RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Chronic diseases are associated with a high disease burden. Under- and overprovision of care as well as quality variation between health care providers persists, while current quality indicators rarely capture the patients' perspective. Capturing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as well as patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) is becoming more and more important to identify gaps in care provision, prioritize services most valuable to patients, and aid patients' self-management. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to measure the potential benefits and effectiveness of using electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) and electronic patient-reported experience measures in a structured and population-based manner to enhance health care for chronic disease patients in Germany. METHODS: This prospective cohort study aims to evaluate the potential benefits of PROM usage in patients with chronic diseases. We evaluate whether (1) digitally collected PROMs and PREMs can be used for health system performance assessment by generating a representative response of chronically diseased individuals with asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, and coronary artery disease across Germany, and (2) based on the PROMs and PREMs, low-value care can be identified. As patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are rarely presented back to patients, (3) this study also examines patients' reactions to their PROM scores in the form of digital PRO feedback. For these purposes, randomly selected patients from a nationwide German insurer are digitally surveyed with generic and disease-specific PROMs and PREMs, as well as additional questions on their health-related behavior, 4 times over 1 year. Individual PRO feedback is presented back to patients longitudinally and compared to a peer group after each survey period. Patient-reported data is linked with health insurance data. Response rates, changes in health and experience outcomes over time, self-reported changes in health behavior, and health care system usage will be analyzed. RESULTS: The PROMchronic study explores the usage of PROMs in patients with chronic diseases. Data collection began in October 2023, after the initial invitation letter. All the 200,000 potential patients have been invited to participate in the study. Data have not yet been analyzed. Publication of the interim results is planned for the autumn of 2024, and the results are planned to be published in 2025. CONCLUSIONS: We aim to fill the research gap on the population-based usage of PROMs and PREMs in patients with chronic diseases and add to the current understanding of PROM data-sharing with patients. The study's results can thereby inform whether a health care system-wide approach to collecting PROMs and PREMs can be used to identify low-value care, assess quality variation within and across chronic conditions, and determine whether PRO feedback is helpful and associated with any changes in patients' health behaviors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00031656; https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00031656. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/56487.
Asunto(s)
Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Humanos , Enfermedad Crónica/terapia , Estudios Prospectivos , Alemania , Masculino , Femenino , Estudios de CohortesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Value-based healthcare (VBHC) aims to increase patient outcomes in relation to the costs incurred, with a focus on measuring these outcomes using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The German healthcare system faces the challenge of quality disparities in care amidst rising costs, making VBHC of interest. OBJECTIVES: This paper aims to illustrate how VBHC principles are currently being implemented in the field of internal medicine in Germany and to identify the potential that can be derived from VBHC pioneering examples from the Netherlands. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Selected case studies are presented to illustrate how VBHC principles are already being applied in internal medicine, focusing on where PROMs are utilized and how value-based reimbursement supports VBHC implementation-both in Germany and the Netherlands. RESULTS: In Germany, various cross-provider initiatives and individual providers implement the VBHC element of PROMs measurement. In addition, the Baden-Württemberg selective contract in cardiology demonstrates how financing VBHC elements in regular care was already made possible in Germany. Pioneers such as the Dutch center of excellence Diabeter and the multidisciplinary care network Netherlands Heart Network provide further inspiration for the implementation of VBHC in internal medicine. CONCLUSION: While various initiatives support the measurement of PROMs in the German context, the use of these results in care practice is not apparent. The utilization of PROMs and strategies identified in Dutch examples could be initial steps toward fostering VBHC in Germany.
Asunto(s)
Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Humanos , Alemania , Países Bajos , Medicina Interna/economía , Atención a la Salud/economía , Seguro de Salud Basado en Valor/economía , Programas Nacionales de Salud/economía , Atención Médica Basada en ValorRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Healthcare in Germany is not always needs-based and has considerable potential for optimization. Internal medicine (IM) plays a special role in the German healthcare system due to its long tradition. Against this background, a look at the optimization potential to achieve better quality and higher efficiency care seems particularly relevant. OBJECTIVE: Based on an international comparison and taking ambulatory care-sensitive conditions (ACSC) into account, this study aims to identify the steering potential in IM and to discuss it in the context of current reform plans. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The descriptive analysis was carried out as part of a report commissioned by the German Society of Internal Medicine and is based on data from the Federal Statistical Office and Eurostat as well as the ACSC catalogue developed for Germany. RESULTS: The top 10 reasons for inpatient treatment in IM include 7 ACSCs. These diagnoses account for almost one quarter of cases and treatment days and mostly relate to cardiology. The international comparison including numerous other indications shows that other countries have both significantly fewer cases and shorter lengths of stay for most indications. CONCLUSION: The results show that IM in Germany has considerable potential for optimization of inpatient care. In light of the regional variation in service providers and utilization as well as the potential for avoiding inpatient treatment, the current reform plans represent an opportunity for the reorientation of IM. Not least because of its high relevance, also in terms of numbers, it is therefore right and important that it is given such strong consideration within the reform plans.
