Socioeconomic inequalities in the uptake of postpartum care at home across Dutch neighbourhoods.

BACKGROUND: Postpartum care focuses on prevention of health problems by performing medical check-ups and through enhancing maternal empowerment, the parent-infant interaction and knowledge about mother's own health and that of her newborn. We aimed to investigate whether there was significant clustering within neighbourhoods regarding the uptake of postpartum care and to what extent neighbourhood-level differences are explained by individual socio-demographic factors, pregnancy-related factors and neighbourhood-level determinants (i.e. deprivation and urbanization). METHODS: A nationwide population-based observational study was carried out using linked routinely collected healthcare data from appropriate-for-gestational-age weight live-born term singleton deliveries (2015-18) in the Netherlands. We performed two-level multivariable logistic regression analyses, using three different models. Model 1 contained no explanatory variables and was used to assess clustering of postpartum care uptake within neighbourhoods. In model 2, individual-level determinants were added one by one and in model 3, neighbourhood-level determinants were added. RESULTS: About 520 818 births were included. Multilevel modelling showed that 11% of the total variance in postpartum care uptake could be attributed to the neighbourhood of residence. Individual characteristics explained 38% of the neighbourhood variance, of which income and migration background were the most important contributors. An additional 6% of the variation could be explained by neighbourhood-level determinants. CONCLUSION: We found substantial neighbourhood differences in postpartum care uptake. These differences are influenced by a complex interplay between individual-level and neighbourhood-level determinants, highlighting the importance of addressing both individual and neighbourhood-level determinants to improve the uptake of postpartum care and therewith overall community health.

From test to rest: evaluating socioeconomic differences along the COVID-19 care pathway in the Netherlands.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated healthcare needs and caused excess mortality, especially among lower socioeconomic groups. This study describes the emergence of socioeconomic differences along the COVID-19 pathway of testing, healthcare use and mortality in the Netherlands. METHODOLOGY: This retrospective observational Dutch population-based study combined individual-level registry data from June 2020 to December 2020 on personal socioeconomic characteristics, COVID-19 administered tests, test results, general practitioner (GP) consultations, hospital admissions, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admissions and mortality. For each outcome measure, relative differences between income groups were estimated using log-link binomial regression models. Furthermore, regression models explained socioeconomic differences in COVID-19 mortality by differences in ICU/hospital admissions, test administration and test results. RESULTS: Among the Dutch population, the lowest income group had a lower test probability (RR = 0.61) and lower risk of testing positive (RR = 0.77) compared to the highest income group. However, among individuals with at least one administered COVID-19 test, the lowest income group had a higher risk of testing positive (RR = 1.40). The likelihood of hospital admissions and ICU admissions were higher for low income groups (RR = 2.11 and RR = 2.46, respectively). The lowest income group had an almost four times higher risk of dying from COVID-19 (RR = 3.85), which could partly be explained by a higher risk of hospitalization and ICU admission, rather than differences in test administration or result. DISCUSSION: Our findings indicated that socioeconomic differences became more pronounced at each step of the care pathway, culminating to a large gap in mortality. This underlines the need for enhancing social security and well-being policies and incorporation of health equity in pandemic preparedness plans.

Evaluation of Healthcare Utilisation and Expenditures in Persons with Type 2 Diabetes Undergoing Bariatric-Metabolic Surgery.

PURPOSE: Changes in healthcare utilisation and expenditures after bariatric-metabolic surgery (BMS) for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are unclear. We used the Dutch national all-payer claims database (APCD) to evaluate utilisation and expenditures in people with T2DM who underwent BMS. METHODS: In this cohort study, patients with T2DM who had BMS in 2016 were identified in the APCD. This group was matched 1:2 to a control group with T2DM who did not undergo BMS based on age, gender and healthcare expenditures. Data on healthcare expenditures and utilisation were collected for 2013-2019. RESULTS: In total, 1751 patients were included in the surgery group and 3502 in the control group. After BMS, total median expenditures in the surgery group stabilised (€ 3156 to € 3120) and increased in the control group (€ 3174 to € 3434). Total pharmaceutical expenditures decreased 28% in the surgery group (€957 to €494) and increased 55% in the control group (€605 to €936). In the surgery group, 67.1% did not use medication for T2DM in 2019 compared to 13.3% in the control group. Healthcare use for microvascular complications increased in the control group, but not in the surgery group. CONCLUSION: BMS in people with T2DM stabilises healthcare expenditures and decreases medication use and care use for microvascular complications. In contrast, healthcare use and expenditures in T2DM patients who do not undergo surgery gradually increase over time. Due to the progressive nature of T2DM, it is expected that these differences will become larger in the long-term.

