Models for delivery and co-ordination of primary or secondary health care (or both) to older adults living in aged care facilities.

BACKGROUND: The number of older people is increasing worldwide and public expenditure on residential aged care facilities (ACFs) is expected to at least double, and possibly triple, by 2050. Co-ordinated and timely care in residential ACFs that reduces unnecessary hospital transfers may improve residents' health outcomes and increase satisfaction with care among ACF residents, their families and staff. These benefits may outweigh the resources needed to sustain the changes in care delivery and potentially lead to cost savings. Our systematic review comprehensively and systematically presents the available evidence of the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of alternative models of providing health care to ACF residents. OBJECTIVES: Main objective To assess the effectiveness and safety of alternative models of delivering primary or secondary health care (or both) to older adults living in ACFs. Secondary objective To assess the cost-effectiveness of the alternative models. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases and two trials registers (WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov) on 26 October 2022, together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included individual and cluster-randomised trials, and cost/cost-effectiveness data collected alongside eligible effectiveness studies. Eligible study participants included older people who reside in an ACF as their place of permanent abode and healthcare professionals delivering or co-ordinating the delivery of healthcare at ACFs. Eligible interventions focused on either ways of delivering primary or secondary health care (or both) or ways of co-ordinating the delivery of this care. Eligible comparators included usual care or another model of care. Primary outcomes were emergency department visits, unplanned hospital admissions and adverse effects (defined as infections, falls and pressure ulcers). Secondary outcomes included adherence to clinical guideline-recommended care, health-related quality of life of residents, mortality, resource use, access to primary or specialist healthcare services, any hospital admissions, length of hospital stay, satisfaction with the health care by residents and their families, work-related satisfaction and work-related stress of ACF staff. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence using GRADE. The primary comparison was any alternative model of care versus usual care. MAIN RESULTS: We included 40 randomised trials (21,787 participants; three studies only reported number of beds) in this review. Included trials evaluated alternative models of care aimed at either all residents of the ACF (i.e. no specific health condition; 11 studies), ACF residents with mental health conditions or behavioural problems (12 studies), ACF residents with a specific condition (e.g. residents with pressure ulcers, 13 studies) or residents requiring a specific type of care (e.g. residents after hospital discharge, four studies). Most alternative models of care focused on 'co-ordination of care' (n = 31). Three alternative models of care focused on 'who provides care' and two focused on 'where care is provided' (i.e. care provided within ACF versus outside of ACF). Four models focused on the use of information and communication technology. Usual care, the comparator in all studies, was highly heterogeneous across studies and, in most cases, was poorly reported. Most of the included trials were susceptible to some form of bias; in particular, performance (89%), reporting (66%) and detection (42%) bias. Compared to usual care, alternative models of care may make little or no difference to the proportion of residents with at least one emergency department visit (risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.20; 7 trials, 1276 participants; low-certainty evidence), but may reduce the proportion of residents with at least one unplanned hospital admission (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.99, I2 = 53%; 8 trials, 1263 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of alternative models of care on adverse events (proportion of residents with a fall: RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.60, I² = 74%; 3 trials, 1061 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and adherence to guideline-recommended care (proportion of residents receiving adequate antidepressant medication: RR 5.29, 95% CI 1.08 to 26.00; 1 study, 65 participants) as the certainty of the evidence is very low. Compared to usual care, alternative models of care may have little or no effect on the health-related quality of life of ACF residents (MD -0.016, 95% CI -0.036 to 0.004; I² = 23%; 12 studies, 4016 participants; low-certainty evidence) and probably make little or no difference to the number of deaths in residents of ACFs (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.16, 24 trials, 3881 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). We did not pool the cost-effectiveness or cost data as the specific costs associated with the various alternative models of care were incomparable, both across models of care as well as across settings. Based on the findings of five economic evaluations (all interventions focused on co-ordination of care), we are uncertain of the cost-effectiveness of alternative models of care compared to usual care as the certainty of the evidence is very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Compared to usual care, alternative models of care may make little or no difference to the number of emergency department visits but may reduce unplanned hospital admissions. We are uncertain of the effect of alternative care models on adverse events (i.e. falls, pressure ulcers, infections) and adherence to guidelines compared to usual care, as the certainty of the evidence is very low. Alternative models of care may have little or no effect on health-related quality of life and probably have no effect on mortality of ACF residents compared to usual care. Importantly, we are uncertain of the cost-effectiveness of alternative models of care due to the limited, disparate data available.