Asunto(s)
Medicina Interna , Alemania , Medicina Interna/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Reforma de la Atención de Salud , Atención Ambulatoria/estadística & datos numéricos , Programas Nacionales de Salud/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
Background: Even more than hospital care in general, intensive care and mechanical ventilation capacities and its utilization in terms of rates, indications, ventilation types and outcomes vary largely among countries. We analyzed complete and nationwide data for Germany, a country with a large intensive care sector, before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Analysis of administrative claims data, provided by the German health insurance, from all hospitals for all individual patients who were mechanically ventilated between 2019 and 2022. The data included age, sex, diagnoses, length of stay, procedures (e.g., form and duration of mechanical ventilation), outcome (dead vs. alive) and costs. We included all patients who were at least 18 years old at the time of discharge from January 1st, 2019 to December 31st, 2022. Patients were grouped according to year, age group and the form of mechanical ventilation. We further analyzed subgroups of patients being resuscitated and those being COVID-19 positive (vs. negative). Findings: During the four years, 1,003,882 patients were mechanically ventilated in 1395 hospitals. Rates per 100,000 inhabitants varied across age groups from 110 to 123 (18-59 years) to 1101-1275 (>80 years). The top main diagnoses were other forms of heart diseases, pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), ischemic heart diseases and cerebrovascular diseases. 43.3% (437,031/1,003,882) of all mechanically ventilated patients died in hospital with a remarkable increase in mortality with age and from 2019 to 2022 by almost 5%-points. The in-hospital mortality of ventilated COVID-19 patients was 53.7% (46,553/86,729), while it was 42.6% (390,478/917,153) in non-COVID patients. In-hospital mortality varied from 27.0% in non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) only to 53.4% in invasive mechanical ventilation only cases, 59.4% with early NIV failure, 68.6% with late NIV failure, to 74.0% in patients receiving VV-ECMO and 80.0% in VA-ECMO. 17.5% of mechanically ventilated patients had been resuscitated before, of whom 78.2% (153,762/196,750) died. Total expenditure was around 6 billion Euros per year, i.e. 0.17% of the German GDP. Interpretation: Mechanical ventilation was widely used, before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany, reaching more than 1000 patients per 100,000 inhabitants per year in the age over 80 years. In-hospital mortality rates in this nationwide and complete cohort exceeded most of the data known by far. Funding: This research did not receive any dedicated funding.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Since the World Health Report in 2000, Health System Performance Assessment (HSPA) has been established as a tool for the evaluation and evidence-informed governance of health systems. So far, the population perspective has not been integrated into HSPA in a systematic manner, although people's experiences and expectations are of great importance to improve health systems and especially to strengthen patient-centered care. Therefore, this study aims to conduct an HSPA of Germany's health system from the population's perspective covering all eight goals of WHO's Health Systems Framework, and to identify strengths and needs for improvement. METHODS: In 2018, 32,000 people insured with the German sickness fund 'AOK Nordost' were invited by mail to participate in the survey. The questionnaire contained a total of 43 items covering the eight goals of WHO's Health Systems Framework (e.g., access, quality, safety) plus socioeconomics and other characteristics of the insured persons. The data on the health system goals were analyzed descriptively and by subgroups (age, sex, income, chronic conditions, health literacy). RESULTS: The sample (n=1,481; response rate 4.6%) was 54.8% female and had a mean age of 59.1 years (±18.5). Altogether, the participants saw several needs for improvement within the German health system. For instance, 60.0% found quality differences between hospitals to be big, and between 3.9% and 8.5% reported mistakes related to their treatment or prescription medication in the previous two years. A big need for reform was especially seen regarding out-of-pocket payments (51.5%) and the coordination of ambulatory care physicians among each other (44.2%) and with hospitals (41.9%). In addition, big subgroup differences were seen, especially for income and health literacy. Of the participants in the lower income group, 37.2% reported a (very) strong financial burden due to out-of-pocket payments (vs. 20.7%). People with limited health literacy (52.1%) assessed the access to care generally as not being good, and they perceived greater quality differences and needs for reform, compared to their counterparts. For instance, 36.6% had experienced discrimination in the previous year (vs. 19.9%). DISCUSSION: The survey results provide a comprehensive picture of Germany's health system from the population perspective. In some areas, previous findings were confirmed (e.g., a lack of coordination between providers). Other results expand existing knowledge (e.g., the role of health literacy in health care provision) or raise new questions (e.g., the difference between the subjectively assessed burden from out-of-pocket payments and the objective measures currently used). The great differences between subgroups are a call to action on the level of both politics and practice to better consider the individual's needs in order to make health better for everyone. Further research could provide deeper insights in this regard. CONCLUSION: Strengthening the population perspective in HSPA allows for a better understanding and evaluation of health systems and, in particular, helps to identify areas for improvement in patient-centered care.
