronic conditions OR chronic disease management programme OR chronic disease management program OR CDMP
“Comorbidity” [Mesh]Comorbidity OR comorbidities OR comorbids OR comorbid OR multiple chronic condition OR multiple chronic conditions
“Noncommunicable Diseases” [Mesh]Noncommunicable disease OR Noncommunicable diseases OR non-infectious disease OR non-infectious diseases
2Chronic disease“Diabetes Mellitus” [Mesh]Diabetic OR diabetics OR diabetes mellitus OR diabetes OR elevated blood glucose OR high blood glucose OR glucose intolerance OR pre-diabetes OR pre-diabetic OR pre-diabetics OR impaired fasting glucose OR impaired glucose tolerance
“Hypertension” [Mesh]hypertension OR hypertensive OR high blood pressure OR essential hypertension OR malignant hypertension OR elevated blood pressure OR elevated systolic
“Lipid Metabolism Disorders” [Mesh]Lipid Metabolism Disorder OR Lipid Metabolism Disorders OR dyslipidemia OR dyslipidemias OR high cholesterol OR high cholestrol OR lipid disorder OR lipid disorders OR high triglycerides OR hypercholesterolemia
“Asthma” [Mesh]Asthma OR Asthmas
“Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive” [Mesh]chronic respiratory disease OR chronic respiratory diseases OR COPD OR chronic obstructive pulmonary disease OR chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases OR bronchitis
“Renal Insufficiency, Chronic” [Mesh] OR “Nephrosis” [Mesh]Nephrosis OR nephrotic OR nephrotic syndrome OR chronic kidney disease OR kidney disease chronic OR kidney diseases OR kidney diseases OR chronic renal disease OR renal disease OR chronic renal diseases OR renal diseases OR nephritis OR nephropathy OR pyelonephritis OR chronic kidney insufficiency OR chronic renal insufficiency OR chronic kidney insufficiencies OR chronic renal insufficiencies OR nephrotic disease OR nephrotic diseases
“Schizophrenia” [Mesh]Schizophrenia OR Schizophrenias OR Schizophrenic Disorder OR Schizophrenic Disorders
“Depressive Disorder” [Mesh]Depression OR depressive disorder OR depressive disorders OR depressive syndrome OR depressive syndromes OR unipolar depression OR major depressive disorder OR major depressive disorders OR major depression
“Bipolar Disorder” [Mesh]Bipolar disorder OR bipolar disorders OR psychosis OR psychoses OR bipolar depression OR manic disorder OR manic disorders OR mania OR manias
“Anxiety Disorder” [Mesh]Anxiety disorder OR anxiety disorders OR anxiety
2Chronic disease“Stroke” [Mesh]Stroke OR strokes OR brain ischemia OR brain ischaemia OR cerebrovascular accident OR cerebrovascular accidents OR cerebrovascular stroke OR cerebrovascular strokes OR cerebral stroke OR cerebral strokes OR acute stroke OR acute strokes OR cerebrovascular disease OR cerebrovascular diseases
“Dementia” [Mesh]Dementia OR dementias OR senile dementia OR Alzheimer disease OR Alzheimer’s disease OR Alzheimer diseases OR Alzheimer’s diseases OR vascular dementia
“Osteoarthritis” [Mesh]Osteoarthritis OR osteoarthrosis OR osteoarthroses OR degenerative arthritis OR degenerative arthritidies OR rheumatoid arthritis
“Parkinson Disease” [Mesh]Parkinson Disease OR Parkinson’s Disease OR Parkinsonism
“Prostatic Hyperplasia” [Mesh]Prostatic Hyperplasia OR benign prostatic hyperplasia OR benign prostatic hypertrophy OR prostatic hypertrophy
“Epilepsy” [Mesh]Epilepsy OR epilepsies OR seizure disorder OR seizure disorders OR epileptic syndrome OR epileptic syndromes OR epileptic disorder OR epileptic disorders OR chronic epilepsy
“Osteoporosis” [Mesh]Osteoporosis OR osteoporoses OR bone loss OR bone losses
“Psoriasis” [Mesh]Psoriasis OR psoriases OR psoriatic arthritis OR arthritic psoriasis OR psoriatic arthritis OR psoriatic arthropathy OR psoriatic arthropathies
“Arthritis, Rheumatoid” [Mesh]Rheumatoid Arthritis OR Sjogren’s syndrome OR rheumatoid vasculitis OR chronic inflammatory autoimmune disease OR chronic inflammatory autoimmune diseases