Efficacy of mindfulness and goal setting interventions for increasing resilience and reducing smoking in lower socio-economic groups: randomised controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Smoking and resulting health problems disproportionately impact low socioeconomic status (SES) individuals. Building resilience presents an approach to 'closing the gap'. Mindfulness-based interventions and setting realistic goals are preferred in low socioeconomic communities. We aim to test if these interventions, delivered online and consolidated with peer support offered via ex-smokers, are successful in promoting smoking cessation and resilience. Our conceptualisation of resilience encompasses the inner capacity/skills and external resources (e.g., social support) which smokers utilise to bounce back from adversity. We include a process evaluation of barriers/facilitators to interventions and cost-effectiveness analysis (from health system perspective). METHODS: We plan a four-arm parallel 12-month RCT with a 6-month follow-up to test the efficacy of three group-based interventions each followed by peer support. Arm 1: mindfulness-integrated cognitive behavioural therapy; Arm 2: mindfulness training; Arm 3: setting realistic goals; Arm 4: active control group directed to quit services. All interventions will be administered online. Participants are adult smokers in Australia (N = 812) who have an average weekly household income less than $457AUD or receive welfare benefits. Group-based interventions will occur over 6 months, followed by 6 months of forum-based peer support. PRIMARY OUTCOME: self-reported 14-day period prevalence of smoking abstinence at 6 months, with remote biochemical verification of saliva cotinine (< 30 ng/mL). Secondary outcomes include: internal resilience (Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale-25); external resilience (ENRICHD social support tool); quality adjusted life years (EQ-5D-5L); self-efficacy for smoking abstinence (Smoking-Abstinence Self-Efficacy Questionnaire); motivation to quit smoking (Biener and Abrams Contemplation Ladder); nicotine dependence (Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependency); equanimity (Equanimity Scale-16); stress (Perceived Stress Scale-10); goal assessment/attainment (Problems and Goals Assessment Scale). DISCUSSION: This study is the first to compare resilience interventions for low SES smokers which have been identified by them as acceptable. Our various repeated measures and process evaluation will facilitate exploration of mechanisms of impact. We intervene within the novel framework of the Psychosocial Model of Resilience, applying a promising paradigm to address a critical and inequitable public health problem. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ID: ACTRN12621000445875, registered 19 April 2021 ( https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=381007&isReview=true ). The Universal Trial Number is U1111-1261-8951.

Mapping a decade of interventions to address the supportive care needs of individuals living with or beyond cancer: a scoping review of reviews.

PURPOSE: Individuals diagnosed with cancer have a range of supportive care needs that are often unmet despite substantial evidence supporting interventions to address them. Addressing this knowledge-translation gap represents a significant opportunity to improve health outcomes. A scoping review of reviews was conducted to map the breadth of evidence for interventions, highlighting those with an existing evidence base, as well as those requiring further research. METHODS: Systematic or meta-analytic reviews that examined interventions targeting supportive care needs of adults and children with cancer published between 2009 and 2019 were identified via searches in Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus and Cochrane. RESULTS: Five hundred fifty-one systematic reviews, including 250 meta-analyses, of interventions addressing supportive care needs, were included. Most reviews focused on interventions to address the physical and psychosocial needs of individuals with few reviews identified to address practical needs. Interventions using mental health therapies and physical activity were most commonly used to address all supportive care needs, followed by the use of pharmaceutical and medical devices, complementary and alternative therapies, information and education resources, dietary information and specific spirituality and return-to-work interventions. CONCLUSION: This scoping review of reviews presents the first broad overview of the literature addressing the supportive care needs of people living with or beyond cancer. It provides a database that health service providers can search to identify appropriate interventions. Results highlight specific research gaps, particularly for practical needs, where reviews are needed. It highlights where a substantial evidence base exists that researchers and policy-makers can consider when implementing interventions.