Asunto(s)
Programas Nacionales de Salud , Humanos , Alemania , Estudios Transversales , Persona de Mediana Edad , Femenino , Masculino , Adulto , Anciano , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/economía , Factores Socioeconómicos , Adulto Joven , Adolescente , Atención a la Salud/economía , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Alfabetización en Salud/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have emerged as a promising approach to involve patients in their treatment process. Beyond serving as outcome measures, PROMs can be applied to provide feedback to healthcare providers and patients, thereby offering valuable insights that can improve health outcomes and care processes. This overview offers a comprehensive synthesis of the effects of PROM feedback, contributing to the evidence-based discussion on PROMs' potential to enhance patient care. METHODS: Following Cochrane Collaboration recommendations, this overview included literature reviews across diverse treatment areas, investigating the impact of PROM feedback on patient health outcomes (including quality of life, symptoms, or survival) and care process outcomes (including communication, symptom identification, or clinical practice). The methodological quality of the evidence was assessed with a modified version of A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2, and the potential overlap of primary studies was quantified. Results were narratively synthesized. RESULTS: Forty reviews grouped into 4 categories of treatment areas were included. Overall, their methodological quality was low. The overall overlap of primary studies was 2.2%, reaching up to 15.7% within specific treatment areas. The results indicate that PROM feedback may enhance the quality-of-care processes, whereas its effects on patient health outcomes remained less conclusive. CONCLUSIONS: PROM feedback positively influences the interaction between physicians and patients across the included treatment areas. Further research is needed to comprehend the trickle-down effects of PROM feedback and how to enhance its potential in yielding health benefits for patients.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Hirschsprung's disease (HD) is a rare and complex malformation. The corrective operation is challenging and schedulable. The complete care situation for the corrective surgery for HD in Germany is uninvestigated. METHODS: For the years 2016-2022, the microdata of the diagnosis-related groups (DRG) -statistics provided by the Research Data Center of the German Federal Statistical Office were accessed. All hospital stays for corrective surgery of HD in patients aged 0-17 were analyzed for patient's comorbidities, treatment characteristics and hospital structures. The occurrence of severe early postoperative complications during the hospital stay were documented. RESULTS: The care structure for HD in Germany is decentralized with 109 hospitals performing 1199 corrective surgeries in 7 years. 75% of the participating hospitals performed three or less cases per year and 55 participating hospitals did not perform corrective surgery for HD each year. Early postoperative complications were common with at least one severe early complication in 18.6% of the cases. With an overall low case load per hospital, a volume outcome relationship cannot be established within Germany. Compared to international high volume centers the quality of outcomes for some of the investigated parameters was reduced. Despite the establishing of centers of expertise by the European reference network ERNICA for the treatment of HD no trend towards centralization occurred in Germany. CONCLUSIONS: The corrective surgery for HD in Germany is decentralized and results in an overall high rate of early complications. The comparison with international studies from high-volume centers indicates potential for improvement for the corrective surgery of HD. Centralization remains essential for the improvement of care for patients with HD.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In-hospital mortality from acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is widely used in international comparisons as an indicator of health system performance. Because of the high risk of early death after AMI, international comparisons may be biased by differences in the recording of early death cases in hospital inpatient data. This study examined whether differences in the recording of early deaths affect international comparisons of AMI in-hospital mortality by using the example of Germany and the United States, and explored approaches to address this issue. METHODS: The German Diagnosis-Related Groups Statistics (DRG Statistics), the U.S. National Inpatient Sample (NIS) and the U.S. Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS) were analysed from 2014 to 2019. Cases with treatment for AMI were identified in German and U.S. inpatient data. AMI deaths occurring in the emergency department (ED) without inpatient admission were extracted from NEDS data. 30-day in-hospital mortality figures were calculated according to the OECD indicator definition (unlinked data) and modified by including ED deaths, or excluding all same-day cases. RESULTS: German age-and-sex standardized 30-day in-hospital mortality was substantially higher compared to the U.S. (in 2019, 7.3% vs. 4.6%). The ratio of German vs. U.S. mortality was 1.6. After inclusion of ED deaths in U.S. data this ratio declined to 1.4. Exclusion of same-day cases in German and U.S. data led to a similar ratio. CONCLUSIONS: While short-duration treatments due to early death are generally recorded in German inpatient data, in U.S. inpatient data those cases are partially missing. Excluding cases with short-duration treatment from the calculation of mortality indicators could be a feasible approach to account for differences in the recording of early deaths, that might be existent in other countries as well.