“Cardiovascular Diseases” [Mesh]Cardiovascular disease OR Cardiovascular diseases OR ischaemic heart disease OR ischemic heart disease OR myocardial ischemia OR myocardial ischaemia OR myocardial infarction OR ischaemic heart diseases OR ischemic heart diseases OR myocardial infarctions OR coronary arterial disease OR coronary artery disease OR coronary arterial diseases OR coronary artery diseases OR heart disease OR heart diseases OR coronary disease OR coronary diseases
3Singapore“Singapore” [Mesh]Singapore OR Singaporean OR Singaporeans OR Chinese OR Malay OR Malays OR Indian OR Indians

Appendix C. List of Chronic Disease Management Programme (CDMP) Conditions

  • Anxiety
  • Asthma
  • Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia
  • Bipolar Disorder
  • Chronic Kidney Disease (Nephritis/Nephrosis)
  • Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
  • Dementia
  • Diabetes mellitus and Pre-diabetes
  • Epilepsy
  • Hypertension
  • Ischaemic Heart Disease
  • Lipid Disorders
  • Major Depression
  • Osteoarthritis
  • Osteoporosis
  • Parkinson’s Disease
  • Psoriasis
  • Rheumatoid Arthritis
  • Schizophrenia
  • Stroke

Appendix D. Exclusion Criteria Used to Screen Articles

No.Exclusion CriteriaRationale
1Does not relate to and/or describe care coordinationAlign with the review to consider initiatives that describe care coordination
2Disease is not part of the CDMP listAlign with the review aim to examine initiatives related to management of chronic diseases on the CDMP list.
3Initiative does not target population of interest (i.e., community-dwelling adults who are neither aged 21 and above nor have a chronic disease)Care coordination for adults who are not community-dwelling or non-adult populations involves different considerations (e.g., liaising with the nursing home care team, partnering with parents and teachers).
4Articles are not based on an initiative in SingaporeAlign with the review aim to study initiatives in Singapore.
5Articles not in EnglishEliminate the risk of losing information due to translation issues.
6Articles assessed and/or described an alternative form of intervention (e.g., acupuncture)A sample of 50 articles on alternative therapies were reviewed and the articles did not contain any element and/or description of care coordination. Hence, this criterion was added midway through the stage 1 screening process.
Additional exclusion criteria for stage 2 screening
7Full text is not availableAbstracts may not provide a good representation of the initiative and sufficient level of detail, which does not allow for a comprehensive assessment of the article.
8Care recipients belong to end-of-life populationThe target population is the general Singapore population that is suffering from chronic diseases that require prolonged management in the community as compared to end-of-life populations that need a different set of care management requirements.

References

  1. Ageing and Health. Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ageing-and-health (accessed on 12 March 2023).
  2. Singapore’s Population Getting Older, Adding Pressure on Social Spending—Bloomberg. Available online: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-28/singapore-s-getting-older-adding-pressure-on-social-spending#xj4y7vzkg (accessed on 12 March 2023).
  3. MOH|Singapore Burden of Disease Report 2017. Available online: https://www.moh.gov.sg/resources-statistics/singapore-burden-of-disease-report-2017 (accessed on 12 March 2023).
  4. MOH|News Highlights. Available online: https://www.moh.gov.sg/news-highlights/details/speech-by-mr-gan-kim-yong-minister-for-health-at-the-ministry-of-health-committee-of-supply-debate-2018 (accessed on 17 May 2023).