Stakeholder perspectives on payment reform in maternity care in the Netherlands: A Q-methodology study.

Based on theoretical notions, there is consensus that alternative payment models to the common fee-for-service model have the potential to improve healthcare quality through increased collaboration and reduced under- and overuse. This is particularly relevant for maternity care in the Netherlands because perinatal mortality rates are relatively high in comparison to other Western countries. Therefore, an experiment with bundled payments for maternity care was initiated in 2017. However, the uptake of this alternative payment model remains low, as also seen in other countries, and fee-for-service models prevail. A deeper understanding of stakeholders' perspectives on payment reform in maternity care is necessary to inform policy makers about the obstacles to implementing alternative payment models and potential ways forward. We conducted a Q-methodology study to explore perspectives of stakeholders (postpartum care managers, midwives, gynecologists, managers, health insurers) in maternity care in the Netherlands on payment reform. Participants were asked to rank a set of statements relevant to payment reform in maternity care and explain their ranking during an interview. Factor analysis was used to identify patterns in the rankings of statements. We identified three distinct perspectives on payment reform in maternity care. One general perspective, broadly supported within the sector, focusing mainly on outcomes, and two complementary perspectives, one focusing more on equality and one focusing more on collaboration. This study shows there is consensus among stakeholders in maternity care in the Netherlands that payment reform is required. However, stakeholders have different views on the purpose and desired design of the payment reform and set different conditions. Working towards payment reform in co-creation with all involved parties may improve the general attitude towards payment reform, may enhance the level of trust among stakeholders, and may contribute to a higher uptake in practice.

The Dutch Solid Start program: describing the implementation and experiences of the program's first thousand days.

BACKGROUND: In 2018, the Dutch government initiated the Solid Start program to provide each child the best start in life. The program focuses on the crucial first thousand days of life, which span from preconception to a child's second birthday, and has a specific focus towards (future) parents and young children in vulnerable situations. A key program element is improving collaboration between the medical and social sector by creating Solid Start coalitions. This study aimed to describe the implementation of the Dutch Solid Start program, in order to learn for future practice and policy. Specifically, this paper describes to what extent Solid Start is implemented within municipalities and outlines stakeholders' experiences with the implementation of Solid Start and the associated cross-sectoral collaboration. METHODS: Quantitative and qualitative data were collected from 2019 until 2021. Questionnaires were sent to all 352 Dutch municipalities and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were obtained through focus group discussions(n = 6) and semi-structured interviews(n = 19) with representatives of care and support organizations, knowledge institutes and professional associations, Solid Start project leaders, advisors, municipal officials, researchers, clients and experts-by-experience. Qualitative data were analyzed using the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care. RESULTS: Findings indicated progress in the development of Solid Start coalitions(n = 40 in 2019, n = 140 in 2021), and an increase in cross-sectoral collaboration. According to the stakeholders, initiating Solid Start increased the sense of urgency concerning the importance of the first thousand days and stimulated professionals from various backgrounds to get to know each other, resulting in more collaborative agreements on cross-sectoral care provision. Important elements mentioned for effective collaboration within coalitions were an active coordinator as driving force, and a shared societal goal. However, stakeholders experienced that Solid Start is not yet fully incorporated into all professionals' everyday practice. Most common barriers for collaboration related to systemic integration at macro-level, including limited resources and collaboration-inhibiting regulations. Stakeholders emphasized the importance of ensuring Solid Start and mentioned various needs, including sustainable funding, supportive regulations, responsiveness to stakeholders' needs, ongoing knowledge development, and client involvement. CONCLUSION: Solid Start, as a national program with strong local focus, has led to various incremental changes that supported cross-sectoral collaboration to improve care during the first thousand days, without major transformations of systemic structures. However, to ensure the program's sustainability, needs such as sustainable funding should be addressed.