Asunto(s)
Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Infarto del Miocardio , Humanos , Alemania/epidemiología , Infarto del Miocardio/mortalidad , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Masculino , Femenino , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Grupos Diagnósticos Relacionados/estadística & datos numéricos , AdultoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Prehabilitation aims to improve patients' functional capacity before surgery to reduce perioperative complications, promote recovery and decrease probability of disability. The planned economic evaluation is performed alongside a large German multi-centre pragmatic, two-arm parallel-group, randomized controlled trial on prehabilitation for frail elderly patients before elective surgery compared to standard care (PRAEP-GO RCT). The aim is to determine the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of prehabilitation for frail elderly before an elective surgery. METHODS: The planned health economic evaluation comprises cost-effectiveness, and cost-utility analyses. Analyses are conducted in the German context from different perspectives including the payer perspective, i.e. the statutory health insurance, the societal perspective and the health care provider perspective. Data on outcomes and costs, are collected alongside the ongoing PRAEP-GO RCT. The trial population includes frail or pre-frail patients aged ≥70 years with planned elective surgery. The intervention consists of frailty screening (Fried phenotype), a shared decision-making conference determining modality (physiotherapy and unsupervised physical exercises, nutrition counselling, etc.) and setting (inpatient, day care, outpatient etc.) of a 3-week individual multimodal prehabilitation prior to surgery. The control group receives standard preoperative care. Costs include the intervention costs, the costs of the index hospital stay for surgery, and health care resources consumed during a 12-month follow-up. Clinical effectiveness outcomes included in the economic evaluation are the level of care dependency, the degree of disability as measured by the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0), quality-adjusted life years (QALY) derived from the EQ-5D-5L and the German utility set, and complications occurring during the index hospital stay. Each adopted perspective considers different types of costs and outcomes as outlined in the protocol. All analyses will feature Intention-To-Treat analysis. To explore methodological and parametric uncertainties, we will conduct probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses. Subgroup analyses will be performed as secondary analyses. DISCUSSION: The health economic evaluation will provide insights into the cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation in older frail populations, informing decision-making processes and contributing to the evidence base in this field. Potential limitation includes a highly heterogeneous trial population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PRAEP-GO RCT: NCT04418271; economic evaluation: OSF ( https://osf.io/ecm74 ).
Asunto(s)
Anciano Frágil , Ejercicio Preoperatorio , Anciano , Humanos , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Pacientes Internos , Pacientes Ambulatorios , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Estudios Multicéntricos como AsuntoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Hip arthroplasty (HA) and knee arthroplasty (KA) are high-volume procedures. However, there is a debate about the quality of indication; that is, whether surgery is truly indicated in all patients. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may be used to determine preoperative thresholds to differentiate patients who will likely benefit from surgery from those who will not. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What were the minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) for three commonly used PROMs in a large population of patients undergoing HA or KA treated in a general orthopaedic practice? (2) Do patients who reach the MCID differ in important ways from those who do not? (3) What preoperative PROM score thresholds best distinguish patients who achieve a meaningful improvement 12 months postsurgery from those who do not? (4) Do patients with preoperative PROM scores below thresholds still experience gains after surgery? METHODS: Between October 1, 2019, and December 31, 2020, 4182 patients undergoing HA and 3645 patients undergoing KA agreed to be part of the PROMoting Quality study and were hence included by study nurses in one of nine participating German hospitals. From a selected group of 1843 patients with HA and 1546 with KA, we derived MCIDs using the anchor-based change difference method to determine meaningful improvements. Second, we estimated which preoperative PROM score thresholds best distinguish patients who achieve an MCID from those who do not, using the preoperative PROM scores that maximized the Youden index. PROMs were Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function short form (HOOS-PS) (scored 0 to 100 points; lower indicates better health), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function short form (KOOS-PS) (scored 0 to 100 points; lower indicates better health), EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-level (EQ-5D-5L) (scored -0.661 to 1 points; higher indicates better health), and a 10-point VAS for pain (perceived pain in the joint under