  5. Picco, L.; Achilla, E.; Abdin, E.; Chong, S.A.; Vaingankar, J.A.; McCrone, P.; Chua, H.C.; Heng, D.; Magadi, H.; Ng, L.L. Economic Burden of Multimorbidity among Older Adults: Impact on Healthcare and Societal Costs. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2016, 16, 173. Available online: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4862090/ (accessed on 26 June 2020). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Maeng, D.D.; Martsolf, G.R.; Scanlon, D.P.; Christianson, J.B. Care coordination for the chronically ill: Understanding the patient’s perspective. Health Serv. Res. 2012, 47, 1960–1979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Tan, S.T.; Quek, R.Y.C.; Haldane, V.; Koh, J.J.K.; Han, E.K.L.; Ong, S.E.; Chuah, F.L.H.; Legido-Quigley, H. The social determinants of chronic disease management: Perspectives of elderly patients with hypertension from low socio-economic background in Singapore. Int. J. Equity Health 2019, 18, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Tan, C.C.; Lam, C.S.P.; Matchar, D.B.; Zee, Y.K.; Wong, J.E.L. Singapore’s health-care system: Key features, challenges, and shifts. Lancet 2021, 398, 1091–1104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. MOH|News Highlights. Available online: https://www.moh.gov.sg/news-highlights/details/promoting-overall-healthier-living-while-targeting-specific-sub-populations (accessed on 11 May 2023).
  10. Albertson, E.M.; Chuang, E.; O’Masta, B.; Miake-Lye, I.; Haley, L.A.; Pourat, N. Systematic Review of Care Coordination Interventions Linking Health and Social Services for High-Utilizing Patient Populations. Popul. Health Manag. 2022, 25, 73–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Solberg, L.I. Care coordination: What is it, what are its effects and can it be sustained? Fam. Pract. 2011, 28, 469–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Ehrlich, C.; Kendall, E.; Muenchberger, H. Spanning boundaries and creating strong patient relationships to coordinate care are strategies used by experienced chronic condition care coordinators. Contemp. Nurse 2012, 42, 67–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. The Importance of Patient Care Coordination for Outcomes. Default. Available online: https://www.healthstream.com/resource/blog/the-importance-of-patient-care-coordination-for-outcomes (accessed on 17 May 2023).
  14. Khullar, D.; Chokshi, D.A. Can Better Care Coordination Lower Health Care Costs? JAMA Netw. Open 2018, 1, e184295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Cost Containment and the Tale of Care Coordination|NEJM. Available online: https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMp1610821 (accessed on 17 May 2023).
  16. McDonald, K.M.; Sundaram, V.; Bravata, D.M.; Lewis, R.; Lin, N.; Kraft, S.A.; McKinnon, M.; Paguntalan, H.; Owens, D.K. Definitions of Care Coordination and Related Terms. Closing the Quality Gap: A Critical Analysis of Quality Improvement Strategies (Vol. 7: Care Coordination). Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US). 2007. Available online: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK44012/ (accessed on 12 March 2023).
  17. Care Coordination Measures Atlas Update. Available online: https://www.ahrq.gov/ncepcr/care/coordination/atlas.html (accessed on 12 March 2023).
  18. Lepeleire, J.D. An In-Depth Analysis of Theoretical Frameworks for the Study of Care Coordination. Int. J. Integr. Care 2013, 13, e024. Available online: https://ijic.org/articles/10.5334/ijic.1068 (accessed on 12 March 2023).
  19. Co-Ordinated Care for People with Complex Chronic Conditions. The King’s Fund. Available online: https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/co-ordinated-care-people-complex-chronic-conditions (accessed on 12 March 2023).
  20. Cheah, J. Chronic disease management: A Singapore perspective. BMJ 2001, 323, 990–993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Arend, J.; Tsang-Quinn, J.; Levine, C.; Thomas, D. The patient-centered medical home: History, components, and review of the evidence. Mt. Sinai J. Med. 2012, 79, 433–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Siañez, M.; Pennel, C.; Tamayo, L.; Wells, R. Navigating medically complex patients through system barriers: Patients’ perspectives on care coordination. Int. J. Care Coord. 2018, 21, 160–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Tricco, A.C.; Lillie, E.; Zarin, W.; O’Brien, K.K.; Colquhoun, H.; Levac, D.; Moher, D.; Peters, M.D.J.; Horsley, T.; Weeks, L. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann. Intern. Med. 2018, 169, 467–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. MOH|Chronic Disease Management Programme (CDMP). Available online: https://www.moh.gov.sg/policies-and-legislation/chronic-disease-management-programme-(cdmp) (accessed on 12 March 2023).