The Effect and Cost-Effectiveness of Offering a Combined Lifestyle Intervention for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Primary Care: Results of the Healthy Heart Stepped-Wedge Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of offering the combined lifestyle programme "Healthy Heart", addressing overweight, diet, physical activity, smoking and alcohol, to improve lifestyle behaviour and reduce cardiovascular risk. DESIGN: A practice-based non-randomised stepped-wedge cluster trial with two-year follow-up. Outcomes were obtained via questionnaires and routine care data. A cost-utility analysis was performed. During the intervention period, "Healthy Heart" was offered during regular cardiovascular risk management consultations in primary care in The Hague, The Netherlands. The period prior to the intervention period served as the control period. RESULTS: In total, 511 participants (control) and 276 (intervention) with a high cardiovascular risk were included (overall mean ± SD age 65.0 ± 9.6; women: 56%). During the intervention period, 40 persons (15%) participated in the Healthy Heart programme. Adjusted outcomes did not differ between the control and intervention period after 3-6 months and 12-24 months. Intervention versus control (95% CI) 3-6 months: weight: ß -0.5 (-1.08-0.05); SBP ß 0.15 (-2.70-2.99); LDL-cholesterol ß 0.07 (-0.22-0.35); HDL-cholesterol ß -0.03 (-0.10-0.05); physical activity ß 38 (-97-171); diet ß 0.95 (-0.93-2.83); alcohol OR 0.81 (0.44-1.49); quit smoking OR 2.54 (0.45-14.24). Results were similar for 12-24 months. Mean QALYs and mean costs of cardiovascular care were comparable over the full study period (mean difference (95% CI) QALYs: -0.10 (-0.20; 0.002); costs: EUR 106 (-80; 293)). CONCLUSIONS: For both the shorter (3-6 months) and longer term (12-24 months), offering the Healthy Heart programme to high-cardiovascular-risk patients did not improve their lifestyle behaviour nor cardiovascular risk and was not cost-effective on a population level.

Delineating the Type 2 Diabetes Population in the Netherlands Using an All-Payer Claims Database: Specialist Care, Medication Utilization and Expenditures 2016-2018.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to describe the healthcare utilization and expenditures related to medical specialist care and medication of the entire type 2 diabetes population in the Netherlands in detail. METHODS: For this retrospective, observational study, we used an all-payer claims database. Comprehensive data on specialist care and medication utilization and expenditures of the type 2 diabetes population (n = 900,522 in 2018) were obtained and analyzed descriptively. Data were analyzed across medical specialties and for various types of diabetes medication (or glucose-lowering drugs [GLDs]) and other medication. RESULTS: Specialist care utilization was diverse: different medical specialties were visited by a considerable fraction of the type 2 diabetes population. Total expenditures on specialist care were €2498 million in 2018 (i.e., 10.6% of the national specialist care expenditures). In total, 97.8% of patients used other medication (not GLDs) and 81.8% used GLDs; 25.6% of medication expenditures were for GLDs. For both specialist care and medication, mean expenditures per treated patient were higher than median expenditures, indicating a skewed distribution of spending. CONCLUSION: Use of and expenditures on specialist care and medication of the type 2 diabetes population is diverse. These heterogeneous healthcare use patterns are likely caused by the presence of comorbidities. Additionally, we found that a small fraction of the population is responsible for a large share of the expenditures. A shift towards more patient-centered care could lead to health improvements and a reduction in overall costs, subsequently promoting the sustainability of healthcare systems.