consideration for surgery within the past 7 days) (scored 0 to 10 points; lower indicates better health). The performance of derived thresholds is reported using the Youden index, sensitivity, specificity, F1 score, geometric mean as a measure of central tendency, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. RESULTS: MCIDs for the EQ-5D-5L were 0.2 for HA and 0.2 for KA, with a maximum of 1 point, where higher values represented better health-related quality of life. For the pain scale, they were -0.9 for HA and -0.7 for KA, of 10 points (maximum), where lower scores represent lower pain. For the HOOS-PS, the MCID was -10, and for the KOOS-PS it was -5 of 100 points, where lower scores represent better functioning. Patients who reached the MCID differed from patients who did not reach the MCID with respect to baseline PROM scores across the evaluated PROMs and for both HA and KA. Patients who reached an MCID versus those who did not also differed regarding other aspects including education and comorbidities, but this was not consistent across PROMs and arthroplasty type. Preoperative PROM score thresholds for HA were 0.7 for EQ-5D-5L (Youden index: 0.55), 42 for HOOS-PS (Youden index: 0.27), and 3.5 for the pain scale (Youden index: 0.47). For KA, the thresholds were 0.6 for EQ-5D-5L (Youden index: 0.57), 39 for KOOS-PS (Youden index: 0.25), and 6.5 for the pain scale (Youden index: 0.40). A higher Youden index for EQ-5D-5L than for the other PROMs indicates that the thresholds for EQ-5D-5L were better for distinguishing patients who reached a meaningful improvement from those who did not. Patients who did not reach the thresholds could still achieve MCIDs, especially for functionality and the pain scale. CONCLUSION: We found that patients who experienced meaningful improvements (MCIDs) mainly differed from those who did not regarding their preoperative PROM scores. We further identified that patients undergoing HA or KA with a score above 0.7 or 0.6, respectively, on the EQ-5D-5L, below 42 or 39 on the HOOS-PS or KOOS-PS, or below 3.5 or 6.5 on a 10-point joint-specific pain scale presurgery had no meaningful benefit from surgery. The thresholds can support clinical decision-making. For example, when thresholds indicate that a meaningful improvement is not likely to be achieved after surgery, other treatment options may be prioritized. Although the thresholds can be used as support, patient preferences and medical expertise must supplement the decision. Future studies might evaluate the utility of using these thresholds in practice, examine how different thresholds can be combined as a multidimensional decision tool, and derive presurgery thresholds based on additional PROMs used in practice. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Preoperative PROM score thresholds in this study will support clinicians in decision-making through objective measures that can improve the quality of the recommendation for surgery.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: As patient-reported outcomes (PROs) gain prominence in hip and knee arthroplasty (HA and KA), studies indicate PRO variations between genders. Research on the specific health domains particularly impacted is lacking. Hence, we aim to quantify the gender health gap in PROs for HA/KA patients, differentiating between general health, health-related quality of life (HrQoL), physical functioning, pain, fatigue, and depression. METHODS: The study included 3,693 HA patients (1,627 men, 2,066 women) and 3,110 KA patients (1,430 men, 1,680 women) receiving surgery between 2020 to 2021 in nine German hospitals, followed up until March 2022. Questionnaires used were: EQ-VAS, EQ-5D-5L, HOOS-PS, KOOS-PS, PROMIS-F-SF, PROMIS-D-SF, and a joint-specific numeric pain scale. PROs at admission, discharge, 12-months post-surgery, and the change from admission to 12-months (PRO-improvement) were compared by gender, tested for differences, and assessed using multivariate linear regressions. To enable comparability, PROs were transformed into z-scores (standard deviations from the mean). RESULTS: Observed differences between genders were small in all health domains and differences reduced over time. Men reported significantly better health versus women pre-HA (KA), with a difference of 0.252 (0.224) standard deviations from the mean for pain, 0.353 (0.243) for fatigue (PROMIS-F-SF), 0.327 (0.310) for depression (PROMIS-D-SF), 0.336 (0.273) for functionality (H/KOOS-PS), 0.177 (0.186) for general health (EQ-VAS) and 0.266 (0.196) for HrQoL (EQ-5D-5L). At discharge, the gender health gap reduced and even disappeared for some health dimensions since women improved in health to a greater extent than men. No gender health gap was observed in most PRO-improvements and at month 12. CONCLUSIONS: Men experiencing slightly better health than women in all health dimensions before surgery while experiencing similar health benefits 12-months post-surgery, might be an indicator of men receiving surgery inappropriately early, women unnecessarily late or both. As studies often investigate the PRO-improvement, they miss pre-surgery gender differences, which could be an important target for improvement initiatives in patient-centric care. Moreover, future research on cutoffs for meaningful between-group PRO differences per measurement time would aid the interpretation of gender health disparities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Register for Clinical Trials, DRKS00019916, 26 November 2019.