  25. Buye, R. Critical Examination of the PESTEL Analysis Model. 2021. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349506325_Critical_examination_of_the_PESTEL_Analysis_Model (accessed on 30 December 2022).
  26. Gale, N.K.; Heath, G.; Cameron, E.; Rashid, S.; Redwood, S. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2013, 13, 117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Saunders, B.; Sim, J.; Kingstone, T.; Baker, S.; Waterfield, J.; Bartlam, B.; Burroughs, H.; Jinks, C. Saturation in qualitative research: Exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Qual Quant 2018, 52, 1893–1907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Ang, I.Y.H.; Ng, S.H.X.; Rahman, N.; Nurjono, M.; Tham, T.Y.; Toh, S.A.; Wee, H.L. Right-Site Care Programme with a community-based family medicine clinic in Singapore: Secondary data analysis of its impact on mortality and healthcare utilisation. BMJ Open 2019, 9, e030718. Available online: http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/9/12/e030718 (accessed on 12 February 2020). [CrossRef]
  29. Chandran, M.; Tan, M.Z.W.; Cheen, M.; Tan, S.B.; Leong, M.; Lau, T.C. Secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures—An ‘OPTIMAL’ model of care from Singapore. Osteoporos. Int. 2013, 24, 2809–2817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Chow, W.L.; Jiang, J.; Cho, L.W.; Foo, J.P.; Fock, K.M.; Chen, R. Telehealth for improved glycaemic control in patients with poorly controlled diabetes after acute hospitalization—A preliminary study in Singapore. J. Telemed. Telecare 2014, 20, 317–323. [Google Scholar]
  31. George, P.P.; Heng, B.H.; Lim, T.K.; Abisheganaden, J.; Ng, A.W.K.; Verma, A.; Verma, A.; Lim, F.S. Evaluation of a disease management program for COPD using propensity matched control group. J. Thorac. Dis. 2016, 8, 1661–1671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ha, N.H.L.; Kiat, P.Y.L.; Nicholas, S.O.; Chan, I.; Wee, S.L. Evaluating the Outcomes of a Hospital-to-Community Model of Integrated Care for Dementia. Dement. Geriatr. Cogn. Disord. 2020, 49, 598–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ha, N.H.L.; Chan, I.; Yap, P.; Nurjono, M.; Vrijhoef, H.J.M.; Nicholas, S.O.; Wee, S.L. Mixed-method evaluation of CARITAS: A hospital-to-community model of integrated care for dementia. BMJ Open 2020, 10, e039017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Jafar, T.H.; Tan, N.C.; Allen, J.C.; Pradhan, S.S.; Goh, P.; Tavajoh, S.; Keng, F.M.; Chan, J. Management of hypertension and multiple risk factors to enhance cardiovascular health—A feasibility study in Singapore polyclinics. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2016, 16, 229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Jafar, T.H.; Tan, N.C.; Shirore, R.M.; Allen, J.C.; Finkelstein, E.A.; Hwang, S.W.; Koong, A.Y.L.; Moey, P.K.S.; Kang, G.C.Y.; Goh, C.W.T. Integration of a multicomponent intervention for hypertension into primary healthcare services in Singapore—A cluster randomized controlled trial. PLoS Med. 2022, 19, e1004026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Jiang, Y.; Shorey, S.; Nguyen, H.D.; Wu, V.X.; Lee, C.Y.; Yang, L.F.; Koh, K.W.L.; Wang, W. The development and pilot study of a nurse-led HOMe-based HEart failure self-Management Programme (the HOM-HEMP) for patients with chronic heart failure, following Medical Research Council guidelines. Eur. J. Cardiovasc. Nurs. 2020, 19, 212–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Lai, S.H.; Tsoi, T.; Tang, C.T.; Hui, R.J.Y.; Tan, K.K.; Yeo, Y.W.S.; Kua, E.H. An integrated, collaborative healthcare model for the early diagnosis and management of dementia: Preliminary audit results from the first transdisciplinary service integrating family medicine and geriatric psychiatry services to the heart of patients’ homes. BMC Psychiatry 2019, 19, 61. [Google Scholar]
  38. Lee, K.H.; Low, L.L.; Allen, J.; Barbier, S.; Ng, L.B.; Ng, M.J.M.; Tay, W.Y.; Tan, S.Y. Transitional care for the highest risk patients: Findings of a randomised control study. Int. J. Integr. Care 2015, 15, e039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Lim, A.Y.; Tan, C.S.; Low, B.P.; Lau, T.C.; Tan, T.L.; Goh, L.G.; Teng, G.G. Integrating rheumatology care in the community: Can shared care work? Int. J. Integr. Care 2015, 15, e031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Lim, Y.W.; Ling, J.; Lim, Z.; Chia, A. Family Medicine Clinic: A case study of a hospital-family medicine practice redesign to improve chronic disease care in the community in Singapore. Fam. Pract. 