[Development of a conceptual model for interpretation of monitoring indicators of childhood obesity prevention from the Italian National Prevention Plan]. / Sviluppo di un modello concettuale di riferimento per l'interpretazione degli indicatori di prevenzione dell'obesità infantile e nell'adolescenza nel Piano nazionale della prevenzione.

BACKGROUND: the Italian National Prevention Plan (PNP) posed the standard to be achieved by Regions for the prevention of obesity in childhood and adolescence. The PNP also set up a monitoring system to assess the impact of implemented policies. OBJECTIVES: to develop a conceptual model to facilitate interpretation of variation in outcome indicators. METHODS: after a systematic review, the DPSEEA («Driving forces¼, «Pressures¼, «State¼, «Exposure¼, «Effect¼, «Actions¼) was identified as the more appropriate framework to assess the results of preventive policies. Factors for each component of the framework were identified and indicators that allow measuring the changing of each of these factors were defined. RESULTS: the included «driving forces¼ were related to the profit-led food industry, to the nutrition environment at school, and to household-level factors. Among the «pressures¼, parenting behaviours, food provided by school canteens, sociocultural factors, social context, physical activity (PA), opportunities at school or after-school were included. In the State, the high consumption of processed food, the large quantities of high-calorie food easy available, the consumption of carbonated and sugar-sweetened beverages, the reduced social function of mealtimes in families, the early cessation of breastfeeding, the reduction of outdoors activity, active transportation, and PA at school for children were identified. The «exposure¼ factors were the reduced opportunities of doing PA and the over-consumption of calories that influence the «effect¼, described as the prevalence of children and adolescents affected by obesity. CONCLUSIONS: through the DPSEEA, a conceptual model was set up; it allows to place in the causal chain the «actions¼ and the mechanisms through which these actions should impact on the «exposure¼ (PA and over-consumption of calories), making the rationale of process and impact indicators explicit.

[Development of a conceptual model for interpretation of monitoring indicators of cancer screenings from the Italian National Prevention Plan]. / Sviluppo di un modello concettuale di riferimento per l'interpretazione degli indicatori di monitoraggio degli screening oncologici nel Piano nazionale della prevenzione.

OBJECTIVES: the Italian National Prevention Plan (PNP) posed the standard to be achieved by Italian Regions for the implementation of cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening: to invite all of the target populations and to increase the screening uptake up to 50%, 60%, and 50%, respectively, the standard defined by the Essential Levels of Care (LEA). Moreover, for cervical cancer screening, it requires the implementation of HPV-DNA test and, for breast cancer screening, the PNP demands for the definition of diagnostic and follow up pathways for high familial risk women. The PNP also set up a monitoring system to assess the impact of implemented policies. A conceptual model has been defined to facilitate interpretation of variation in outcome indicators. DESIGN: after a systematic review, the DPSEEA (Driving forces, Pressure, State, Exposure, Effect, Actions) was identified as the more appropriate framework to assess the results of preventive policies. Factors for each component of the model were identified and indicators that allow measuring the changing of each of these factors were defined. RESULTS: among the "driving forces", the trust in the health care system and the social capital were included. The presence of opportunistic screening, the competing private clinical activity, the commitment of General Practitioners and "medical" leaders, the attitude to cooperation and to patients' involvement, and the level of agreement between the positions of scientific societies and the recommendations implemented in organized screening programmes were included in the "pressures". In "state", the availability of technological and human resources, the level of management skills and of accessibility were identified. The "exposure" was defined as the coverage of active invitation of the target population and the uptake of screening tests. The "exposure" factors influence the "effect", described as the impact on anticipation of cancer diagnosis, on disease incidence (for cervical and colorectal cancer) and prognosis. The changing in screening programs performance modifies the impact of invitation coverage and test uptake ("exposure"). CONCLUSIONS: through the DPSEEA framework, we set up a logical conceptual model, which includes implementable actions and the mechanisms through which these actions should impact on the "exposure" (invitation coverage and screening uptake) and on the screening performance (quality).

Health and health service usage outcomes of case management for patients with long-term conditions: a review of reviews.

OBJECTIVE: There have been plenty of articles published in recent decades on patient care in the form of case management (CM), but conclusions regarding health outcomes and costs have often been discordant. The objective of this study was to examine previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses with a view to assessing and pooling the overwhelming amount of data available on CM-based health outcomes and resource usage. METHODS: We conducted a review of reviews of secondary studies (meta-analyses and systematic reviews) addressing the effectiveness of CM compared with usual care (or other organizational models) in adult (18+) with long-term conditions. PubMed, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) were searched from 2000 to the end of December 2017. The outcomes of interest are related to process of care, health measures, and resource usage. RESULTS: Twenty-two articles were ultimately considered: 4 meta-analyses and 18 systematic reviews. There is strong evidence of CM increasing adherence to treatment guidelines and improving patient satisfaction, but none of the secondary studies considered demonstrated any effect on patient survival. Based on the available literature, there is contrasting evidence regarding all the other health outcomes, such as quality of life (QOL), clinical outcomes, and functional status. Good-quality secondary studies consistently found nothing to indicate that CM prompts any reduction in the use of hospital resources. CONCLUSION: The source of variability in the literature on the consistency of the evidence for most outcomes is unclear. It may stem from the heterogeneity of CM programs in terms of what their intervention entails, the populations targeted, and the tools used to measure the results. That said, there was consistently strong evidence of CM being associated with a greater adherence to treatment guidelines and higher patient satisfaction, but not with a longer survival or better use of hospital resources.

A systematic review on the effectiveness of group versus single-handed practice.

BACKGROUND: Since the 1970s, many countries have employed the use of the General practitioner group practice, but there is contrasting evidence about its effectiveness. A systematic review was performed to assess whether group practice has a more positive impact compared with the single-handed practice on different aspects of health care. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted by querying electronic databases and reviewing articles published between 1990 and 2012. A quality assessment was performed. The effect of group practice was evaluated by collecting all items analysed by the articles into four main categories: (1) studies of quality (measured in terms of clinical processes) and productivity (measured in terms of throughput), named "Clinical process measures and throughput"; (2) studies exploring physician's opinion--"Doctor's perspective"; (3) studies looking into the use of innovation, information and communication technology (ICT) and quality assurance--"Innovation, ICT and quality assurance"; (4) studies focused on patient's opinion--"Patient's perspective". The results were synthesized according to three levels of scientific evidence. RESULTS: A total of 26 studies were selected. The most studied category was Clinical process measures and throughput (58%). A positive impact of group medicine on "Clinical process measures and throughput", "Doctor's perspective", "Innovation, ICT and quality assurance" was found. There was contrasting evidence considering the "Patient's perspective". CONCLUSIONS: Group practice might be a successful organizational requirement to improve the quality of clinical practice in Primary Health Care. Further comparative studies are needed to investigate the impact of organizational and professional determinants such as physician's economic incentives, mode of payment, size of the groups and multispecialty on the effectiveness of medical primary care.