Asunto(s)
Dolor , Calidad de Vida , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Resultado del Tratamiento , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Artroplastia , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , FatigaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Anorectal malformations (ARMs) are complex congenital anomalies. The corrective operation is demanding and schedulable. Based on complete national data, patterns of care have not been analyzed in Germany yet. METHODS: All cases with ARM were analyzed (1) at the time of birth and (2) during the hospital stay for the corrective operation, based on the national hospital discharge data (DRG statistics). Patient's comorbidities, treatment characteristics, hospital structures, and the outcome of corrective operations were analyzed with respect to the hospitals' caseload. RESULTS: From 2016 to 2021, 1,726 newborns with ARM were treated at the time of birth in 388 hospitals. Of these hospitals, 19% had neither a pediatric nor a pediatric surgical department. At least one additional congenital anomaly was present in 49% of cases and 7% of the newborns had a birthweight below 1,500 g.In all, 2,060 corrective operations for ARM were performed in 113 hospitals in the same time period. In 24.5% of cases, at least one major complication was documented. One-third of the operations were performed in 56 hospitals, one-third in 20 hospitals, and one-third in 10 hospitals with median annual case numbers of 2, 5, and 10, respectively.Hospitals with the highest caseload operated cloacal defects more often than hospitals with the lowest caseload (7 vs. 2%) and had more early complications than hospitals with the lowest caseload (30 vs. 21%). This difference was not statistically significant after risk adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Children with ARM are multimorbid. Early complications after corrective surgery are common. Considering the large number of hospitals with a very low caseload, centralization of care for the complex and elective corrective surgery for ARM remains a key issue for quality of care.
RESUMEN
The importance of day surgery as a less costly alternative compared to conventional inpatient hospital stays is growing internationally. The rate of day surgery activities has increased across Europe. However, this trend has been heterogeneous across countries, and might still be below its potential. Since payment systems affect how providers offer care, they represent a policy instrument to further increase the rate of day surgeries. In this paper, we review international strategies to promote day surgery with a particular focus on payment models for 13 OECD countries (Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, England, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland). We conduct a cross-country comparison based on an email survey of health policy experts and a comprehensive literature review of peer-reviewed papers and grey literature. Our research shows that all countries aim to strengthen day surgery activity to increase health system efficiency. Several countries used financial and non-financial policy measures to overcome misaligned incentive structures and promote day surgery activity. Financial incentives for day surgery can serve as a policy instrument to promote change. We recommend embedding these incentives in a comprehensive approach of restructuring health systems. In addition, we encourage countries to monitor and evaluate the effect of changes to payment systems on day surgeries to allow for more informed decision-making.
Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Ambulatorios , Política de Salud , Humanos , Europa (Continente) , Alemania , Países BajosRESUMEN
Financial risk protection from high costs for care is a main goal of health systems. Health system characteristics typically associated with universal health coverage and financial risk protection, such as financial redistribution between insureds, are inherent to, e.g. social health insurance (SHI) but missing in private health insurance (PHI). This study provides evidence on financial protection in PHI for the case of Germany's dual insurance system of PHI and SHI, where PHI covers 11% of the population. Linked survey and claims data of PHI insureds (n = 3105) and population-wide household budget data (n = 42,226) are used to compute the prevalence of catastrophic health expenditures (CHE), i.e. the share of households whose out-of-pocket payments either exceed 40% of their capacity-to-pay or push them (further) into poverty. Despite comparatively high out-of-pocket payments, CHE is low in German PHI. It only affects the poor. Key to low financial burden seems to be the restriction of PHI to a small, overall wealthy group. Protection for the worse-off is provided through special mandatorily offered tariffs. In sum, Germany's dual health insurance system provides close-to-universal coverage. Future studies should further investigate the effect of premiums on financial burden, especially when linked to utilisation.