2018, 35, 612–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Low, L.L.; Tan, S.Y.; Ng, M.J.M.; Tay, W.Y.; Ng, L.B.; Balasubramaniam, K.; Towle, R.M.; Lee, K.H. Applying the Integrated Practice Unit Concept to a Modified Virtual Ward Model of Care for Patients at Highest Risk of Readmission: A Randomized Controlled Trial. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0168757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Low, L.L.; Vasanwala, F.F.; Ng, L.B.; Chen, C.; Lee, K.H.; Tan, S.Y. Effectiveness of a transitional home care program in reducing acute hospital utilization: A quasi-experimental study. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2015, 15, 100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Mustapha, N.Z.B.; Yi, X.; Mohd Razali, M.R.B.; Najumudin, N.B.; Barman, H.B. The role of patient navigators: Case studies in Singapore. Proc. Singap. Healthc. 2016, 25, 188–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Nurjono, M.; Shrestha, P.; Ang, I.Y.H.; Shiraz, F.; Yoong, J.S.Y.; Toh, S.A.E.S.; Vrijhoef, H.J.M. Implementation fidelity of a strategy to integrate service delivery: Learnings from a transitional care program for individuals with complex needs in Singapore. BMC Health Serv. Res. Lond. 2019, 19, 177. Available online: http://search.proquest.com/docview/2193675645/abstract/42614205B8954A13PQ/1 (accessed on 29 February 2020). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Prabhakaran, L.; Yap, C.W. Effectiveness of the eCARE programme: A short message service for asthma monitoring. BMJ Health Care Inform. 2019, 26, e100007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Verma, S.; Poon, L.Y.; Lee, H.; Rao, S.; Chong, S.A. Evolution of early psychosis intervention services in Singapore. East Asian Arch. Psychiatry 2012, 22, 114–117. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  47. Wee, S.L.; Loke, C.K.; Liang, C.; Ganesan, G.; Wong, L.M.; Cheah, J. Effectiveness of a national transitional care program in reducing acute care use. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2014, 62, 747–753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Wee, S.L.; Vrijhoef, H.J.M. A conceptual framework for evaluating the conceptualization, implementation and performance of transitional care programmes. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2015, 21, 221–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Wong, H.H.; Yong, Y.H.; Shahwan, S.; Cetty, L.; Vaingankar, J.; Hon, C.; Lee, H.; Loh, C.; Abdin, E.; Subramaniam, M. Case management in early psychosis intervention programme: Perspectives of clients and caregivers. Early Interv. Psychiatry 2019, 13, 598–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Wong, H.H.; Shahwan, S.; Verma, S.; Subramaniam, M. Case management in early psychosis intervention programme: Perspectives of case managers. Psychosis 2019, 11, 116–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Wong, N.; Chua, S.J.T.; Gao, F.; Sim, S.T.R.; Matchar, D.; Wong, S.L.A.; Yeo, K.K.; Tan, W.C.J.; Chin, C.T. The effect of a nurse-led telephone-based care coordination program on the follow-up and control of cardiovascular risk factors in patients with coronary artery disease. Int. J. Qual. Health Care 2016, 28, 758–763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Wu, C.X.; Tan, W.S.; See, R.C.K.; Yu, W.; Kwek, L.S.L.; Toh, M.P.H.S.; Chee, T.G.; Chua, G.S.W. A matched-group study protocol to evaluate the implementation of an Integrated Care Pathway programme for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Singapore. BMJ Open 2015, 5, e005655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Wu, C.X.; Hwang, C.H.; Tan, W.S.; Tai, K.P.; Kwek, L.S.L.; Chee, T.G.; Choo, Y.M.; Phng, F.W.L.; Chua, G.S.W. Effectiveness of a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease integrated care pathway in a regional health system: A propensity score matched cohort study. BMJ Open 2018, 8, e019425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Yeo, S.Q.; Harris, M.; Majeed, F.A. Integrated care for diabetes-a Singapore approach. Int. J. Integr. Care 2012, 12, e8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Xu, Y.; Koh, X.H.; Chua, Y.T.S.; Tan, C.G.I.; Aloweni, F.A.B.; Yap, B.E.J.; Oh, H.C.; Teo, S.H.S.; Lim, S.F. The impact of community nursing program on healthcare utilization: A program evaluation. Geriatr. Nurs. 2022, 46, 69–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. 2020 Ep 5: Patient-Centred CPGs by Singapore Medical Journal Podcast. Anchor. Available online: https://anchor.fm/smj-podcast/embed/episodes/2020-Ep-5-Patient-centred-CPGs-eoimor (accessed on 3 April 2023).