Identifying and delineating the type 2 diabetes population in the Netherlands using an all-payer claims database: characteristics, healthcare utilisation and expenditures.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to identify and delineate the Dutch type 2 diabetes population and the distribution of healthcare utilisation and expenditures across the health system from 2016 to 2018 using an all-payer claims database. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort study based on an all-payer claims database of the Dutch population. SETTING: The Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: The whole Dutch type 2 diabetes population (n=900 522 in 2018), determined based on bundled payment codes for integrated diabetes care and medication use indicating type 2 diabetes. OUTCOME MEASURES: Annual prevalence of type 2 diabetes, comorbidities and characteristics of the type 2 diabetes population, as well as the distribution of healthcare utilisation and expenditures were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: In 2018, 900 522 people (6.5% of adults) were identified as having type 2 diabetes. The most common comorbidity in the population was heart disease (12.1%). Additionally, 16.2% and 5.6% of patients received specialised care for microvascular and macrovascular diabetes-related complications, respectively. Most patients with type 2 diabetes received pharmaceutical care (99.1%), medical specialist care (97.0%) and general practitioner consultations (90.5%). In total, €8173 million, 9.4% of total healthcare expenditures, was reimbursed for the type 2 diabetes population. Medical specialist care accounted for the largest share of spending (38.1%), followed by district nursing (12.4%), and pharmaceutical care (11.5%). CONCLUSIONS: All-payer claims databases can be used to delineate healthcare use: this insight can inform health policy and practice and, thereby, support better decisions to promote long-term sustainability of healthcare systems. The healthcare utilisation of the Dutch type 2 diabetes population is distributed across the health system and utilisation of medical specialist care is high. This is likely to be due to presence of concurrent morbidities and complications. Therefore, a shift from a disease-specific approach to a person-centred and integrated care approach could be beneficial in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

Dutch shared savings program targeted at primary care: Reduced expenditures in its first year.

In countries where GPs fulfill a central role in the health care system, like in the Netherlands, the lack of value-based incentives in GP payment systems may have negative consequences for value delivered in other parts of the health care spectrum. We evaluate an experiment in which GPs were allowed to share in savings in total health care expenditures, conditionally on achieving quality targets. At least in theory, these so-called 'shared savings contracts' incentivize GPs to become critical gatekeepers, coordinate the provision of care and substitute for specialist services when appropriate. This study evaluates a Dutch shared savings program targeted at GPs. This study employs a difference-in-differences design using a regional control group of non-participating GPs. We find that program participation led to savings in health care expenditures (-2%), while patient satisfaction was unaffected and while the results for other quality indicators were ambiguous. Additional analyses show that savings have been predominantly realized by lowering the volume of specialist care, and that almost every participating GP displayed cost-saving behavior. This finding suggests that shared savings contracts, even when added as a mere complemented to existing volume-based payment models, already elicit substantive effort to increase the value of health care provided.

Trading patients' choice in providers for quality of maternity care? A discrete choice experiment amongst pregnant women.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of bundled payment for maternity care, aimed at improving the quality of maternity care, may affect pregnant women's choice in providers of maternity care. This paper describes a Dutch study which examined pregnant women's preferences when choosing a maternity care provider. The study focused on factors that enhance the quality of maternity care versus (restricted) provider choice. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was conducted amongst 611 pregnant women living in the Netherlands using an online questionnaire. The data were analysed with Latent Class Analyses. The outcome measure consisted of stated preferences in the discrete choice experiment. Included factors were: information exchange by care providers through electronic medical records, information provided by midwife, information provided by friends, freedom to choose maternity care provider and travel distance. RESULTS: Four different preference structures were found. In two of those structures, respondents found aspects of the maternity care related to quality of care more important than being able to choose a provider (provider choice). In the two other preference structures, respondents found provider choice more important than aspects related to quality of maternity care. CONCLUSIONS: In a country with presumed high-quality maternity care like the Netherlands, about half of pregnant women prefer being able to choose their maternity care provider over organisational factors that might imply better quality of care. A comparable amount of women find quality-related aspects most important when choosing a maternity care provider and are willing to accept limitations in their choice of provider. These insights are relevant for policy makers in order to be able to design a bundled payment model which justify the preferences of all pregnant women.

Are quality-adjusted medical prices declining for chronic disease? Evidence from diabetes care in four health systems.

