Abstract:Introduction: During the last decade, individual care plans (ICPs) have been introduced in healthcare in many countries. ICPs are used in different settings and for different purposes. In chronic illness care, ICPs are implemented to improve patient-centeredness, i.e. to ensure that decision-making about treatment and care and the actual delivery of care is based on patients’ self-assessed needs and personal goals, and is tailored to their preferences and competencies. In addition, ICPs are implemented to support patients’ self-management. In terms of the Chronic Care Model (Wagner et al., 1998), these two purposes refer to interventions in different components: delivery system design and self-management support. With this paper we aim to provide more insight in the use of ICPs in chronic illness (primary) care in the Netherlands and in other European countries: to what extent and for which purpose have they been implemented, for which target populations and which outcomes have been achieved?Methods: Data were collected in three ways: 1. by a patient survey among a nationwide sample of 1602 patients with a (medically diagnosed) chronic disease registered in 82 general practices in the Netherlands, 2. by surveys among patients with COPD, diabetes type 2 or cardiovascular disease/high risk and their primary care providers participating in pretest-posttest evaluation studies of several ICP-related interventions in the Netherlands, and 3. by a survey among country experts of 31 European countries and subsequent site visits to regional integrated care programs or practices targeting patients with multi-morbidity in several European countries as part of the ICARE4EU-project (www.icare4eu.org).Results: Overall, the use of ICPs in Dutch chronic illness primary care in 2011 was low (9%), with slightly higher percentages of ICP-use found among patients with diabetes or COPD (13%), both diseases for which disease management programs have been implemented in the Netherlands. A low implementation level was also reported in studies from Norway and the UK. More recently, Dutch care groups who facilitated training and support for primary care providers to start working with ICPs succeeded in increasing the use of ICPs in their disease management programs for COPD, diabetes and cardiovascular disease/high risk (up to 36% of the participating patients). Primary care physicians and nurses reported various reasons to decide whether or not to develop an ICP with a specific patient. Some reported to use an ICP with patients with very complex health conditions, whereas others used ICPs with patients whom they perceived to be better prepared for self-management. These different reasons suggest that primary care providers use ICPs for different purposes. Several evaluation studies show that patients with whom an ICP had been developed experienced better chronic illness care (as assessed by the PACIC-questionnaire) than patients without an ICP. However, improvements in self-management were usually not found. One study showed no difference in outcomes between diabetes patients with a low or high (pretest) activation level (PAM).In 24 of the 31 countries included in the ICARE4EU-survey, integrated care programs were found in which the use of ICPs was reported. In the POTKU-project, which aimed to improve patient-centeredness of chronic illness primary care in Middle Finland, patients with an ICP reported to receive better chronic illness care (PACIC-scores) than patients without an ICP. But also in this project the implementation of ICPs lagged behind expectations, which -like in the Dutch evaluation studies- was attributed to poor integration of the ICP with the health information system, lack of time and patient characteristics.Highlights: - The implementation of ICPs in chronic illness care in European countries is still low, which seems partly due to impeding factors in the organization of the care (e.g. health information systems, allocation of staff time).- Healthcare providers seem to use ICPs for different purposes, which is reflected in their selection of patients with whom they develop an ICP.- ICPs have the potential to improve patient-centeredness: patients with an ICP report to receive care that is more guided by their personal goals and preferences than patients without an ICP.- There is currently insufficient evidence that ICPs also improve chronically ill patients’ self-management.Conclusion: There is a gap between policy aspirations and clinical practice of the use of ICPs in chronic illness care in the Netherlands and in other European countries. Factors in the organization of primary care (e.g. time investment, supportive environments) need to be addressed to improve implementation. ICPs may improve patient-centeredness rather than patients’ self-management in chronic illness care.

Management of Personalised Guideline-Driven Care Plans Addressing the Needs of Multi-Morbidity Via Clinical Decision Support Services

A Collaborative Platform for Management of Chronic Diseases Via Guideline-Driven Individualized Care Plans

Global Approaches to Integrated Care: Best Practices and Ongoing Innovation.

Effectiveness of Collaborative Care for Depression and HbA1c in Patients with Depression and Diabetes: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Integrated Care for Multimorbidity Population in Asian Countries: A Scoping Review

Facilitating Coordinated Care for Multi-morbidity Patients Through Integrated Preventive Clinical Decision Support (C3-Cloud)

Transforming evidence-based clinical guidelines into implementable clinical decision support services: the CAREPATH study for multimorbidity management

Digitalizing Clinical Guidelines: Experiences in the Development of Clinical Decision Support Algorithms for Management of Childhood Illness in Resource-Constrained Settings

The inflammatory bowel disease care manager: Italian state of the art

A concept for integrated care pathways for atopic dermatitis-A GA2 LEN ADCARE initiative

Individual care plans in chronic illness care: aims, use and outcomes

The management of multi-morbidity in elderly patients: Ready yet for precision medicine in intensive care?

Harmonizing allergy care-integrated care pathways and multidisciplinary approaches

IDE 4 ICDS: A human-centric and model-driven proposal to improve the digitization of clinical practice guideline

Predictive, preventive and personalised approach as a conceptual and technological innovation in primary and secondary care of inflammatory bowel disease benefiting affected individuals and populations

Comparative case studies in integrated care implementation from across the globe: a quest for action

The development of inherited cardiac conditions services: current position and future perspectives

Electronic Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (eIMCI): a randomized controlled trial to evaluate an electronic clinical decision-making support system for management of sick children in primary health care facilities in South Africa

STIMULATE-ICP-Delphi (Symptoms, Trajectory, Inequalities and Management: Understanding Long-COVID to Address and Transform Existing Integrated Care Pathways Delphi): Study protocol

An Integrated Care Platform System (C3-Cloud) for Care Planning, Decision Support, and Empowerment of Patients With Multimorbidity: Protocol for a Technology Trial

On the Interdisciplinary Treatment and Management of Patients with Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases. A Study on Patients' Personal Experiences and Perspectives