  57. Lai, Y.F.; Lum, A.Y.W.; Ho, E.T.L.; Lim, Y.W. Patient-provider disconnect: A qualitative exploration of understanding and perceptions to care integration. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0187372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Foo, K.M.; Sundram, M.; Legido-Quigley, H. Facilitators and barriers of managing patients with multiple chronic conditions in the community: A qualitative study. BMC Public Health 2020, 20, 273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Williams, M.D.; Asiedu, G.B.; Finnie, D.; Neely, C.; Egginton, J.; Finney Rutten, L.J.; Jacobson, R.M. Sustainable care coordination: A qualitative study of primary care provider, administrator, and insurer perspectives. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2019, 19, 92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Oikonomou, E.; Chatburn, E.; Higham, H.; Murray, J.; Lawton, R.; Vincent, C. Developing a measure to assess the quality of care transitions for older people. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2019, 19, 505. Available online: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6642522/ (accessed on 10 March 2020). [CrossRef]
  61. Vargas, I.; Eguiguren, P.; Mogollón-Pérez, A.S.; Samico, I.; Bertolotto, F.; López-Vázquez, J.; Vázquez, M.L. Can care coordination across levels be improved through the implementation of participatory action research interventions? Outcomes and conditions for sustaining changes in five Latin American countries. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2020, 20, 941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Foo, C.D.; Surendran, S.; Tam, C.H.; Ho, E.; Matchar, D.B.; Car, J.; Koh, G.C.H. Perceived facilitators and barriers to chronic disease management in primary care networks of Singapore: A qualitative study. BMJ Open 2021, 11, e046010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Petchel, S.; Gelmon, S.; Goldberg, B. The Organizational Risks of Cross-Sector Partnerships: A Comparison of Health and Human Services Perspectives. Health Aff. 2020, 39, 574–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Carini, E.; Gabutti, I.; Frisicale, E.M.; Di Pilla, A.; Pezzullo, A.M.; de Waure, C.; Cicchetti, A.; Boccia, S.; Specchia, M.L. Assessing hospital performance indicators. What dimensions? Evidence from an umbrella review. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2020, 20, 1038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. D’Ascanio, I.; Ciaralli, F.; Perria, C.; Spunticchia, G.; Vicario, G.; Zega, M.; Borgia, P.; D’Urso, A.; Guasticchi, G.; Degrassi, F. Defining a set of indicators for the evaluation of healthcare needs and of the performance of local health authorities. Ig. E Sanita Pubblica 2010, 66, 215–228. [Google Scholar]
  66. Foo, C.D.; Tan, Y.L.; Shrestha, P.; Eh, K.X.; Ang, I.Y.H.; Nurjono, M.; Toh, S.A.; Shiraz, F. Exploring the dimensions of patient experience for community-based care programmes in a multi-ethnic Asian context. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0242610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Kuipers, S.J.; Nieboer, A.P.; Cramm, J.M. The Need for Co-Creation of Care with Multi-Morbidity Patients—A Longitudinal Perspective. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 3201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Cullati, S.; Bochatay, N.; Maître, F.; Laroche, T.; Muller-Juge, V.; Blondon, K.S.; Perron, N.J.; Bajwa, N.M.; Vu, N.V.; Kim, S. When Team Conflicts Threaten Quality of Care: A Study of Health Care Professionals’ Experiences and Perceptions. Mayo Clin. Proc. Innov. Qual. Outcomes 2019, 3, 43–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Surendran, S.; Foo, C.D.; Matchar, D.B.; Ansah, J.P.; Car, J.; Koh, G.C.H. Developing integration among stakeholders in the primary care networks of Singapore: A qualitative study. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2022, 22, 782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Impact of Interpersonal Conflict in Health Care Setting on Patient Care; the Role of Nursing Leadership Style on Resolving the Conflict. Nurs. Care Open Access J. 2017, 2, 44–46. Available online: https://medcraveonline.com/NCOAJ/NCOAJ-02-00031.pdf (accessed on 3 April 2023).