Improvements in medical treatment have contributed to rising health spending. Yet there is relatively little evidence on whether the spending increase is "worth it" in the sense of producing better health outcomes of commensurate value-a critical question for understanding productivity in the health sector and, as that sector grows, for deriving an accurate quality-adjusted price index for an entire economy. We analyze individual-level panel data on medical spending and health outcomes for 123,548 patients with type 2 diabetes in four health systems: Japan, The Netherlands, Hong Kong and Taiwan. Using a "cost-of-living" method that measures value based on improved survival, we find a positive net value of diabetes care: the value of improved survival outweighs the added costs of care in each of the four health systems. This finding is robust to accounting for selective survival, end-of-life spending, and a range of values for a life-year or fraction of benefits attributable to medical care. Since the estimates do not include the value from improved quality of life, they are conservative. We, therefore, conclude that the increase in medical spending for management of diabetes is offset by an increase in quality.

Unraveling the Complexity in the Design and Implementation of Bundled Payments: A Scoping Review of Key Elements From a Payer's Perspective.

Policy Points Because bundled payments are relatively new and require a different type of collaboration among payers, providers, and other actors, their design and implementation process is complex. By sorting the 53 key elements that contribute to this complexity into specific pre- and postcontractual phases as well as the actors involved in the health system, this framework provides a comprehensive overview of this complexity from a payer's perspective. Strategically, the design and implementation of bundled payments should not be approached by payers as merely the introduction of a new contracting model, but as part of a broader transformation into a more sustainable, value-based health care system. CONTEXT: Traditional fee-for-service (FFS) payment models in health care stimulate volume-driven care rather than value-driven care. To address this issue, increasing numbers of payers are adopting contracts based on bundled payments. Because their design and implementation are complex, understanding the elements that contribute to this complexity from a payer's perspective might facilitate their adoption. Consequently, the objective of our study was to identify and structure the key elements in the design and implementation of bundled payment contracts. METHODS: Two of us independently and systematically examined the literature to identify all the elements considered relevant to our objective. We then developed a framework in which these elements were arranged according to the specific phases of a care procurement process and actors' interactions at various levels of the health system. FINDINGS: The final study sample consisted of 147 articles in which we identified the 53 elements included in the framework. These elements were found in all phases of the pre- and postcontractual procurement process and involved actors at different levels of the health care system. Examples of elements that were cited frequently and are typical of bundled payment procurement, as opposed to FFS procurement, are (1) specification of care services, patients' characteristics, and corresponding costs, (2) small and heterogeneous patient populations, (3) allocation of payment and savings/losses among providers, (4) identification of patients in the bundle, (5) alignment of the existing care delivery model with the new payment model, and (6) limited effects on quality and costs in the first pilots and demonstrations. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with traditional FFS payment models, bundled payment contracts tend to introduce an alternative set of (financial) incentives, touch on almost all aspects of governance within organizations, and demand a different type of collaboration among organizations. Accordingly, payers should not strategically approach their design and implementation as merely the adoption of a new contracting model, but rather as part of a broader transformation toward a more sustainable value-based health care system, based less on short-term transactional negotiations and more on long-term collaborative relationships between payers and providers.

Barriers to payment reform: Experiences from nine Dutch population health management sites.

Population health management (PHM) initiatives aim for better population health, quality of care and reduction of expenditure growth by integrating and optimizing services across domains. Reforms shifting payment of providers from traditional fee-for-service towards value-based payment models may support PHM. We aimed to gain insight into payment reform in nine Dutch PHM sites. Specifically, we investigated 1) the type of payment models implemented, and 2) the experienced barriers towards payment reform. Between October 2016 and February 2017, we conducted 36 (semi-)structured interviews with program managers, hospitals, insurers and primary care representatives of the sites. We addressed the structure of payment models and barriers to payment reform in general. After three years of PHM, we found that four shared savings models for pharmaceutical care and five extensions of existing (bundled) payment models adding providers into the model were implemented. Interviewees stated that reluctance to shift financial accountability to providers was partly due to information asymmetry, a lack of trust and conflicting incentives between providers and insurers, and last but not least a lack of a sense of urgency. Small steps to payment reform have been taken in the Dutch PHM sites, which is in line with other international PHM initiatives. While acknowledging the autonomy of PHM sites, governmental stewardship (e.g. long-term vision, supporting knowledge development) can further stimulate value-based payment reforms.

Substituting hospital-based outpatient cardiology care: The impact on quality, health and costs.

