Changes in healthcare utilisation for paediatric tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy in the Netherlands: a population-based study.

OBJECTIVES: Tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy in children are controversial subjects with large regional variation in surgical rates, partly explained by cultural differences and lack of high-quality evidence on indications for surgery. A quality of care cycle was executed on this topic in the Netherlands. The objective of this study was to estimate changes in healthcare utilisation for paediatric tonsil surgery in the Netherlands. METHODS: Population-based data on tonsillectomies and adenoidectomies in children up to age 10 were retrieved retrospectively from Dutch administrative databases between 2005 and 2018. A change point analysis was performed to detect the most pivotal change point in surgical rates. We performed univariate analyses to compare surgical patients' characteristics before and after the pivotalpoint . Impact on healthcare budget and societal costs were estimated using current prices and data from cost-effectiveness analyses. RESULTS: The annual number of adenotonsillectomies reduced by 10 952 procedures (-39%; from 129 per 10 000 children to 87 per 10 000 children) between 2005 and 2018, and the number of adenoidectomies by 14 757 procedures (-49%; from 138 per 10 000 children to 78 per 10 000 children). The most pivotal change point was observed around 2012, accompanied by small changes in patient selection for surgery before and after 2012. An estimated €5.3 million per year was saved on the healthcare budget and €10.4 million per year on societal costs. CONCLUSION: The quality of care cycle resulted in fewer operations, with a concomitant reduction of costs. We suggest that part of these savings be invested in new research to maintain the quality of care cycle.

Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of microcytic anemias due to genetic disorders of iron metabolism or heme synthesis.

During recent years, our understanding of the pathogenesis of inherited microcytic anemias has gained from the identification of several genes and proteins involved in systemic and cellular iron metabolism and heme syntheses. Numerous case reports illustrate that the implementation of these novel molecular discoveries in clinical practice has increased our understanding of the presentation, diagnosis, and management of these diseases. Integration of these insights into daily clinical practice will reduce delays in establishing a proper diagnosis, invasive and/or costly diagnostic tests, and unnecessary or even detrimental treatments. To assist the clinician, we developed evidence-based multidisciplinary guidelines on the management of rare microcytic anemias due to genetic disorders of iron metabolism and heme synthesis. These genetic disorders may present at all ages, and therefore these guidelines are relevant for pediatricians as well as clinicians who treat adults. This article summarizes these clinical practice guidelines and includes background on pathogenesis, conclusions, and recommendations and a diagnostic flowchart to facilitate using these guidelines in the clinical setting.

[The importance of professional guidelines for Appropriate Care]. / Richtlijnen zijn onmisbaar voor passende zorg.

'Appropriate Care' forms the cornerstone of the Integral Care Agreement, composed and signed by several Dutch health care organizations and the government. Professional guidelines play an important role to fulfill the four principles of 'Appropriate Care'. Guidelines contribute to value based care by describing effective and efficient treatments. They contribute to personalized care, because they are the basis of (tools for) shared decision making. They contribute to the right care at the right place by cooperation or coordination across domains. And they contribute to health instead of sickness by recommendations about prevention and self care. Obviously this is accompanied by multiple challenges that will be addressed together with possible solutions, hopefully resulting in the fact that guidelines remain essential for 'Appropriate Care'.

[How often do medical guidelines refer to articles written in Dutch?] / Hoe vaak verwijzen richtlijnen naar artikelen in hetNTvG?

OBJECTIVE: For Dutch medical guidelines, Dutch research articles published in the NTvG (NederlandsTijdschriftvoorGeneeskunde) and other medical journals are not searched systematically and are only used sporadically. Using these publications in the process of guideline development can be useful for recommendations regarding the Dutch context of care. In this research, we have investigated how often and in which parts of Dutch guidelines articles published in NTvG are used. DESIGN: We specifically investigated how often articles published in NTvG are mentioned in Dutch medical guidelines published on www.richtlijnendatabase.nl, that were developed in 2019, 2020 and 2021. METHOD: In all parts of new or revised Dutch medical guidelines published in these years on www.richtlijnendatabase.nl, we searched for references of articles published in NTvG. RESULTS: The results show that in 3% of all Dutch medical guidelines a reference to an article published in NTvG is made. These references were made in the literature summaries (21% of the references), the reflections on the literature for the Dutch context of care (48% of the references), or in other areas such as the introduction (10% of the references) or appendices (21% of the references). CONCLUSION: Articles published in NTvG may be relevant for making recommendations in Dutch medical guidelines, as these publications usually reflect the Dutch care context, and may do more so than research published in international journals. The results of this research show that the number of Dutch guidelines where these articles are used is limited. Dutch research articles may be a source of information that is yet to be tapped into.

Priority setting for health technology assessment in The Netherlands: principles and practice.

The resources for health technology assessment fall short of that needed to evaluate all health technologies. Therefore, priorities have to be set. In The Netherlands, the Health Care Insurance Board tried to address this issue by developing a more explicit priority setting procedure for the Fund for Investigative Medicine, which is the most important health technology assessment programme in The Netherlands. The procedure provides one of the first examples of the application of theoretical principles for priority setting. The aim is to select those health technologies for assessment that are most relevant for policy-making. To determine the policy relevance of research proposals, different procedures for categorising, scoring, and weighting policy criteria were defined, and different classification strategies were explored. Our first experiences using the priority setting procedure are described by means of an example on low back pain. Subsequently, the procedure has been applied to research proposals submitted to the Fund for Investigative Medicine in 1998 to illustrate how decisions on the funding of health technology assessments can be guided. The results show a different rating of research proposals into one of three predefined categories of policy relevance, high, intermediate and low, implying that decisions about funding can heavily dependent on the selected procedure. Therefore, it seems to be important that the selected procedure reflects the viewpoint of the organisation wishing to set priorities. The different ratings of the research proposals using a more explicit procedure suggest that there may be scope for further development and application of the procedure.

