Examining the hospital costs of children born into relative deprivation in England.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between being born into relative deprivation and hospital costs during childhood. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: We created a birth cohort using Hospital Episode Statistics for children born in NHS hospitals in 2003/2004. The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) rank at birth was missing from 75% of the baby records, so we linked mother and baby records to obtain the IMD decile from the mother's record. We aggregated and costed each child's hospital inpatient admissions, and outpatient and emergency department (ED) attendances up to 15 years of age. We used 2019/2020 NHS tariffs to assign costs. We constructed an additional cohort, all children born in 2013/2014, to explore any changes over time, comparing the utilisation and costs up to 5 years of age. RESULTS: Our main cohort comprised 567 347 babies born in 2003/2004, of which we could include 91%. Up to the age of 15 years, children born into the most deprived areas used more hospital services than those born in the least deprived, reflected in higher costs of inpatient, outpatient and ED care. The highest costs and greatest differences are in the year following birth. Comparing this with the later cohort (up to age 5 years), the average cost per child increased across all deprivation deciles, but differences between the most and least deprived deciles appeared to narrow slightly. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare utilisation and costs are consistently higher for children who are born into the most deprived areas compared with the least.

The effects of computerised decision support systems on nursing and allied health professional performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review and user contextualisation.

Background: Computerised decision support systems (CDSS) are widely used by nurses and allied health professionals but their effect on clinical performance and patient outcomes is uncertain. Objectives: Evaluate the effects of clinical decision support systems use on nurses', midwives' and allied health professionals' performance and patient outcomes and sense-check the results with developers and users. Eligibility criteria: Comparative studies (randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised trials, controlled before-and-after (CBA) studies, interrupted time series (ITS) and repeated measures studies comparing) of CDSS versus usual care from nurses, midwives or other allied health professionals. Information sources: Nineteen bibliographic databases searched October 2019 and February 2021. Risk of bias: Assessed using structured risk of bias guidelines; almost all included studies were at high risk of bias. Synthesis of results: Heterogeneity between interventions and outcomes necessitated narrative synthesis and grouping by: similarity in focus or CDSS-type, targeted health professionals, patient group, outcomes reported and study design. Included studies: Of 36,106 initial records, 262 studies were assessed for eligibility, with 35 included: 28 RCTs (80%), 3 CBA studies (8.6%), 3 ITS (8.6%) and 1 non-randomised trial, a total of 1318 health professionals and 67,595 patient participants. Few studies were multi-site and most focused on decision-making by nurses (71%) or paramedics (5.7%). Standalone, computer-based CDSS featured in 88.7% of the studies; only 8.6% of the studies involved 'smart' mobile or handheld technology. Care processes - including adherence to guidance - were positively influenced in 47% of the measures adopted. For example, nurses' adherence to hand disinfection guidance, insulin dosing, on-time blood sampling, and documenting care were improved if they used CDSS. Patient care outcomes were statistically - if not always clinically - significantly improved in 40.7% of indicators. For example, lower numbers of falls and pressure ulcers, better glycaemic control, screening of malnutrition and obesity, and accurate triaging were features of professionals using CDSS compared to those who were not. Evidence limitations: Allied health professionals (AHPs) were underrepresented compared to nurses; systems, studies and outcomes were heterogeneous, preventing statistical aggregation; very wide confidence intervals around effects meant clinical significance was questionable; decision and implementation theory that would have helped interpret effects - including null effects - was largely absent; economic data were scant and diverse, preventing estimation of overall cost-effectiveness. Interpretation: CDSS can positively influence selected aspects of nurses', midwives' and AHPs' performance and care outcomes. Comparative research is generally of low quality and outcomes wide ranging and heterogeneous. After more than a decade of synthesised research into CDSS in healthcare professions other than medicine, the effect on processes and outcomes remains uncertain. Higher-quality, theoretically informed, evaluative research that addresses the economics of CDSS development and implementation is still required. Future work: Developing nursing CDSS and primary research evaluation. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; 2023. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Registration: PROSPERO [number: CRD42019147773].