Asunto(s)
Gastos en Salud , Pobreza , Humanos , Seguro de Salud , Composición Familiar , AlemaniaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Retrospective hospital quality indicators can only be useful if they are trustworthy signals of current or future quality. Despite extensive longitudinal quality indicator data and many hospital quality public reporting initiatives, research on quality indicator stability over time is scarce and skepticism about their usefulness widespread. OBJECTIVE: Based on aggregated, widely available hospital-level quality indicators, this paper sought to determine whether quality indicators are stable over time. Implications for health policy were drawn and the limited methodological foundation for stability assessments of hospital-level quality indicators enhanced. METHODS: Two longitudinal datasets (self-reported and routine data), including all hospitals in Germany and covering the period from 2004 to 2017, were analysed. A logistic regression using Generalized Estimating Equations, a time-dependent, graphic quintile representation of risk-adjusted rates and Spearman's rank correlation coefficient were used. RESULTS: For a total of eight German quality indicators significant stability over time was demonstrated. The probability of remaining in the best quality cluster in the future across all hospitals reached from 46.9% (CI: 42.4-51.6%) for hip replacement reoperations to 80.4% (CI: 76.4-83.8%) for decubitus. Furthermore, graphical descriptive analysis showed that the difference in adverse event rates for the 20% top performing compared to the 20% worst performing hospitals in the two following years is on average between 30% for stroke and AMI and 79% for decubitus. Stability over time has been shown to vary strongly between indicators and treatment areas. CONCLUSION: Quality indicators were found to have sufficient stability over time for public reporting. Potentially, increasing case volumes per hospital, centralisation of medical services and minimum-quantity regulations may lead to more stable and reliable quality of care indicators. Finally, more robust policy interventions such as outcome-based payment, should only be applied to outcome indicators with a higher level of stability over time. This should be subject to future research.
Asunto(s)
Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Accidente Cerebrovascular , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Hospitales , AlemaniaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The reimbursement of new technologies in inpatient care is not always linked to a requirement for evidence-based evaluation of patient benefit. In Germany, every new technology approved for market was until recently eligible for reimbursement in inpatient care unless explicitly excluded. The aim of this work was (1) to investigate the type of evidence that was available at the time of introduction of 25 innovative technologies and how this evidence evolved over time, and (2) to explore the relationship between clinical evidence and utilization for these technologies in German inpatient care. METHODS: This study combined different methods. A systematic search for evidence published between 2003 and 2017 was conducted in four bibliographic databases, clinical trial registries, resources for clinical guidelines, and health technology assessment-databases. Information was also collected on funding mechanisms and safety notices. Utilization was measured by hospital procedures captured in claims data. The body of evidence, funding and safety notices per technology were analyzed descriptively. The relationship between utilization and evidence was explored empirically using a multilevel regression analysis. RESULTS: The number of included publications per technology ranges from two to 498. For all technologies, non-comparative studies form the bulk of the evidence. The number of randomized controlled clinical trials per technology ranges from zero to 19. Some technologies were utilized for several years without an adequate evidence base. A relationship between evidence and utilization could be shown for several but not all technologies. CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals a mixed picture regarding the evidence available for new technologies, and the relationship between the development of evidence and the use of technologies over time. Although the influence of funding and safety notices requires further investigation, these results re-emphasize the need for strengthening market approval standards and HTA pathways as well as approaches such as coverage with evidence development.
Asunto(s)
Pacientes Internos , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica , Humanos , Bases de Datos Factuales , AlemaniaRESUMEN
Purpose: To elaborate a concept for implementing digital health applications (DiHA), including prioritisation criteria (PC) for the Austrian context and an overview of available prioritised DiHAs. Methods: Based on European DiHA-listings and input by Austrian experts, a categorised meta-directory of DiHAs was created. PC were developed to reflect, inter alia, the provisions of the Austrian General Insurance Act, and were applied to the meta-directory to identify DiHAs potentially relevant for the Austrian statutory health insurance. An iterative process with expert involvement was used to tailor an existing reimbursement framework to the Austrian setting. Results: The meta-directory comprised 132 DiHAs. Developed PC focused on plausibility (German language) and legal aspects (treatment/monitoring of chronic conditions), while other criteria (e.g. interoperability standards) were considered optional. After applying the PC, 38 DiHAs were potentially relevant in the Austrian setting. Of these, only seven supported current health record integration. Most of the prioritised DiHAs reported on CE marking (29/38) and data protection (35/38), while reporting on risk class (10/38) and technical algorithms (0/38) was sparse. For DiHA reimbursement, a four-step process is proposed: identification (ideally based on needs assessment); filtering based on PC; review of technical, regulatory and evidentiary requirements; and health technology assessment. Conclusion: The proposed concept can offer guidance for policy makers (e.g., on prioritising available DiHAs) and may further foster scientific debate with regard to DiHA implementation. Further discussion on how to fully incorporate regulatory, technical, and evidentiary criteria is needed. Attention should be given to national implementation requirements, re-assessment criteria, and appropriate remuneration schemes.