Integrating evidence on patient preferences in healthcare policy decisions: protocol of the patient-VIP study.

BACKGROUND: Despite a strong movement towards active patient involvement in healthcare policy decisions, systematic and explicit consideration of evidence of this research on patient preferences seems limited. Furthermore, little is known about the opinions of several stakeholders towards consideration of research evidence on patient preferences in healthcare policy decisions. This paper describes the protocol for an explorative study on the integration of research on patient preferences in healthcare policy decisions. The study questions: to what extent research evidence on patient preferences is considered in current procedures for healthcare policy decisions; opinions of stakeholders regarding the integration of this type of evidence in healthcare policy decisions; and what could be a decision framework for the integration of such research evidence in healthcare policy decisions. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is divided in three sub-studies, predominantly using qualitative methods. The first sub-study is a scoping review in five European countries to investigate whether and how results of research on patient preferences are considered in current procedures for coverage decisions and clinical practice guideline development. The second sub-study is a qualitative study to explore the opinions of stakeholders with regard to the possibilities for integrating evidence on patient preferences in the process of healthcare decision-making in the Netherlands. The third sub-study is the development of a decision framework for research on patient preferences. The framework will consist of: a process description regarding the place of evidence on patient preferences in the decision-making process; and a taxonomy describing different terminologies and conceptualisations of 'preferences' and an overview of existing methodologies for investigating preferences. The concept framework will be presented to and discussed with experts. DISCUSSION: This study will create awareness regarding the existence and potential value of research evidence on patient preferences for healthcare policy decision-making and provides insight in the methods for investigating patient preferences and the barriers and facilitators for integration of such research in healthcare policy decisions. Results of the study will be useful for researchers, clinical practice guideline developers, healthcare policy makers, and patient representatives.

A multidisciplinary evidence-based guideline for minimally invasive surgery.: Part 1: entry techniques and the pneumoperitoneum.

The Dutch Society for Endoscopic Surgery together with the Dutch Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology initiated a multidisciplinary working group to develop a guideline on minimally invasive surgery to formulate multidisciplinary agreements for minimally invasive surgery aiming towards better patient care and safety. The guideline development group consisted of general surgeons, gynecologists, an anesthesiologist, and urologist authorized by their scientific professional association. Two advisors in evidence-based guideline development supported the group. The guideline was developed using the "Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation" instrument. Clinically important aspects were identified and discussed. The best available evidence on these aspects was gathered by systematic review. Recommendations for clinical practice were formulated based on the evidence and a consensus of expert opinion. The guideline was externally reviewed by members of the participating scientific associations and their feedback was integrated. Identified important topics were: laparoscopic entry techniques, intra-abdominal pressure, trocar use, electrosurgical techniques, prevention of trocar site herniation, patient positioning, anesthesiology, perioperative care, patient information, multidisciplinary user consultation, and complication registration. The text of each topic contains an introduction with an explanation of the problem and a summary of the current literature. Each topic was discussed, considerations were evaluated and recommendations were formulated. The development of a guideline on a multidisciplinary level facilitated a broad and rich discussion, which resulted in a very complete and implementable guideline.

A cohort study of cancer mortality among Biology Research Laboratory workers in The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: To examine cancer mortality among persons employed in biology research institutes. METHOD: A historical cohort study was undertaken in the Netherlands. The cohort, comprising 7307 laboratory workers employed by the four participating institutes between 1960 and 1992, was followed for mortality from 1960 to 1995 (median follow-up time 16.5 years). Causes of death were obtained for 98% of all deaths. Cancer mortality in the cohort was compared with that in the general population by computation of the standardized mortality ratio (SMR). The Cox proportional hazards model was used to compare cancer mortality among laboratory workers with that in an internal reference population consisting of unexposed research personnel (n = 2,404). RESULTS: All-cause mortality among laboratory workers was significantly lower than that in the general population. Total cancer mortality and lung cancer mortality were also significantly decreased (SMR = 0.8; 95% confidence interval CI = 0.7-0.9 and SMR = 0.7; 95% CI = 0.6-0.9), respectively. However, when compared to the internal reference population, laboratory workers had a slightly increased cancer mortality (relative risk (RR) = 1.3 95% CI = 0.9-1.9). Among men, a 2.5-fold (95% CI = 1.0-6.3) increase of lung cancer mortality was observed which could not be explained by differences in smoking habits. Lung cancer mortality increased with longer follow-up. Results with regard to a priori defined fields of research showed significantly increased cancer mortality (in particular from lung cancer) for men working in genetics (RR = 3.8), virology (RR = 4.1) and plant physiology (RR = 2.1). CONCLUSION: Laboratory workers have a favorable cancer mortality pattern as compared to the general population. However, this favorable pattern disappears when a comparison is made with a control group of unexposed research personnel. The excess lung cancer mortality among male laboratory workers was concentrated in certain fields of research, which warrants further research to identify specific exposures related to the increased risk.