A methodology for identifying high-need, high-cost patient personas for international comparisons.

OBJECTIVE: To establish a methodological approach to compare two high-need, high-cost (HNHC) patient personas internationally. DATA SOURCES: Linked individual-level administrative data from the inpatient and outpatient sectors compiled by the International Collaborative on Costs, Outcomes, and Needs in Care (ICCONIC) across 11 countries: Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United States. STUDY DESIGN: We outline a methodological approach to identify HNHC patient types for international comparisons that reflect complex, priority populations defined by the National Academy of Medicine. We define two patient profiles using accessible patient-level datasets linked across different domains of care-hospital care, primary care, outpatient specialty care, post-acute rehabilitative care, long-term care, home-health care, and outpatient drugs. The personas include a frail older adult with a hip fracture with subsequent hip replacement and an older person with complex multimorbidity, including heart failure and diabetes. We demonstrate their comparability by examining the characteristics and clinical diagnoses captured across countries. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Data collected by ICCONIC partners. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Across 11 countries, the identification of HNHC patient personas was feasible to examine variations in healthcare utilization, spending, and patient outcomes. The ability of countries to examine linked, individual-level data varied, with the Netherlands, Canada, and Germany able to comprehensively examine care across all seven domains, whereas other countries such as England, Switzerland, and New Zealand were more limited. All countries were able to identify a hip fracture persona and a heart failure persona. Patient characteristics were reassuringly similar across countries. CONCLUSION: Although there are cross-country differences in the availability and structure of data sources, countries had the ability to effectively identify comparable HNHC personas for international study. This work serves as the methodological paper for six accompanying papers examining differences in spending, utilization, and outcomes for these personas across countries.

Within and across country variations in treatment of patients with heart failure and diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To compare within-country variation of health care utilization and spending of patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) and diabetes across countries. DATA SOURCES: Patient-level linked data sources compiled by the International Collaborative on Costs, Outcomes, and Needs in Care across nine countries: Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, New Zealand, Spain, Switzerland, and the United States. DATA COLLECTION METHODS: Patients were identified in routine hospital data with a primary diagnosis of CHF and a secondary diagnosis of diabetes in 2015/2016. STUDY DESIGN: We calculated the care consumption of patients after a hospital admission over a year across the care pathway-ranging from primary care to home health nursing care. To compare the distribution of care consumption in each country, we use Gini coefficients, Lorenz curves, and female-male ratios for eight utilization and spending measures. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In all countries, rehabilitation and home nursing care were highly concentrated in the top decile of patients, while the number of drug prescriptions were more uniformly distributed. On average, the Gini coefficient for drug consumption is about 0.30 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.27-0.36), while it is, 0.50 (0.45-0.56) for primary care visits, and more than 0.75 (0.81-0.92) for rehabilitation use and nurse visits at home (0.78; 0.62-0.9). Variations in spending were more pronounced than in utilization. Compared to men, women spend more days at initial hospital admission (+5%, 1.01-1.06), have a higher number of prescriptions (+7%, 1.05-1.09), and substantially more rehabilitation and home care (+20% to 35%, 0.79-1.6, 0.99-1.64), but have fewer visits to specialists (-10%; 0.84-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Distribution of health care consumption in different settings varies within countries, but there are also some common treatment patterns across all countries. Clinicians and policy makers need to look into these differences in care utilization by sex and care setting to determine whether they are justified or indicate suboptimal care.