The long-term costs and effects of tubal flushing with oil-based versus water-based contrast during hysterosalpingography.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the long-term costs and effects of oil- versus water-based contrast in infertile women undergoing hysterosalpingography (HSG)? DESIGN: This economic evaluation of a long-term follow-up of a multicentre randomized controlled trial involved 1119 infertile women randomized to HSG with oil- (n = 557) or water-based contrast (n = 562) in the Netherlands. RESULTS: In the oil-based contrast group, 39.8% of women needed no other treatment, 34.6% underwent intrauterine insemination (IUI) and 25.6% had IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in the 5 years following HSG. In the water-based contrast group, 35.0% of women had no other treatment, 34.2% had IUI and 30.8% had IVF/ICSI in the 5 years following HSG (P = 0.113). After 5 years of follow-up, HSG using oil-based contrast resulted in equivalent costs (mean cost difference -€144; 95% confidence interval [CI] -€579 to +€290; P = 0.515) for a 5% increase in the cumulative ongoing pregnancy rate compared with HSG using water-based contrast (80% compared with 75%, Relative Risk (RR) 1.07; 95% CI 1.00-1.14). Similarly, HSG with oil-based contrast resulted in equivalent costs (mean cost difference -€50; 95% CI -€576 to +€475; P = 0.850) for a 7.5% increase in the cumulative live birth rate compared with HSG with water-based contrast (74.8% compared with 67.3%, RR 1.11; 95% CI 1.03-1.20), making it the dominant strategy. Scenario analyses suggest that the oil-based contrast medium is the dominant strategy up to a price difference of €300. CONCLUSION: Over a 5-year follow-up, HSG with an oil-based contrast was associated with a 5% increase in ongoing pregnancy rate, a 7.5% increase in live birth rate and similar costs to HSG with water-based contrast.

Evaluations of healthcare delivery models in Australia: a scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review is to identify and describe the evidence base of published primary, comparative healthcare delivery model evaluations that require the employment of additional healthcare practitioners undertaken in Australia. INTRODUCTION: In Australia, formal processes are utilized in assessing the value of new pharmaceuticals and medical services, which inform decisions on whether to list new items on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Schedule and Medicare Benefits Schedule, respectively. There are no formal processes to aid in decision making on the funding of new, evaluated healthcare delivery models. This imbalance undervalues the available evidence on healthcare delivery models, leading to the sub-optimal allocation of resources between new health technologies and new healthcare delivery models within the Australian health system. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Eligible studies will evaluate healthcare delivery models that require the employment of additional healthcare practitioners (either to replace existing practitioners of another type or to provide new services). Studies must include a comparator to evaluate a condition of interest being treated using alternative healthcare delivery models, or no treatment, and will involve observation of outcomes over a similar period of time. Studies in any Australian setting will be included. Interventions aimed at primary preventions will be excluded. METHODS: PubMed, Embase and CINAHL will be searched for articles published from 2008. One reviewer will review titles, and then two reviewers will independently review abstracts to identify eligible studies. One reviewer will extract data on study characteristics and design. The results of the data extraction will be presented in a table with examples of case studies.