RESUMEN
Importance: Although remote patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) monitoring has shown promising results in cancer care, there is a lack of research on PROM monitoring in orthopedics. Objective: To determine whether PROM monitoring can improve health outcomes for patients with joint replacement compared with the standard of care. Design, Setting, and Participants: A 2-group, patient-level randomized clinical trial (PROMoting Quality) across 9 German hospitals recruited patients aged 18 years or older with primary hip or knee replacement from October 1, 2019, to December 31, 2020, with follow-up until March 31, 2022. Interventions: Intervention and control groups received the standard of care and PROMs at hospital admission, discharge, and 12 months after surgery. In addition, the intervention group received PROMs at 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery. Based on prespecified PROM score thresholds, at these times, an automated alert signaled critical recovery paths to hospital study nurses. On notification, study nurses contacted patients and referred them to their physicians if necessary. Main Outcomes and Measures: The prespecified outcomes were the mean change in PROM scores (European Quality of Life 5-Dimension 5-Level version [EQ-5D-5L; range, -0.661 to 1.0, with higher values indicating higher levels of health-related quality of life (HRQOL)], European Quality of Life Visual Analogue Scale [EQ-VAS; range, 0-100, with higher values indicating higher levels of HRQOL], Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Shortform [HOOS-PS; range, 0-100, with lower values indicating lower physical impairment] or Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Shortform [KOOS-PS; range, 0-100, with lower values indicating lower physical impairment], Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS]-fatigue [range, 33.7-75.8, with lower values indicating lower levels of fatigue], and PROMIS-depression [range, 41-79.4, with lower values indicating lower levels of depression]) from baseline to 12 months after surgery. Analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis. Results: The study included 3697 patients with hip replacement (mean [SD] age, 65.8 [10.6] years; 2065 women [55.9%]) and 3110 patients with knee replacement (mean [SD] age, 66.0 [9.2] years; 1669 women [53.7%]). Exploratory analyses showed significantly better health outcomes in the intervention group on all PROMs except the EQ-5D-5L among patients with hip replacement, with a 2.10-point increase on the EQ-VAS in the intervention group compared with the control group (HOOS-PS, -1.86 points; PROMIS-fatigue, -0.69 points; PROMIS-depression, -0.57 points). Patients in the intervention group with knee replacement had a 1.24-point increase on the EQ-VAS, as well as significantly better scores on the KOOS-PS (-0.99 points) and PROMIS-fatigue (-0.84 points) compared with the control group. Mixed-effect models showed a significant difference in improvement on the EQ-VAS (hip replacement: effect estimate [EE], 1.66 [95% CI, 0.58-2.74]; knee replacement: EE, 1.71 [95% CI, 0.53-2.90]) and PROMIS-fatigue (hip replacement: EE, -0.65 [95% CI, -1.12 to -0.18]; knee replacement: EE, -0.71 [95% CI, -1.23 to -0.20]). The PROMIS-depression score was significantly reduced in the hip replacement group (EE, -0.60 [95% CI, -1.01 to -0.18]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, the PROM-based monitoring intervention led to a small improvement in HRQOL and fatigue among patients with hip or knee replacement, as well as in depression among patients with hip replacement. Trial registration: Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien ID: DRKS00019916.
Asunto(s)
Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Cadera , Osteoartritis , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Electrónica , Fatiga , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Calidad de Vida , Masculino , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed weaknesses in health systems of many countries, including those in sub-Saharan Africa. Despite comparatively low rates of COVID-19 admissions and deaths in sub-Saharan Africa, the pandemic still had a significant impact by disrupting health service utilisation (HSU). The aim of this scoping review is to synthesise the available evidence on HSU in sub-Saharan Africa during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially focusing on (1) changes in HSU compared with the prepandemic period, (2) changes in HSU among particular patient groups studied and (3) identifying factors determining changes in HSU as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: The scoping review will be guided by the methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews developed by Arskey and O'Malley. We will identify relevant studies on HSU in sub-Saharan Africa during the COVID-19 pandemic using PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, Scopus and Web of Science databases from 1 December, 2019 to 31 March 2023. We will search grey literature, government and organisational websites for reports and conference proceedings. Included studies will be restricted to those reported in English or French. Two reviewers will independently screen articles at the title and abstract stage for inclusion into full text screening. We will provide a general descriptive overview, tabular summaries and content analysis for the extracted data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for the conduct of the scoping review. We will disseminate our findings via open access peer-reviewed journals and scientific presentations. Our scoping review findings will help to determine the feasibility of a subsequent systematic review (and meta-analysis) on HSU during the COVID-19 pandemic.