Hospital-level Effects Contribute to Variations in Prostate Cancer Quality of Care.

A paucity of real-world data exists highlighting whether variations in prostate cancer quality of care occur at a hospital level, independent of differences in case mix. To overcome this knowledge gap, we benchmarked hospital-level quality (n = 1245 hospitals) across a broad multidisciplinary panel of previously reported disease-specific, expert-defined quality indicators (QIs), adjusting for differences in patient case mix by indirect standardization. A composite measure of prostate cancer quality-the prostate cancer quality score (PC-QS)-was derived, and associations between PC-QS and hospital volume, academic status, and location as well as patient all-cause mortality were determined. After adjusting for the case mix, of the total of 1245 hospitals evaluated, 2-37% were identified as those performing significantly below the national average for a given QI. Hospitals with a higher PC-QS displayed larger patient volumes, were more commonly academic affiliated, and had lower overall mortality. Collectively, our data-driven benchmarking analysis reveals that widespread hospital-level variations exist in prostate cancer quality of care after adjusting for differences in case mix, with the PC-QS serving as a novel, validated, quality benchmarking tool. PATIENT SUMMARY: Our statistical benchmarking method shows that the quality of prostate cancer care varies between hospitals, after accounting for differences in patient characteristics. The prostate cancer quality score is a novel, validated, quality benchmarking tool.

Causal Mediation Analysis for Standardized Mortality Ratios.

Indirectly standardized mortality ratios (SMR) are often used to compare patient outcomes between health care providers as indicators of quality of care. Observed differences in the outcomes raise the question of whether these could be causally attributable to earlier processes or outcomes in the pathway of care that the patients received. Such pathways can be naturally addressed in a causal mediation analysis framework. Adopting causal mediation models allows the total provider effect on outcome to be decomposed into direct and indirect (mediated) effects. This in turn enables quantification of the improvement in patient outcomes due to a hypothetical intervention on the mediator. We formulate the effect decomposition for the indirectly standardized SMR when comparing to a health care system-wide average performance, propose novel model-based and semiparametric estimators for the decomposition, study the properties of these through simulations, and demonstrate their use through application to Ontario kidney cancer data.

A cluster randomized-controlled trial of a classroom-based drama workshop program to improve mental health outcomes among immigrant and refugee youth in special classes.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this cluster randomized trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of a school-based theatre intervention program for immigrant and refugee youth in special classes for improving mental health and academic outcomes. The primary hypothesis was that students in the theatre intervention group would report a greater reduction in impairment from symptoms compared to students in the control and tutoring groups. METHODS: Special classrooms in five multiethnic high schools were randomly assigned to theater intervention (n = 10), tutoring (n = 10) or control status (n = 9), for a total of 477 participants. Students and teachers were non-blinded to group assignment. The primary outcome was impairment from emotional and behavioural symptoms assessed by the Impact Supplement of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) completed by the adolescents. The secondary outcomes were the SDQ global scores (teacher and youth reports), impairment assessed by teachers and school performance. The effect of the interventions was assessed through linear mixed effect models which incorporate the correlation between students in the same class, due to the nature of the randomization of the interventions by classroom. RESULTS: The theatre intervention was not associated with a greater reduction in self-reported impairment and symptoms in youth placed in special class because of learning, emotional and behavioural difficulties than a tutoring intervention or a non-active control group. The estimates of the different models show a non-significant decrease in both self-reported and impairment scores in the theatre intervention group for the overall group, but the impairment score decreased significantly for first generation adolescents while it increased for second generation adolescents. CONCLUSION: The difference between the population of immigrant and refugee youth newcomers studied previously and the sample of this trial may explain some of the differences in the observed impact of the theatre intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01426451.