Computerised decision support systems (CDSS) are software or computer-based technologies providing advice to professionals making clinical decisions ­ for example, which patients to treat first in emergency departments. CDSS improve some doctors' decisions and patients' outcomes, but we don't know if they improve nurses', midwives' and therapists' or other staff decisions and patient outcomes. Research into, and health professionals' use of, technology ­ for example, in video consultations ­ has grown since the last relevant systematic review in 2009. We systematically searched electronic databases for research measuring how well nurses, midwifes and other therapists/staff followed CDSS advice, how CDSS influence their decisions, how safe CDSS are, and their financial costs and benefits. We interviewed CDSS users and developers and some patient representatives from a general practice to help understand our findings. Of 35 relevant studies ­ from 36,106 initially found ­ most (71%) focused on nurses. Just over half (57%) involved hospital-based staff, and three-quarters (75%) were from richer countries like the USA or the UK. Research quality had not noticeably improved since 2009 and all studies were at risk of potentially misleading readers. CDSS improved care in just under half (47%) of professional behaviours, such as following hand-disinfection guidance, working out insulin doses, and sampling blood on time. Patient care ­ judged using outcomes like falls, pressure ulcers, diabetes control and triage accuracy ­ was better in 41% of the care measured. There wasn't enough evidence to judge CDSS safety or the financial costs and benefits of systems. CDSS can improve some nursing and therapist decisions and some patient outcomes. Studies mostly measure different behaviours and outcomes, making comparing them hard. Theories explaining or predicting how decision support systems might work are not used enough when designing, implementing or evaluating CDSS. More research into the financial costs and benefits of CDSS and higher-quality evidence of their effects are still needed. Whether decision support for nurses, midwives and other therapists reliably improves decision-making remains uncertain.

A Comparative Analysis of Anticancer Drug Appraisals Including Managed Entry Agreements in South Korea and England.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare appraisal decisions about anticancer drugs between the health technology assessment (HTA) agencies in Korea and England, and investigate whether the decisions and supporting evidence are comparable. METHODS: This study identified 49 anticancer drugs listed by the Korean Ministry of Health and Welfare between January 2014 and December 2019. Of those, 46 anticancer drugs for 58 indications were included for analysis. Official appraisal documents from both countries for 58 drug-indication pairs were compared and assessed in terms of clinical and economic evidence. Evidence items and their groups for analysis were predefined. RESULTS: Three-quarters of cases were recommended with managed entry agreements (MEAs) in England and three-fifths in Korea. Finance-based MEA types were most common in both countries. Korean and English authorities made consistent decisions in 48 cases (83%) when classifying decisions as 'recommended' and 'not recommended', while the degree of agreement lowered to 16 cases (28%) when subdividing decisions according to MEA types. When the evidence base was identical, their decisions were more likely to be consistent. Regarding clinical evidence, while the majority of cases referred to the same pivotal studies, differences between the committees' recognized comparators and the appraisal date caused discrepancies in decisions. Economic evidence, including incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) estimates, was identical in only 12 cases (21%), which contributed to discrepancies. CONCLUSION: England relies on economic evaluation, with increasing use of data collection agreements, in contrast with Korea's new procedure exempting companies from providing economic evaluation. While there is possibility for international cooperation in the assessment of clinical evidence, transferability issues exist, particularly with regard to economic evidence.

Correction: The impact of public health insurance on health care utilisation, financial protection and health status in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0219731.].

The impact of public health insurance on health care utilisation, financial protection and health status in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Expanding public health insurance seeks to attain several desirable objectives, including increasing access to healthcare services, reducing the risk of catastrophic healthcare expenditures, and improving health outcomes. The extent to which these objectives are met in a real-world policy context remains an empirical question of increasing research and policy interest in recent years. METHODS: We reviewed systematically empirical studies published from July 2010 to September 2016 using Medline, Embase, Econlit, CINAHL Plus via EBSCO, and Web of Science and grey literature databases. No language restrictions were applied. Our focus was on both randomised and observational studies, particularly those including explicitly attempts to tackle selection bias in estimating the treatment effect of health insurance. The main outcomes are: (1) utilisation of health services, (2) financial protection for the target population, and (3) changes in health status. FINDINGS: 8755 abstracts and 118 full-text articles were assessed. Sixty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria including six randomised studies, reflecting a substantial increase in the quantity and quality of research output compared to the time period before 2010. Overall, health insurance schemes in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have been found to improve access to health care as measured by increased utilisation of health care facilities (32 out of 40 studies). There also appeared to be a favourable effect on financial protection (26 out of 46 studies), although several studies indicated otherwise. There is moderate evidence that health insurance schemes improve the health of the insured (9 out of 12 studies). INTERPRETATION: Increased health insurance coverage generally appears to increase access to health care facilities, improve financial protection and improve health status, although findings are not totally consistent. Understanding the drivers of differences in the outcomes of insurance reforms is critical to inform future implementations of publicly funded health insurance to achieve the broader goal of universal health coverage.

The impact of public health insurance on healthcare utilisation in Indonesia: evidence from panel data.