  71. Lutz, B.J.; Reimold, A.E.; Coleman, S.W.; Guzik, A.K.; Russell, L.P.; Radman, M.D.; Johnson, A.M.; Duncan, P.W.; Bushnell, C.D.; Rosamond, W.D. Implementation of a Transitional Care Model for Stroke: Perspectives from Frontline Clinicians, Administrators, and COMPASS-TC Implementation Staff. Gerontologist 2020, 60, 1071–1084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Fakha, A.; Leithaus, M.; de Boer, B.; van Achterberg, T.; Hamers, J.P.; Verbeek, H. Implementing Four Transitional Care Interventions for Older Adults: A Retrospective Collective Case Study. Gerontologist 2023, 63, 451–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Kripalani, S.; LeFevre, F.; Phillips, C.O.; Williams, M.V.; Basaviah, P.; Baker, D.W. Deficits in communication and information transfer between hospital-based and primary care physicians: Implications for patient safety and continuity of care. JAMA 2007, 297, 831–841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. MOH May Make it Mandatory for Private Sector to Join National Health Database. Available online: https://www.ihis.com.sg/Latest_News/News_Article/Pages/MOH_may_make_it_mandatory_for_private_sector_to_join_national_health_database.aspx (accessed on 31 March 2023).
  75. MOH|Primary Care Survey 2014 Report. Available online: https://www.moh.gov.sg/resources-statistics/reports/primary-care-survey-2014-report (accessed on 28 March 2020).
  76. Quinn, M.; Forman, J.; Harrod, M.; Winter, S.; Fowler, K.E.; Krein, S.L.; Gupta, A.; Saint, S.; Singh, H.; Chopra, V. Electronic Health Records, Communication, and Data Sharing: Cchallenges and Opportunities for improving the diagnostic process. Diagnosis 2019, 6, 241–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Surendran, S.; Foo, C.D.; Tam, C.H.; Ho, E.Q.Y.; Matchar, D.B.; Car, J.; Koh, G.C.H. The Missed Opportunity of Patient-Centered Medical Homes to Thrive in an Asian Context. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Barbosa, W.; Zhou, K.; Waddell, E.; Myers, T.; Dorsey, E.R. Improving Access to Care: Telemedicine Across Medical Domains. Annu. Rev. Public Health 2021, 42, 463–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Snoswell, C.L.; Taylor, M.L.; Comans, T.A.; Smith, A.C.; Gray, L.C.; Caffery, L.J. Determining if Telehealth Can Reduce Health System Costs: Scoping Review. J. Med. Internet Res. 2020, 22, e17298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Haun, J.N.; Patel, N.R.; French, D.D.; Campbell, R.R.; Bradham, D.D.; Lapcevic, W.A. Association between health literacy and medical care costs in an integrated healthcare system: A regional population based study. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2015, 15, 249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Harrison, A.; Verhoef, M. Understanding coordination of care from the consumer’s perspective in a regional health system. Health Serv. Res. 2002, 37, 1031–1054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. vom Eigen, K.A.; Walker, J.D.; Edgman-Levitan, S.; Cleary, P.D.; Delbanco, T.L. Carepartner experiences with hospital care. Med. Care 1999, 37, 33–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Oh, E.G.; Lee, H.J.; Yang, Y.L.; Kim, Y.M. Effectiveness of Discharge Education with the Teach-Back Method on 30-Day Readmission: A Systematic Review. J. Patient Saf. 2021, 17, 305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Press, M.J.; Michelow, M.D.; MacPhail, L.H. Care coordination in accountable care organizations: Moving beyond structure and incentives. Am. J. Manag. Care 2012, 18, 778–780. [Google Scholar]
