Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Oct 14;22(1):1247.
doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08610-1.

The effectiveness of case management for cancer patients: an umbrella review

Nina Wang  1   2 , Jia Chen  3 , Wenjun Chen  4   5 , Zhengkun Shi  1 , Huaping Yang  1 , Peng Liu  6 , Xiao Wei  7 , Xiangling Dong  6 , Chen Wang  3 , Ling Mao  8 , Xianhong Li  3
Affiliations

The effectiveness of case management for cancer patients: an umbrella review

Nina Wang et al. BMC Health Serv Res. .

Abstract

Background: Case management (CM) is widely utilized to improve health outcomes of cancer patients, enhance their experience of health care, and reduce the cost of care. While numbers of systematic reviews are available on the effectiveness of CM for cancer patients, they often arrive at discordant conclusions that may confuse or mislead the future case management development for cancer patients and relevant policy making. We aimed to summarize the existing systematic reviews on the effectiveness of CM in health-related outcomes and health care utilization outcomes for cancer patient care, and highlight the consistent and contradictory findings.

Methods: An umbrella review was conducted followed the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Umbrella Review methodology. We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus for reviews published up to July 8th, 2022. Quality of each review was appraised with the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses. A narrative synthesis was performed, the corrected covered area was calculated as a measure of overlap for the primary studies in each review. The results were reported followed the Preferred reporting items for overviews of systematic reviews checklist.

Results: Eight systematic reviews were included. Average quality of the reviews was high. Overall, primary studies had a slight overlap across the eight reviews (corrected covered area = 4.5%). No universal tools were used to measure the effect of CM on each outcome. Summarized results revealed that CM were more likely to improve symptom management, cognitive function, hospital (re)admission, treatment received compliance, and provision of timely treatment for cancer patients. Overall equivocal effect was reported on cancer patients' quality of life, self-efficacy, survivor status, and satisfaction. Rare significant effect was reported on cost and length of stay.

Conclusions: CM showed mixed effects in cancer patient care. Future research should use standard guidelines to clearly describe details of CM intervention and its implementation. More primary studies are needed using high-quality well-powered designs to provide solid evidence on the effectiveness of CM. Case managers should consider applying validated and reliable tools to evaluate effect of CM in multifaced outcomes of cancer patient care.

Keywords: Cancer patients; Case management; Health care; Outcome assessment; Quality of life; Umbrella review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart for umbrella review. *Index publication is the first occurrence of a primary publication in the included reviews. **Additional eligible primary studies that had not been initially indentified by the search of the relevant reviews or obtained by updating the search of the included reviews
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Features, components, and delivery strategies of case management for cancer patient care
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Ferlay J, Ervik M, Lam F, Colombet M, Mery L, Piñeros M, et al. Global cancer observatory: Cancer today: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2020. https://gco.iarc.fr/today.
    1. Ferlay J, Ervik M, Lam F, Colombet M, Mery L, Piñeros M, et al. Global Cancer observatory: Cancer tomorrow: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2020. https://gco.iarc.fr/tomorrow.
    1. Quaresma M, Coleman MP, Rachet B. 40-year trends in an index of survival for all cancers combined and survival adjusted for age and sex for each cancer in England and Wales, 1971-2011: a population-based study. Lancet. 2015;385:1206–1218. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61396-9. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Yabroff KR, Dowling EC, Guy GP, Banegas MP, Davidoff A, Han X, et al. Financial hardship associated with cancer in the United States: findings from a population-based sample of adult cancer survivors. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:259–267. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.62.0468. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Yan AF, Stevens P, Holt C, Walker A, Ng A, McManus P, et al. Culture, identity, strength and spirituality: a qualitative study to understand experiences of African American women breast cancer survivors and recommendations for intervention development. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2019;28:e13013. doi: 10.1111/ecc.13013. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types