BACKGROUND: Many Western countries face the challenge of providing high-quality care while keeping the healthcare system accessible and affordable. In an attempt to deal with this challenge a new healthcare delivery model called primary care plus (PC+) was introduced in the Netherlands. Within the PC+ model, medical specialists perform consultations in a primary care setting. PC+ aims to support the general practitioners in gatekeeping and prevent unnecessary referrals to hospital care. The aim of this study was to examine the effects of a cardiology PC+ intervention on the Triple Aim outcomes, which were operationalized by patient-perceived quality of care, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes, and healthcare costs per patient. METHODS: This is a quantitative study with a longitudinal observational design. The study population consisted of patients, with non-acute and low-complexity cardiology-related health complaints, who were referred to the PC+ centre (intervention group) or hospital-based outpatient care (control group; care-as-usual). Patient-perceived quality of care and HRQoL (EQ-5D-5L, EQ-VAS and SF-12) were measured through questionnaires at three different time points. Healthcare costs per patient were obtained from administrative healthcare data and patients were followed for nine months. Chi-square tests, independent t-tests and multilevel linear models were used to analyse the data. RESULTS: The patient-perceived quality of care was significantly higher within the intervention group for 26 out of 27 items. HRQoL outcomes did significantly increase in both groups (P <0.05) but there was no significant interaction between group and time. At baseline and also at three, six and nine months' follow-up the healthcare costs per patient were significantly lower for patients in the intervention group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: While this study showed no improvements on HRQoL outcomes, PC+ seemed to be promising as it results in improved quality of care as experienced by patients and lower healthcare costs per patient.

Unraveling the drivers of regional variation in healthcare spending by analyzing prevalent chronic diseases.

BACKGROUND: To indicate inefficiencies in health systems, previous studies examined regional variation in healthcare spending by analyzing the entire population. As a result, population heterogeneity is taken into account to a limited extent only. Furthermore, it clouds a detailed interpretation which could be used to inform regional budget allocation decisions to improve quality of care of one chronic disease over another. Therefore, we aimed to gain insight into the drivers of regional variation in healthcare spending by studying prevalent chronic diseases. METHODS: We used 2012 secondary health survey data linked with claims data, healthcare supply data and demographics at the individual level for 18 Dutch regions. We studied patients with diabetes (n = 10,767) and depression (n = 3,735), in addition to the general population (n = 44,694). For all samples, we estimated the cross-sectional relationship between spending, supply and demand variables and region effects using linear mixed models. RESULTS: Regions with above (below) average spending for the general population mostly showed above (below) average spending for diabetes and depression as well. Less than 1% of the a-priori total variation in spending was attributed to the regions. For all samples, we found that individual-level demand variables explained 62-63% of the total variance. Self-reported health status was the most prominent predictor (28%) of healthcare spending. Supply variables also explained, although a small part, of regional variation in spending in the general population and depression. Demand variables explained nearly 100% of regional variation in spending for depression and 88% for diabetes, leaving 12% of the regional variation left unexplained indicating differences between regions due to inefficiencies. CONCLUSIONS: The extent to which regional variation in healthcare spending can be considered as inefficiency may differ between regions and disease-groups. Therefore, analyzing chronic diseases, in addition to the traditional approach where the general population is studied, provides more insight into the causes of regional variation in healthcare spending, and identifies potential areas for efficiency improvement and budget allocation decisions.

Cost Variation in Diabetes Care across Dutch Care Groups?

OBJECTIVE: The introduction of bundled payment for diabetes care in the Netherlands led to the origination of care groups. This study explored to what extent variation in health care costs per patient can be attributed to the performance of care groups. Furthermore, the commonly applied simple mean aggregation was compared with the more advanced generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) to benchmark health care costs per patient between care groups. DATA SOURCE: Dutch 2009 nationwide insurance claims data of diabetes type 2 patients (104,544 patients, 50 care groups). STUDY DESIGN: Both a simple mean aggregation and a GLMM approach was applied to rank care groups, using two different health care costs variables: total treatment health care costs and diabetes-specific specialist care costs per diabetes patient. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Care groups varied slightly in the first and mainly in the second indicator. Care group variation was not explained by composition. Although the ranking methods were correlated, some care groups' rank positions differed, with consequences on the top-10 and the low-10 positions. CONCLUSIONS: Differences between care groups exist when an appropriate indicator and a sophisticated aggregation technique is used. Currently applied benchmarking may have unfair consequences for some care groups.