OBJECTIVES: This study is the first rigorous evaluation of the impact of Jaminan Kesehatan Nasional (JKN) on improving access to outpatient and inpatient care, utilising longitudinal data from the Indonesian Family Life Survey. METHODS: Two treatment groups were identified: a contributory group (N = 982), who paid the premium voluntarily, and a subsidised group (N = 2503), paid by government. Each group was compared with the uninsured group (N = 8576). Propensity score matching combined with difference-in-difference approaches was used to estimate the causal effect of the JKN programme. RESULTS: The results found that JKN increased the probability of inpatient admission for the contributory and subsidised groups by 8.2% (95% CI 5.9-10.5%) and 1.8% (95% CI 0.7-2.82%), respectively. The contributory group had an increase in probability of an outpatient visit of 7.9% (95% CI 4.3-11.4%). CONCLUSIONS: The JKN programme has increased the utilisation of outpatient and inpatient care in the contributory group. Those with subsidised insurance have an increase in access to inpatient facilities only, and this is of a smaller magnitude. Hence, while JKN has improved average utilisation, inequity in access to both outpatient and inpatient care may remain.

General practitioners and emergency departments (GPED)-efficient models of care: a mixed-methods study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Pressure continues to grow on emergency departments in the UK and throughout the world, with declining performance and adverse effects on patient outcome, safety and experience. One proposed solution is to locate general practitioners to work in or alongside the emergency department (GPED). Several GPED models have been introduced, however, evidence of effectiveness is weak. This study aims to evaluate the impact of GPED on patient care, the primary care and acute hospital team and the wider urgent care system. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study will be divided into three work packages (WPs). WP-A; Mapping and Taxonomy: mapping, description and classification of current models of GPED in all emergency departments in England and interviews with key informants to examine the hypotheses that underpin GPED. WP-B; Quantitative Analysis of National Data: measurement of the effectiveness, costs and consequences of the GPED models identified in WP-A, compared with a no-GPED model, using retrospective analysis of Hospital Episode Statistics Data. WP-C; Case Studies: detailed case studies of different GPED models using a mixture of qualitative and quantitative methods including: non-participant observation of clinical care, semistructured interviews with staff, patients and carers; workforce surveys with emergency department staff and analysis of available local routinely collected hospital data. Prospective case study sites will be identified by completing telephone interviews with sites awarded capital funding by the UK government to implement GPED initiatives. The study has a strong patient and public involvement group that has contributed to study design and materials, and which will be closely involved in data interpretation and dissemination. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the National Health Service East Midlands-Leicester South Research Ethics Committee: 17/EM/0312. The results of the study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conferences and a planned programme of knowledge mobilisation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN51780222.

Paying hospital specialists: Experiences and lessons from eight high-income countries.

Payment systems for specialists in hospitals can have far reaching consequences for the efficiency and quality of care. This article presents a comparative analysis of payment systems for specialists in hospitals of eight high-income countries (Canada, England, France, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and the USA/Medicare system). A theoretical framework highlighting the incentives of different payment systems is used to identify potentially interesting reform approaches. In five countries,most specialists work as employees - but in Canada, the Netherlands and the USA, a majority of specialists are self-employed. The main findings of our review include: (1) many countries are increasingly shifting towards blended payment systems; (2) bundled payments introduced in the Netherlands and Switzerland as well as systematic bonus schemes for salaried employees (most countries) contribute to broadening the scope of payment; (3) payment adequacy is being improved through regular revisions of fee levels on the basis of more objective data sources (e.g. in the USA) and through individual payment negotiations (e.g. in Sweden and the USA); and (4) specialist payment has so far been adjusted for quality of care only in hospital specific bonus programs. Policy-makers across countries struggle with similar challenges, when aiming to reform payment systems for specialists in hospitals. Examples from our reviewed countries may provide lessons and inspiration for the improvement of payment systems internationally.

Hospital Surgical Volumes and Mortality after Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Using International Comparisons to Determine a Safe Threshold.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate a safe minimum hospital volume for hospitals performing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. DATA SOURCE: Hospital data on all publicly funded CABG in five European countries, 2007-2009 (106,149 patients). DESIGN: Hierarchical logistic regression models to estimate the relationship between hospital volume and mortality, allowing for case mix. Segmented regression analysis to estimate a threshold. FINDINGS: The 30-day in-hospital mortality rate was 3.0 percent overall, 5.2 percent (95 percent CI: 4.0-6.4) in low-volume hospitals, and 2.1 percent (95 percent CI: 1.8-2.3) in high-volume hospitals. There is a significant curvilinear relationship between volume and mortality, flatter above 415 cases per hospital per year. CONCLUSIONS: There is a clear relationship between hospital CABG volume and mortality in Europe, implying a "safe" threshold volume of 415 cases per year.