Oil-based or water-based contrast for hysterosalpingography in infertile women: a cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost effectiveness of the use of oil-based versus water-based contrast in infertile women undergoing hysterosalpingography (HSG). DESIGN: Economic evaluation alongside a multicenter randomized trial. SETTING: Hospitals. PATIENT(S): Infertile women with an ovulatory cycle, 18-39 years of age, low risk of tubal pathology. INTERVENTION(S): Use of oil-based versus water-based contrast during HSG. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Costs per additional ongoing pregnancy and per live birth within 6 months of randomization, incremental cost-effective ratios (ICERs). RESULT(S): A total of 1,119 women were randomized to HSG (oil-based contrast, n = 557; water-based contrast, n = 562). After HSG, most women had no additional treatment; a minority had IUI or IVF. In the oil group, 39.7% women had an ongoing pregnancy within 6 months of randomization versus 29.1% women in the water group. There was a 10.7% increase in the live birth rate in the oil group. For ongoing pregnancy, the mean costs per couple were US$2,014 in the oil group and US$1,144 in the water group, with a corresponding ICER of US$8,198 per additional ongoing pregnancy. For live birth, the mean costs per couple were US$11,532 in the oil group and US$8,310 in the water group, with a corresponding ICER of US$30,112 per additional live birth. CONCLUSION(S): Hysterosalpingography with oil-based contrast results in higher 6-month ongoing pregnancy and live birth rate. If society is willing to pay US$8,198 for an additional ongoing pregnancy, HSG with oil-based contrast is a cost-effective strategy compared with HSG with water-based contrast for infertile, ovulatory women at low risk for tubal pathology. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Dutch Trial Register, NTR 6577 (www.trialregister.nl).

Informing disinvestment with limited evidence: cobalamin deficiency in the fatigued.

OBJECTIVES: Health technology reassessment and disinvestment can be difficult due to uncertainties regarding available evidence. Pathology testing to investigate cobalamin (vitamin B12) deficiency is a strong case in point. We conducted a 3-month economic evaluation of five strategies for diagnosing and treating cobalamin deficiency in adult patients hypothetically presenting with new unexplained fatigue in the primary care setting. The first consultation per patient was considered. Screening tests other than serum cobalamin were not included. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was undertaken using a decision tree to represent the diagnostic / treatment pathways, with relevant cost and utility scores assigned to different stages in the evaluation process. Input parameter values were estimated from published evidence, supplemented by expert opinion, with sensitivity analysis undertaken to represent parameter uncertainty. RESULTS: Ordering serum vitamin B12 to assess cobalamin deficiency among patients with unexplained fatigue was not cost-effective in any patient population, irrespective of pretest prevalence of this deficiency. For patients with a pretest prevalence above 1 percent, treating all with oral vitamin B12 supplements without testing was most cost-effective, whereas watchful waiting with symptoms monitoring was most cost-effective for patients with lower pretest prevalence probabilities. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial evidence gaps exist for parameter estimation: questionable cobalamin deficiency levels in the fatigued; debatable treatment methods; unknown natural history of the condition. Despite this, we reveal a robust path for disinvestment decision making in the face of a paradox between the evidence required to inform disinvestment compared with its paucity in informing initial funding decisions.

Lifetime cost-utility analyses of deferasirox in beta-thalassaemia patients with chronic iron overload: a UK perspective.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Regular blood transfusions for beta-thalassaemia patients lead to the accumulation of iron deposits in the body. In order to remove such deposits, iron chelation therapy is required. Subcutaneously administered deferoxamine has been the gold standard chelation therapy for over 40 years. Deferasirox is a newer chelation therapy that is taken orally once daily. The objective of this study was to estimate the long-term costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) associated with deferoxamine and deferasirox in a cohort of transfusion-dependent beta-thalassaemia patients from a UK health service perspective. METHODS: A 50-year annual cycle state transition model comprised three core health states: alive without cardiac complications, alive with cardiac complications, and dead, as well as representing other chronic complications of iron overload: diabetes, hypogonadism, hypoparathyroidism and hypothyroidism. The model was calibrated to identify sets of convergent input parameter values that predicted observed overall survival by mean lifetime compliance with chelation therapy. A pivotal non-inferiority trial informed the main estimates of the effectiveness of deferasirox, which were applied to the calibrated model. Using cost values for the year 2011, costs and utilities were summed over patients' lifetimes to estimate lifetime costs and QALY gains. RESULTS: Mean lifetime treatment costs for patients receiving deferoxamine were £70,000 higher than deferasirox. Drug acquisition costs were £100,000 higher for deferasirox, but administration costs associated with deferoxamine were £170,000 higher. Higher compliance associated with oral deferasirox administration led to fewer complications. Combined with the quality-of-life effects of an oral mode of administration, an average gain of 4.85 QALYs for deferasirox was estimated. In the base case, deferasirox dominates deferoxamine, i.e., costs less and patients gain more QALYs. The key parameter is the proportion of deferoxamine patients using balloon infusers. Sensitivity analyses showed that even when the proportion of patients using balloon infusers is decreased from 79 to 25 %, the incremental cost per QALY gained remains well under £20,000. CONCLUSION: Higher drug acquisition costs for deferasirox are offset by the avoidance of infusion-related equipment costs. Combined with health benefits derived from an oral mode of administration and improved compliance, deferasirox has a high probability of being a cost-effective intervention compared with deferoxamine.

Evaluating the effects of variation in clinical practice: a risk adjusted cost-effectiveness (RAC-E) analysis of acute stroke services.

BACKGROUND: Methods for the cost-effectiveness analysis of health technologies are now well established, but such methods may also have a useful role in the context of evaluating the effects of variation in applied clinical practice. This study illustrates a general methodology for the comparative analysis of applied clinical practice at alternative institutions--risk adjusted cost-effectiveness (RAC-E) analysis--with an application that compares acute hospital services for stroke patients admitted to the main public hospitals in South Australia. METHODS: Using linked, routinely collected data on all South Australian hospital separations from July 2001 to June 2008, an analysis of the RAC-E of services provided at four metropolitan hospitals was undertaken using a decision analytic framework. Observed (plus extrapolated) and expected lifetime costs and survival were compared across patient populations, from which the relative cost-effectiveness of services provided at the different hospitals was estimated. RESULTS: Unadjusted results showed that at one hospital patients incurred fewer costs and gained more life years than at the other hospitals (i.e. it was the dominant hospital). After risk adjustment, the cost minimizing hospital incurred the lowest costs, but with fewer life-years gained than one other hospital. The mean incremental cost per life-year gained of services provided at the most effective hospital was under $20,000, with an associated 65% probability of being cost-effective at a $50,000 per life year monetary threshold. CONCLUSIONS: RAC-E analyses can be used to identify important variation in the costs and outcomes associated with clinical practice at alternative institutions. Such data provides an impetus for further investigation to identify specific areas of variation, which may then inform the dissemination of best practice service delivery and organisation.

The effect of testosterone and a nutritional supplement on hospital admissions in under-nourished, older people.

BACKGROUND: Weight loss and under-nutrition are relatively common in older people, and are associated with poor outcomes including increased rates of hospital admissions and death. In a pilot study of 49 undernourished older, community dwelling people we found that daily treatment for one year with a combination of testosterone tablets and a nutritional supplement produced a significant reduction in hospitalizations. We propose a larger, multicentre study to explore and hopefully confirm this exciting, potentially important finding (NHMRC project grant number 627178). METHODS/DESIGN: One year randomized control trial where subjects are allocated to either oral testosterone undecanoate and high calorie oral nutritional supplement or placebo medication and low calorie oral nutritional supplementation. 200 older community-dwelling, undernourished people [Mini Nutritional Assessment score <24 and either: a) low body weight (body mass index, in kg/m(2): <22) or b) recent weight loss (>7.5% over 3 months)]. Hospital admissions, quality-adjusted life years, functional status, nutritional health, muscle strength, body composition and other variables will be assessed. DISCUSSION: The pilot study showed that combined treatment with an oral testosterone and a supplement drink was well tolerated and safe, and reduced the number of people hospitalised and duration of hospital admissions in undernourished, community dwelling older people. This is an exciting finding, as it identifies a treatment which may be of substantial benefit to many older people in our community. We now propose to conduct a multi-centre study to test these findings in a substantially larger subject group, and to determine the cost effectiveness of this treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian Clinical Trial Registry: ACTRN 12610000356066.

Effectiveness of earlier antenatal screening for sickle cell disease and thalassaemia in primary care: cluster randomised trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of offering antenatal screening for sickle cell disease and thalassaemia in primary care as a way of facilitating earlier uptake of screening. DESIGN: Partial factorial cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 25 UK general practices from deprived inner city areas. PARTICIPANTS: Anonymised data on all pregnant women attending participating practices during a six month period before randomisation and a seven month period after randomisation. This included 1708 eligible women. INTERVENTION: Practices were randomised to three groups for seven months: parallel testing in general practice (tests for sickle cell disease and thalassaemia offered to both parents when pregnancy was first reported); sequential testing in general practice (tests offered to mothers when pregnancy was first reported, and subsequently to the partners of women who were found to be carriers); and midwife care (tests offered to mothers at first consultation with a midwife). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome (available for all women) was the proportion of eligible women screened before 10 weeks' (70 days') gestation. Secondary outcomes were an offer of screening to women before 10 weeks' gestation, gestational age at testing, mean interval from first visit to the general practice visit to screening, and women's knowledge of the carrier status of their baby's father before 77 days' (11 weeks') gestation. The study was designed to detect a 20% absolute increase in screening uptake. Cluster level analyses were adjusted for age group, parity, ethnic group, primary care organisation, and number of general practitioners per practice. RESULTS: Data were analysed for 1708 eligible women. In the midwife care arm, 2% (9/441) of women were screened before 10 weeks' gestation compared with 24% (161/677) in the GP parallel testing arm and 28% (167/590) in the GP sequential testing arm. The estimated adjusted difference between the midwife care and GP parallel testing arms was 16.5% (95% confidence interval 7.1% to 25.8%; P=0.002) and between the midwife care and GP sequential testing arms was 27.8% (14.8% to 40.7%; P<0.001). By 26 weeks' gestation the proportion of women screened across the three trial arms was similar (81%). The proportion of women who knew the carrier status of the baby's father by 11 weeks' gestation was 0% (0/441) in the midwife care arm, 2% (13/677) in the GP parallel testing arm (P=0.003), and 1% (3/590) in the GP sequential testing arm (P=0.374). CONCLUSION: Offering antenatal screening for sickle cell disease and thalassaemia as part of consultations for pregnancy confirmation in primary care increases the proportion of women screened before 10 weeks' gestation. Even with intervention, however, only a minority of women were screened before 10 weeks. Additional interventions should be considered to achieve testing early in pregnancy for most women wanting such tests so that couples with affected pregnancies have less time pressure to choose options, which may include termination of the pregnancy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN00677850.

Model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of interventions aimed at preventing medication error at hospital admission (medicines reconciliation).

RATIONALE: Medication errors can lead to preventable adverse drug events (pADEs) that have significant cost and health implications. Errors often occur at care interfaces, and various interventions have been devised to reduce medication errors at the point of admission to hospital. The aim of this study is to assess the incremental costs and effects [measured as quality adjusted life years (QALYs)] of a range of such interventions for which evidence of effectiveness exists. METHODS: A previously published medication errors model was adapted to describe the pathway of errors occurring at admission through to the occurrence of pADEs. The baseline model was populated using literature-based values, and then calibrated to observed outputs. Evidence of effects was derived from a systematic review of interventions aimed at preventing medication error at hospital admission. RESULTS: All five interventions, for which evidence of effectiveness was identified, are estimated to be extremely cost-effective when compared with the baseline scenario. Pharmacist-led reconciliation intervention has the highest expected net benefits, and a probability of being cost-effective of over 60% by a QALY value of pound10 000. CONCLUSIONS: The medication errors model provides reasonably strong evidence that some form of intervention to improve medicines reconciliation is a cost-effective use of NHS resources. The variation in the reported effectiveness of the few identified studies of medication error interventions illustrates the need for extreme attention to detail in the development of interventions, but also in their evaluation and may justify the primary evaluation of more than one specification of included interventions.