Are low-value care measures up to the task? A systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Reducing low-value care is a core component of healthcare reforms in many Western countries. A comprehensive and sound set of low-value care measures is needed in order to monitor low-value care use in general and in provider-payer contracts. Our objective was to review the scientific literature on low-value care measurement, aiming to assess the scope and quality of current measures. METHODS: A systematic review was performed for the period 2010-2015. We assessed the scope of low-value care recommendations and measures by categorizing them according to the Classification of Health Care Functions. Additionally, we assessed the quality of the measures by 1) analysing their development process and the level of evidence underlying the measures, and 2) analysing the evidence regarding the validity of a selected subset of the measures. RESULTS: Our search yielded 292 potentially relevant articles. After screening, we selected 23 articles eligible for review. We obtained 115 low-value care measures, of which 87 were concentrated in the cure sector, 25 in prevention and 3 in long-term care. No measures were found in rehabilitative care and health promotion. We found 62 measures from articles that translated low-value care recommendations into measures, while 53 measures were previously developed by institutions as the National Quality Forum. Three measures were assigned the highest level of evidence, as they were underpinned by both guidelines and literature evidence. Our search yielded no information on coding/criterion validity and construct validity for the included measures. Despite this, most measures were already used in practice. CONCLUSION: This systematic review provides insight into the current state of low-value care measures. It shows that more attention is needed for the evidential underpinning and quality of these measures. Clear information about the level of evidence and validity helps to identify measures that truly represent low-value care and are sufficiently qualified to fulfil their aims through quality monitoring and in innovative payer-provider contracts. This will contribute to creating and maintaining the support of providers, payers, policy makers and citizens, who are all aiming to improve value in health care.

Which Triple Aim related measures are being used to evaluate population management initiatives? An international comparative analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Population management (PM) initiatives are introduced in order to create sustainable health care systems. These initiatives should focus on the continuum of health and well-being of a population by introducing interventions that integrate various services. To be successful they should pursue the Triple Aim, i.e. simultaneously improve population health and quality of care while reducing costs per capita. This study explores how PM initiatives measure the Triple Aim in practice. METHOD: An exploratory search was combined with expert consultations to identify relevant PM initiatives. These were analyzed based on general characteristics, utilized measures and related selection criteria. RESULTS: In total 865 measures were used by 20 PM initiatives. All quality of care domains were included by at least 11 PM initiatives, while most domains of population health and costs were included by less than 7 PM initiatives. Although their goals showed substantial overlap, the measures applied showed few similarities between PM initiatives and were predominantly selected based on local priority areas and data availability. CONCLUSION: Most PM initiatives do not measure the full scope of the Triple Aim. Additionally, variety between measures limits comparability between PM initiatives. Consensus on the coverage of Triple Aim domains and a set of standardized measures could further both the inclusion of the various domains as well as the comparability between PM initiatives.

US Children And Adolescents Had Fewer Annual Doctor And Dentist Contacts Than Their Dutch Counterparts, 2010-12.

Children and adolescents in the United States have been found to be less healthy than their counterparts in other high-income countries. The contribution of pediatric health care use to health outcomes--either as an independent determinant or as a mediator of wider social factors--is not well understood. We found that, compared to their peers in the Netherlands, US children and adolescents had fewer annual doctor and dental contacts in 2012. In both countries, poorer health status was reported among low-income compared to high-income children; however, this status was accompanied by greater or equal number of doctor and dental contacts among low-income Dutch children compared to their higher-income Dutch peers. By contrast, low-income US children had 28-65 percent fewer care episodes than high-income US children. Further research is needed to investigate the potential impact of greater equity and use of pediatric services on US health outcomes. Possible policy responses might include a focus on improving the quality, coverage, and benefits of health insurance, as well as on the workforce implications of providing high-quality pediatric care to all.