Socioeconomic inequality in hip replacement in four European countries from 2002 to 2009--area-level analysis of hospital data.

BACKGROUND: Cross-country comparisons of socioeconomic equity in health care typically use sample survey data on general services such as physician visits. This study uses comprehensive administrative data on a specific service: hip replacement. METHODS: We analyse 651 652 publicly funded hip replacements, excluding fractures and accidents, in adults over 35 in Denmark, England, Portugal and Spain from 2002 to 2009. Sub-national administrative areas are split into socioeconomic quintile groups comprising approximately one-fifth of the national population. Area-level Poisson regression with Huber-White standard errors is used to calculate age-sex standardised hip replacement rates by quintile group, together with gaps and ratios between richest and poorest groups (Q5 and Q1) and the middle group (Q3). RESULTS: We find pro-rich-area inequality in England (2009 Q5/Q1 ratio 1.35 [CI 1.25-1.45]) and Spain (2009 Q5/Q1 ratio 1.43 [CI 1.17-1.70]), pro-poor-area inequality in Portugal (2009 Q5/Q1 ratio 0.67 [CI 0.50-0.83]) and no significant inequality in Denmark. Pro-rich-area inequality increased over time in England and Spain but not significantly. Within-country differences between socioeconomic quintile groups are smaller than between-country differences in general population averages: hip replacement rates are substantially lower in Portugal and Spain (8.6 and 7.4 per 10 000 in 2009) than England and Denmark (20.2 and 27.8 per 10 000 in 2009). CONCLUSION: Despite limitations regarding individual-level inequality and area heterogeneity, analysis of area-level data on publicly funded hospital activity can provide useful cross-country comparisons and longitudinal monitoring of socioeconomic inequality in specific health services. Although this kind of analysis cannot provide definitive answers, it can raise important questions for decision makers.

International experience in controlling pharmaceutical expenditure: influencing patients and providers and regulating industry - a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To review international policies to control expenditure on pharmaceuticals by influencing the behaviour of patients and providers and regulating the pharmaceutical industry. METHOD: Systematic review of experimental and quasi-experimental studies. Published studies were identified with an electronic search strategy using MEDLINE and EMBASE from 1980 to May 2012. Studies were eligible if they assessed the effect of policies aimed at influencing the behaviour of patients and providers, and regulating the pharmaceutical industry. Outcome measures included pharmaceutical expenditure, prices or utilization; other resource use relating to pharmaceuticals; and health outcomes and patients' or providers' behaviour relating to pharmaceutical use. Quality assessment criteria for each study design were developed based on the standard criteria recommended by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) group. The review includes studies based on randomized controlled trials and rigorous quasi-experimental designs (interrupted time-series and controlled before-and-after studies). Studies were excluded if they were conducted within a single hospital or practice; related to pharmaceutical care services or disease management; had less than 6 months of follow-up period (or less than 12 months overall for interrupted time series); if data in controlled before-and-after studies were not collected contemporaneously or if no rationale was stated for the choice of control group; or if relevant and interpretable data were not presented. RESULTS: A total of 255 studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. The majority of the studies relating to patients evaluated cost sharing interventions such as user charges (52 studies). User charges do reduce utilization of pharmaceuticals, and reduce public expenditure by shifting costs to patients. But they reduce the use of essential as well as non-essential drugs, and without adequate exemptions they affect vulnerable groups disproportionately. The majority of studies relating to doctors evaluated the effects of educational approaches (78 studies), reimbursement restrictions (48 studies) and incentive systems (22 studies). Evidence on these policies is of mixed quality. It appears possible to influence prescribing modestly, through various means, but it is essential that messages to prescribers are based on good evidence of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Twenty-nine studies related to industry regulation, and they were of mixed quality. Evidence from studies of reference pricing suggests that this may result in cost savings. These are, however, achieved not by companies reducing or restraining prices, or by reductions in the overall volume of prescriptions, but by some shifts in use and shifting costs to patients, with consequent adverse effects on the equity of access to medicines. Other price and profit controls remain almost completely lacking in evaluative evidence. CONCLUSIONS: It may be that the undesirable consequences of policies influencing patients, particularly user charges, can outweigh the benefits. To influence demand for pharmaceuticals, it is more appropriate to influence prescribing doctors and although interventions to improve prescribing practice have been developed, they often achieve relatively modest benefits and sometimes at high cost. Good evaluative evidence related to industry regulation is scarce despite its policy importance.

Trends in consultant clinical activity and the effect of the 2003 contract change: retrospective analysis of secondary data.