  85. Cropley, S.; Sandrs, E.D. Care coordination and the essential role of the nurse. Creat Nurs. 2013, 19, 189–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Apaydin, E.A.; Rose, D.E.; McClean, M.R.; Yano, E.M.; Shekelle, P.G.; Nelson, K.M.; Stockdale, S.E. Association between care coordination tasks with non-VA community care and VA PCP burnout: An analysis of a national, cross-sectional survey. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2021, 21, 809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. White, E.M.; Aiken, L.H.; McHugh, M.D. Registered Nurse Burnout, Job Dissatisfaction, and Missed Care in Nursing Homes. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2019, 67, 2065–2071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Limbani, F.; Thorogood, M.; Gómez-Olivé, F.X.; Kabudula, C.; Goudge, J. Task shifting to improve the provision of integrated chronic care: Realist evaluation of a lay health worker intervention in rural South Africa. BMJ Glob. Health 2019, 4, e001084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Hudon, C.; Aubrey-Bassler, K.; Chouinard, M.C.; Doucet, S.; Dubois, M.F.; Karam, M.; Luke, A.; Moullec, G.; Pluye, P.; Tzenov, A. Better understanding care transitions of adults with complex health and social care needs: A study protocol. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2022, 22, 206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Austin, N.; Rudoler, D.; Allin, S.; Dolovich, L.; Glazier, R.H.; Grudniewicz, A.; Martin, E.; Sirois, C.; Strumpf, E. Team-based primary care reforms and older adults: A descriptive assessment of sociodemographic trends and prescribing endpoints in two Canadian provinces. BMC Prim. Care 2023, 24, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Allin, S.; Martin, E.; Rudoler, D.; Church Carson, M.; Grudniewicz, A.; Jopling, S.; Strumpf, E. Comparing public policies impacting prescribing and medication management in primary care in two Canadian provinces. Health Policy 2021, 125, 1121–1130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Wieczorek, E.; Kocot, E.; Evers, S.; Sowada, C.; Pavlova, M. Do financial aspects affect care transitions in long-term care systems? A systematic review. Arch. Public Health 2022, 80, 90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Norton, E. Long-term Care and Pay-for-Performance Programs. Asian Development Bank. 2017. Available online: https://www.adb.org/publications/long-term-care-and-pay-performance-programs (accessed on 2 April 2023).
  94. Van Herck, P.; De Smedt, D.; Annemans, L.; Remmen, R.; Rosenthal, M.B.; Sermeus, W. Systematic review: Effects, design choices, and context of pay-for-performance in health care. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2010, 10, 247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Brown, R.S.; Peikes, D.; Peterson, G.; Schore, J.; Razafindrakoto, C.M. Six Features of Medicare Coordinated Care Demonstration Programs That Cut Hospital Admissions of High-Risk Patients. Health Aff. 2012, 31, 1156–1166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. PRISMA flow chart illustrating search strategy used to identify eligible studies for inclusion.
Figure 1. PRISMA flow chart illustrating search strategy used to identify eligible studies for inclusion.
Healthcare 11 01546 g001
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Foo, C.D.; Yan, J.Y.; Chan, A.S.L.; Yap, J.C.H. Identifying Key Themes of Care Coordination for Patients with Chronic Conditions in Singapore: A Scoping Review. Healthcare 2023, 11, 1546. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11111546

AMA Style

Foo CD, Yan JY, Chan ASL, Yap JCH. Identifying Key Themes of Care Coordination for Patients with Chronic Conditions in Singapore: A Scoping Review. Healthcare. 2023; 11(11):1546. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11111546

Chicago/Turabian Style

Foo, Chuan De, Jia Yin Yan, Audrey Swee Ling Chan, and Jason C H Yap. 2023. "Identifying Key Themes of Care Coordination for Patients with Chronic Conditions in Singapore: A Scoping Review" Healthcare 11, no. 11: 1546. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11111546

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop