International comparison of hospitalizations and emergency department visits related to mental health conditions across high-income countries before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To explore variation in rates of acute care utilization for mental health conditions, including hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits, across high-income countries before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: Administrative patient-level data between 2017 and 2020 of eight high-income countries: Canada, England, Finland, France, New Zealand, Spain, Switzerland, and the United States (US). STUDY DESIGN: Multi-country retrospective observational study using a federated data approach that evaluated age-sex standardized rates of hospitalizations and ED visits for mental health conditions. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: There was significant variation in rates of acute mental health care utilization across countries. Among the subset of four countries with both hospitalization and ED data, the US had the highest pre-COVID-19 combined average annual acute care rate of 1613 episodes/100,000 people (95% CI: 1428, 1797). Finland had the lowest rate of 776 (686, 866). When examining hospitalization rates only, France had the highest rate of inpatient hospitalizations of 988/100,000 (95% CI 858, 1118) while Spain had the lowest at 87/100,000 (95% CI 76, 99). For ED rates for mental health conditions, the US had the highest rate of 958/100,000 (95% CI 861, 1055) while France had the lowest rate with 241/100,000 (95% CI 216, 265). Notable shifts coinciding with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic were observed including a substitution of care setting in the US from ED to inpatient care, and overall declines in acute care utilization in Canada and France. CONCLUSION: The study underscores the importance of understanding and addressing variation in acute care utilization for mental health conditions, including the differential effect of COVID-19, across different health care systems. Further research is needed to elucidate the extent to which factors such as workforce capacity, access barriers, financial incentives, COVID-19 preparedness, and community-based care may contribute to these variations. WHAT IS KNOWN ON THIS TOPIC: Approximately one billion people globally live with a mental health condition, with significant consequences for individuals and societies. Rates of mental health diagnoses vary across high-income countries, with substantial differences in access to effective care. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated mental health challenges globally, with varying impacts across countries. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: This study provides a comprehensive international comparison of hospitalization and emergency department visit rates for mental health conditions across eight high-income countries. It highlights significant variations in acute care utilization patterns, particularly in countries that are more likely to care for people with mental health conditions in emergency departments rather than inpatient facilities The study identifies temporal and cross-country differences in acute care management of mental health conditions coinciding with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Identifying health inequities faced by older adults with rare diseases: A systematic literature review and proposal for an ethical spectrum and resource allocation framework.

Ageism in healthcare has received increased attention in recent years, but literature focusing on how it affects individuals living with rare diseases remains scant. The rare disease population already faces obstacles when navigating health systems, and ageism has the potential to exacerbate existing health inequities. We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed and gray literature on health inequities in rare disease populations, seeking to identify publications that reported primary or secondary data on the equitable or inequitable treatment of these populations, or that discussed related regulatory, moral, or philosophical issues. Our aims were to understand how health inequities in these populations arise, how they are justified from societal points of view, how they manifest themselves in laws and regulations, and what effects they have on health care access and health outcomes. We retrieved information from 63 publications, which we inductively synthesized into five categories: ethical discussions, societal preferences, regulations, access to care, and health outcomes. Integrating insights from these categories, we developed an Ethical Spectrum and Resource Allocation Framework, which explains the emergence of equity issues and how they are manifested in health systems. By providing a better understanding of the root causes of health inequities, particularly among older adults, the framework can inform health policymaking, improving access to care and health outcomes for rare disease patients.

The modernisation of newborn screening as a pan-European challenge - An international delphi study.

Newborn screening is a public health measure to diagnose rare diseases at birth, thereby minimising negative effects of late treatment. Genomic technologies promise an unprecedented expansion of screened diseases at low cost and with transformative potential for newborn screening programmes. However, barriers to the public funding of genomic newborn screening are poorly understood, particularly in light of the heterogenous European newborn screening landscape. This study therefore aims to understand whether international newborn screening experts share a common understanding of the barriers to fund genomic newborn screening. For this purpose, we convened 21 European newborn screening experts across a range of professions and national backgrounds in a Delphi study. Stable consensus, determined via the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks test, was found via three consecutive survey rounds for all presented barriers. Experts generally judged the scenario of genomic newborn screening being available to every newborn in seven years to be unlikely, identifying treatability and the absence of counselling and a skilled workforce as the most significant barriers to public funding. We identify value re-definition for rare disease treatments, centralisation of genomic expertise, and international research consortia as avenues for pan-European actions which build on the consensus achieved by our Delphi panel.

The challenges of regulatory pluralism.

Countries with small and/or less-resourced regulatory authorities that operate outside of a larger medical product regulatory system face a regulatory strategy dilemma. These countries may rely on foreign well-resourced regulators by recognising the regulatory decisions of large systems and following suit (regulatory reliance); alternatively, such countries may extend formal decision recognition to regulators in multiple other jurisdictions with similar oversight and public health goals, following a system which we call regulatory pluralism. In this policy comment, we discuss three potential limitations to regulatory pluralism: (i) regulatory escape, in which manufacturers exploit regulatory variation and choose the lowest regulatory threshold for their product; (ii) increased fragmentation and complexity for countries adopting this approach, which may, in turn, lead to inconsistent processes; and (iii) loss of international bargaining power in developing regulatory policies. We argue that regulatory pluralism has important long-term implications, which may not be readily apparent to policy makers opting for such an approach. We advocate for the long-term value of an alternative approach relying on greater collaboration between regulatory authorities, which may relieve administrative pressures on countries with small or less-resourced regulatory authorities, regardless of whether countries pursue a strategy of domestic regulation or regulatory pluralism.

Health literacy, governance and systems leadership contribute to the implementation of the One Health approach: a virtuous circle.

One Health is an important approach to addressing health threats and promoting health through interdisciplinary health, policy, legislation and leadership research to achieve better human and animal health and better outcomes for the planet. The Covid-19 pandemic has triggered an urgent awareness of the need to develop innovative integrative solutions to address root causes of such threats to health, which requires collaboration across disciplines and amongst different sectors and communities. We explore how achieving the Quadripartite Organizations' One Health Joint Plan of Action can be supported by the concepts of 'One Health literacy' and 'One Health governance' and promote both academic and policy dialogue. We show how One Health literacy and One Health governance influence and reinforce each other, while an interdisciplinary systems leadership approach acts as a catalyst and mechanism for understanding and enacting change. Based on our understanding of how these elements influence the implementation of the One Health approach, we describe a model for considering how external triggering events such as the Covid-19 pandemic may prompt a virtuous circle whereby exposure to and exploration of One Health issues may lead to improved One Health literacy and to better governance. We close with recommendations to international organisations, national governments and to leaders in policy, research and practice to enhance their influence on society, the planetary environment, health and well-being.

Are the European reference networks for rare diseases ready to embrace machine learning? A mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: The delay in diagnosis for rare disease (RD) patients is often longer than for patients with common diseases. Machine learning (ML) technologies have the potential to speed up and increase the precision of diagnosis in this population group. We aim to explore the expectations and experiences of the members of the European Reference Networks (ERNs) for RDs with those technologies and their potential for application. METHODS: We used a mixed-methods approach with an online survey followed by a focus group discussion. Our study targeted primarily medical professionals but also other individuals affiliated with any of the 24 ERNs. RESULTS: The online survey yielded 423 responses from ERN members. Participants reported a limited degree of knowledge of and experience with ML technologies. They considered improved diagnostic accuracy the most important potential benefit, closely followed by the synthesis of clinical information, and indicated the lack of training in these new technologies, which hinders adoption and implementation in routine care. Most respondents supported the option that ML should be an optional but recommended part of the diagnostic process for RDs. Most ERN members saw the use of ML limited to specialised units only in the next 5 years, where those technologies should be funded by public sources. Focus group discussions concluded that the potential of ML technologies is substantial and confirmed that the technologies will have an important impact on healthcare and RDs in particular. As ML technologies are not the core competency of health care professionals, participants deemed a close collaboration with developers necessary to ensure that results are valid and reliable. However, based on our results, we call for more research to understand other stakeholders' opinions and expectations, including the views of patient organisations. CONCLUSIONS: We found enthusiasm to implement and apply ML technologies, especially diagnostic tools in the field of RDs, despite the perceived lack of experience. Early dialogue and collaboration between health care professionals, developers, industry, policymakers, and patient associations seem to be crucial to building trust, improving performance, and ultimately increasing the willingness to accept diagnostics based on ML technologies.

Genetic newborn screening and digital technologies: A project protocol based on a dual approach to shorten the rare diseases diagnostic path in Europe.

Since 72% of rare diseases are genetic in origin and mostly paediatrics, genetic newborn screening represents a diagnostic "window of opportunity". Therefore, many gNBS initiatives started in different European countries. Screen4Care is a research project, which resulted of a joint effort between the European Union Commission and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations. It focuses on genetic newborn screening and artificial intelligence-based tools which will be applied to a large European population of about 25.000 infants. The neonatal screening strategy will be based on targeted sequencing, while whole genome sequencing will be offered to all enrolled infants who may show early symptoms but have resulted negative at the targeted sequencing-based newborn screening. We will leverage artificial intelligence-based algorithms to identify patients using Electronic Health Records (EHR) and to build a repository "symptom checkers" for patients and healthcare providers. S4C will design an equitable, ethical, and sustainable framework for genetic newborn screening and new digital tools, corroborated by a large workout where legal, ethical, and social complexities will be addressed with the intent of making the framework highly and flexibly translatable into the diverse European health systems.

An econometric approach to aggregating multiple cardiovascular outcomes in German hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: Development of an aggregate quality index to evaluate hospital performance in cardiovascular events treatment. METHODS: We applied a two-stage regression approach using an accelerated failure time model based on variance weights to estimate hospital quality over four cardiovascular interventions: elective coronary bypass graft, elective cardiac resynchronization therapy, and emergency treatment for acute myocardial infarction. Mortality and readmissions were used as outcomes. For the estimation we used data from a statutory health insurer in Germany from 2005 to 2016. RESULTS: The precision-based weights calculated in the first stage were higher for mortality than for readmissions. In general, teaching hospitals performed better in our ranking of hospital quality compared to non-teaching hospitals, as did private not-for-profit hospitals compared to hospitals with public or private for-profit ownership. DISCUSSION: The proposed approach is a new method to aggregate single hospital quality outcomes using objective, precision-based weights. Likelihood-based accelerated failure time models make use of existing data more efficiently compared to widely used models relying on dichotomized data. The main advantage of the variance-based weights approach is that the extent to which an indicator contributes to the aggregate index depends on the amount of its variance.

Why the US spends more treating high-need high-cost patients: a comparative study of pricing and utilization of care in six high-income countries.

One of the most pressing challenges facing most health care systems is rising costs. As the population ages and the demand for health care services grows, there is a growing need to understand the drivers of these costs across systems. This paper attempts to address this gap by examining utilization and spending of the course of a year for two specific high-need high-cost patient types: a frail older person with a hip fracture and an older person with congestive heart failure and diabetes. Data on utilization and expenditure is collected across five health care settings (hospital, post-acute rehabilitation, primary care, outpatient specialty and drugs), in six countries (Canada (Ontario), France, Germany, Spain (Aragon), Sweden and the United States (fee for service Medicare) and used to construct treatment episode Purchasing Power Parities (PPPs) that compare prices using baskets of goods from the different care settings. The treatment episode PPPs suggest other countries have more similar volumes of care to the US as compared to other standardization approaches, suggesting that US prices account for more of the differential in US health care expenditures. The US also differs with regards to the share of expenditures across care settings, with post-acute rehab and outpatient speciality expenditures accounting for a larger share of the total relative to comparators.

After the four-year transition period: Is the European Union's Medical Device Regulation of 2017 likely to achieve its main goals?

Following a series of major scandals over the past two decades, the medical device industry is now undergoing a major regulatory change: the implementation of the European Union Medical Device Regulation (MDR) of 2017. After a transitional period of four years, the MDR became fully binding in May 2021. Although the medium- and long-term impacts of the MDR are still unclear, a range of scholars, health care professionals, and industry representatives have begun to publish early evidence and publicize their views on how the new regulation may impact free trade and patient safety. Even a cursory view of their output reveals hypotheses and opinions that could hardly be more divergent. The reasons for this disagreement are unclear and may extend beyond the different interests of the various stakeholder groups. To find out why this might be the case, we examine the MDR and seek to improve scholarly understanding of this most extensive regulation of medical devices since the early 1990s. We offer policymakers suggestions to help them improve future regulation. Based on theoretical considerations, we conclude that while the MDR is highly likely to strengthen the internal market of the EU, its impact on patient safety will remain unclear as long as there are no comprehensive studies on this topic that are based on empirical data.

An approach to quantify parameter uncertainty in early assessment of novel health technologies.

Health economic modeling of novel technology at the early stages of a product lifecycle has been used to identify technologies that are likely to be cost-effective. Such early assessments are challenging due to the potentially limited amount of data. Modelers typically conduct uncertainty analyses to evaluate their effect on decision-relevant outcomes. Current approaches, however, are limited in their scope of application and imposes an unverifiable assumption, that is, uncertainty can be precisely represented by a probability distribution. In the absence of reliable data, an approach that uses the fewest number of assumptions is desirable. This study introduces a generalized approach for quantifying parameter uncertainty, that is, probability bound analysis (PBA), that does not require a precise specification of a probability distribution in the context of early-stage health economic modeling. We introduce the concept of a probability box (p-box) as a measure of uncertainty without necessitating a precise probability distribution. We provide formulas for a p-box given data on summary statistics of a parameter. We describe an approach to propagate p-boxes into a model and provide step-by-step guidance on how to implement PBA. We conduct a case and examine the differences between the status-quo and PBA approaches and their potential implications on decision-making.

How to pay primary care physicians for SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations: An analysis of 43 EU and OECD countries.

Vaccinations are crucial to fighting SARS-CoV-2, and high coverage rates can in most countries probably only be achieved with the involvement of primary care physicians (PCPs). We aimed to explore how SARS-CoV-2 vaccination payment schemes in 43 countries differ with regard to the (i) type of payment scheme, (ii) amount paid, (iii) degree of bundling, and (iv) use of pay-for-performance elements. We collected information on payments and health system characteristics, such as PCP income and employment status, in all EU and OECD countries over time. We regressed the payment amount on the income of PCPs for countries with activity-dependent schemes using a linear regression (OLS), and we interpreted the residuals of this regression as a vaccination payment index. The majority of countries (30/43) had chosen payment schemes that reward PCPs for the activity they perform. Seventeen countries paid less per vaccination than the income-adjusted average, whereas 13 countries paid more. Twelve countries used pay-for-performance elements.

Coverage with evidence development for medical devices in Europe: Can practice meet theory?

Health economists have written extensively on the design and implementation of coverage with evidence development (CED) schemes and have proposed theoretical frameworks based on cost-effectiveness modeling and value of information analysis. CED may aid decision-makers when there is uncertainty about the (cost-)effectiveness of a new health technology at the time of reimbursement. Medical devices are potential candidates for CED schemes, as regulatory regimes do not usually require the same level of efficacy and safety data normally needed for pharmaceuticals. The purpose of this research is to assess whether the actual practice of CED for medical devices in Europe meets the theoretical principles proposed by health economists and whether theory and practice can be more closely aligned. Based on decision-makers' perceptions of the challenges associated with CED schemes, plus examples from the schemes themselves, we discuss a series of proposals for assessing the desirability of schemes, their design, implementation, and evaluation. These proposals, while reflecting the practical challenges with developing CED programs, embody many of the principles suggested by economists and should support decision-makers in dealing with uncertainty about the real-world performance of devices.

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

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

Validation and application of a needs-based segmentation tool for cross-country comparisons.

OBJECTIVE: To compare countries' health care needs by segmenting populations into a set of needs-based health states. DATA SOURCES: We used seven waves of the Survey of Health, Aging and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) panel survey data. STUDY DESIGN: We developed the Cross-Country Simple Segmentation Tool (CCSST), a validated clinician-administered instrument for categorizing older individuals by distinct, homogeneous health and related social service needs. Using clinical indicators, self-reported physician diagnosis of chronic disease, and performance-based tests conducted during the survey interview, individuals were assigned to 1-5 global impressions (GI) segments and assessed for having any of the four identifiable complicating factors (CFs). We used Cox proportional hazard models to estimate the risk of mortality by segment. First, we show the segmentation cross-sectionally to assess cross-country differences in the fraction of individuals with different levels of medical needs. Second, we compare the differences in the rate at which individuals transition between those levels and death. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We segmented 270,208 observations (from Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland) from 96,396 individuals into GI and CF categories. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The CCSST is a valid tool for segmenting populations into needs-based states, showing Switzerland with the lowest fraction of individuals in high medical needs segments, followed by Denmark and Sweden, and Poland with the highest fraction, followed by Italy and Israel. Comparing hazard ratios of transitioning between health states may help identify country-specific areas for analysis of ecological and cultural risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: The CCSST is an innovative tool for aggregate cross-country comparisons of both health needs and transitions between them. A cross-country comparison gives policy makers an effective means of comparing national health system performance and provides targeted guidance on how to identify strategies for curbing the rise of high-need, high-cost patients.

Improving health care from the bottom up: Factors for the successful implementation of kaizen in acute care hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Kaizen-a management technique increasingly employed in health care-enables employees, regardless of their hierarchy level, to contribute to the improvement of their organization. The approach puts special emphasis on frontline employees because it represents one of their main opportunities to participate directly in decision making. In this study, we aimed to (1) understand the experiences of nurses in two hospitals that had recently implemented kaizen, and (2) identify factors affecting the implementation of the technique. METHODS: By means of purposeful sampling, we selected 30 nurses from different units in two private acute care hospitals in Switzerland in May 2018. We used the Organizational Transformation Model to conduct semi-structured interviews and perform qualitative content analysis. Lastly, originating from Herzberg's motivation theory, we suggest two types of factor influencing the implementation of kaizen-hygiene factors that may prevent nurses from getting demotivated, and motivational factors that may boost their motivation. RESULTS: Nurses generally experienced kaizen as a positive practice that enabled them to discuss work-related activities in a more comprehensive manner. In some cases, however, a lack of visible improvement in the workplace lowered nurses' motivation to make suggestions. Nurses' attitudes towards kaizen differed across both hospitals depending on the available managerial support, resources such as infrastructure and staffing levels. CONCLUSIONS: From our findings, we derived several coping strategies to help health practitioners implement kaizen for the benefit of their organization and employees: Strong managerial support, appropriate use of kaizen tools, and a greater sense of team cohesion, among other factors, can influence how effectively hospital teams implement kaizen. To reap the benefits of kaizen, hospital managers should promote the exchange of opinions across hierarchy levels, allocate the necessary resources in terms of personnel and infrastructure, and show nurses how the technique can help them improve their workplace.

International comparison of spending and utilization at the end of life for hip fracture patients.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and explore differences in spending and utilization of key health services at the end of life among hip fracture patients across seven developed countries. DATA SOURCES: Individual-level claims data from the inpatient and outpatient health care sectors compiled by the International Collaborative on Costs, Outcomes, and Needs in Care (ICCONIC). STUDY DESIGN: We retrospectively analyzed utilization and spending from acute hospital care, emergency department, outpatient primary care and specialty physician visits, and outpatient drugs. Patterns of spending and utilization were compared in the last 30, 90, and 180 days across Australia, Canada, England, Germany, New Zealand, Spain, and the United States. We employed linear regression models to measure age- and sex-specific effects within and across countries. In addition, we analyzed hospital-centricity, that is, the days spent in hospital and site of death. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We identified patients who sustained a hip fracture in 2016 and died within 12 months from date of admission. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Resource use, costs, and the proportion of deaths in hospital showed large variability being high in England and Spain, while low in New Zealand. Days in hospital significantly decreased with increasing age in Canada, Germany, Spain, and the United States. Hospital spending near date of death was significantly lower for women in Canada, Germany, and the United States. The age gradient and the sex effect were less pronounced in utilization and spending of emergency care, outpatient care, and drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Across seven countries, we find important variations in end-of-life care for patients who sustained a hip fracture, with some differences explained by sex and age. Our work sheds important insights that may help ongoing health policy discussions on equity, efficiency, and reimbursement in health care systems.

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

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

Differences in health care spending and utilization among older frail adults in high-income countries: ICCONIC hip fracture persona.

OBJECTIVE: This study explores differences in spending and utilization of health care services for an older person with frailty before and after a hip fracture. DATA SOURCES: We used individual-level patient data from five care settings. STUDY DESIGN: We compared utilization and spending of an older person aged older than 65 years for 365 days before and after a hip fracture across 11 countries and five domains of care as follows: acute hospital care, primary care, outpatient specialty care, post-acute rehabilitative care, and outpatient drugs. Utilization and spending were age and sex standardized.. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: The data were compiled by the International Collaborative on Costs, Outcomes, and Needs in Care (ICCONIC) across 11 countries as follows: Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United States. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The sample ranged from 1859 patients in Spain to 42,849 in France. Mean age ranged from 81.2 in Switzerland to 84.7 in Australia. The majority of patients across countries were female. Relative to other countries, the United States had the lowest inpatient length of stay (11.3), but the highest number of days were spent in post-acute care rehab (100.7) and, on average, had more visits to specialist providers (6.8 per year) than primary care providers (4.0 per year). Across almost all sectors, the United States spent more per person than other countries per unit ($13,622 per hospitalization, $233 per primary care visit, $386 per MD specialist visit). Patients also had high expenditures in the year prior to the hip fracture, mostly concentrated in the inpatient setting. CONCLUSION: Across 11 high-income countries, there is substantial variation in health care spending and utilization for an older person with frailty, both before and after a hip fracture. The United States is the most expensive country due to high prices and above average utilization of post-acute rehab care.