OBJECTIVES: To explore trends in the clinical activity of hospital specialists in English National Health Service (NHS) hospitals, and test the effect of contract reform. DESIGN: Retrospective secondary analysis of hospital episode statistics, describing trends and testing for a contract effect using multilevel interrupted time series analysis. SETTING: Ten surgical and medical specialties in English NHS hospitals from 1999 to 2009. Participants Hospital consultants on full time or maximum part-time English NHS hospitals. INTERVENTION: A new contract offered to NHS consultants in October 2003, with higher pay alongside job planning and appraisal. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Inpatient finished consultant episodes (FCEs) per consultant per month, with and without accounting for case-mix differences. RESULTS: In most specialties there was a statistically significant downward trend in FCEs per consultant per month. On average in the surgical specialties, FCEs reduced by 0.14 per month (95% CI -0.16 to -0.11) and in medicine there was a smaller reduction of 0.08 FCEs per month (95% CI -0.1 to -0.06). NHS patients symptoms have increased in severity over time, and the downward trend is reduced after case-mix-adjustment, and reversed in general and geriatric medicine. The effect of the contract on clinical activity was minimal. In five specialties there was no statistically significant effect, but in five specialties there was a statistically significant negative effect. CONCLUSIONS: Consultant clinical activity, as measured by FCEs per month, has shown a general downward trend from 1999 to 2009. The consultant contract was not associated with an increase in consultant clinical activity rates.

Cost-effectiveness of acupuncture for irritable bowel syndrome: findings from an economic evaluation conducted alongside a pragmatic randomised controlled trial in primary care.

BACKGROUND: There is insufficient evidence to determine whether acupuncture is a cost-effective treatment for irritable bowel syndrome. The objective of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of acupuncture as an adjunct to usual care versus usual care alone for the treatment of Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS). METHODS: Cost-utility analysis conducted alongside a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. 233 patients with irritable bowel syndrome were randomly allocated to either acupuncture plus usual care, or usual care alone. Cost-effectiveness outcomes are expressed in terms of incremental cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) at one year after randomisation. Costs were estimated from the UK National Health Service perspective for a time horizon of one year. Cost-utility ratios were estimated based on complete case analysis for the base case analysis, where only patients with available EQ-5D and cost data were included. Sensitivity analyses comprised a multiple imputation approach for missing data and a subgroup analysis for the more severe cases of IBS. RESULTS: The base case analysis showed acupuncture to be marginally more effective than usual care (gain of 0.0035 QALYs, 95% CI: -0.00395 to 0.0465) and more expensive (incremental cost of £218 per patient (95% CI: 55.87 to 492.87) resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of approximately £62,500. Sensitivity analysis using multiple imputation for missing data resulted in acupuncture appearing less effective and more costly than usual care, so usual care is dominant. Subgroup analysis selecting the most severe cases of IBS (Symptom Severity Score of over 300) suggested that acupuncture may be a cost-effective treatment option for this group, with a cost-per-QALY of £6,500. CONCLUSIONS: Acupuncture as an adjunct to usual care is not a cost-effective option for the whole IBS population; however it may be cost-effective for those with more severe irritable bowel syndrome. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN08827905.

The effects of new pricing and copayment schemes for pharmaceuticals in South Korea.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the effect of new Korean pricing and copayment schemes for pharmaceuticals (1) on per patient drug expenditure, utilisation and unit prices of overall pharmaceuticals; (2) on the utilisation of essential medications and (3) on the utilisation of less costly alternatives to the study medication. METHODS: Interrupted time series analysis using retrospective observational data. RESULTS: The increasing trend of per patient drug expenditure fell gradually after the introduction of a new copayment scheme. The segmented regression model suggested that per patient drug expenditure might decrease by about 12% 1 year after the copayment increase, compared with the absence of such a policy, with few changes in overall utilisation and unit prices. The level of savings was much smaller when the new price scheme was included, while the effects of a price cut were inconclusive due to the short time period before an additional policy change. Based on the segmented regression models, we estimate that the number of patients filling their antihyperlipidemics prescriptions decreased by 18% in the corresponding period. Those prescribed generic and brand-named antihyperlipidemics declined by around 16 and 19%, respectively, indicating little evidence of generic substitution resulting from the copayment increase. Few changes were found in the use of antihypertensives. CONCLUSIONS: The policies under consideration appear to contain costs not by the intended mechanisms, such as substituting generics for brand name products, but by reducing patients' access to costly therapies regardless of clinical necessity. Thus, concerns were raised about potentially compromising overall health and loss of equity in pharmaceutical utilisation.