Engaging primary care professionals in OECD's international PaRIS survey: a documentary analysis.

Healthcare professionals have first-hand experience with patients in clinical practice and the dynamics in the healthcare system, which can be of great value in the design, implementation, data analysis and dissemination of research study results. Primary care professionals are particularly important as they provide first contact, accessible, coordinated, comprehensive and continuous people-focused care. However, in-depth examination of the engagement of health professionals in health system research and planning activities-how professionals are engaged and how this varies across national contexts- is limited, particularly in international initiatives. There is a need to identify gaps in the planning of engagement activities to inform the design and successful implementation of future international efforts to improve the responsiveness of health systems to the changing needs of patients and professionals. The aim of this study was to explore how primary care professionals were engaged in the design and implementation plans of an international health policy study led by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The OECD's international PaRIS survey measures and disseminates information on patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs and PREMs) of people living with chronic conditions who are managed in primary care. A documentary analysis of 17 written national implementation plans (country roadmaps) was conducted between January and June 2023. Two reviewers independently performed the screening and data abstraction and resolved disagreements by discussion. We reported the intended target primary care professionals, phase of the study, channel of engagement, level of engagement, and purpose of engagement. All 17 countries aimed to engage primary care professionals in the execution plans for the international PaRIS survey. While organisations of primary care professionals, particularly of family doctors, were the most commonly targeted group, variation was found in the timing of engagement activities during the different phases of the study and in the level of engagement, ranging from co-development (half of the countries co-developed the survey together with primary care professionals) to one-off consultations with whom. International guidance facilitated the participation of primary care professionals. Continuous collaborative efforts at the international and national levels can foster a culture of engagement with primary care organisations and individual professionals and enhance meaningful engagement of primary care professionals.

Factors that Promote and Protect Against Financial Toxicity after Orthopaedic Trauma: A Qualitative Study.

INTRODUCTION: Financial toxicity is highly prevalent in patients after an orthopaedic injury. However, little is known regarding the conditions that promote and protect against this financial distress. Our objective was to understand the factors that cause and protect against financial toxicity after a lower extremity fracture. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured interviews with 20 patients 3 months after surgical treatment of a lower extremity fracture. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using thematic analysis to identify themes and subthemes. Data saturation occurred after 15 interviews. The percentage of patients who described the identified themes are reported. RESULTS: A total of 20 patients (median age, 44 years [IQR, 38 to 58]; 60% male) participated in the study. The most common injury was a distal tibia fracture (n = 8; 40%). Eleven themes that promoted financial distress were identified, the most common being work effects (n = 14; 70%) and emotional health (n = 12; 60%). Over half (n = 11; 55%) of participants described financial toxicity arising from an inability to access social welfare programs. Seven themes that protected against financial distress were also identified, including insurance (n = 17; 85%) and support from friends and family (n = 17; 85%). Over half (n = 13; 65%) of the participants discussed the support they received from their healthcare team, which encompassed expectation setting and connections to financial aid and other services. Employment protection and workplace flexibility were additional protective themes. CONCLUSION: This qualitative study of orthopaedic trauma patients found work and emotional health-related factors to be primary drivers of financial toxicity after injury. Insurance and support from friends and family were the most frequently reported protective factors. Many participants described the pivotal role of the healthcare team in establishing recovery expectations and facilitating access to social welfare programs.

Relation between pre-existing quality management measures and prevention and containment of COVID-19 outbreaks in 159 nursing homes in Tuscany: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Nursing homes were often the focus of COVID-19 outbreaks. Many factors are known to influence the ability of a nursing home to prevent and contain a COVID-19 outbreak. The role of an organisation's quality management prior to the pandemic is not yet clear. In the Italian region of Tuscany nursing home performance indicators have been regularly collected since before the pandemic, providing the opportunity to better understand this relationship. OBJECTIVES: To test if there is a difference in the results achieved by nursing homes in Tuscany on 13 quality management indicators, when grouped by severity of COVID-19 outbreaks; and to better understand how these indicators may be related to the ability to control COVID-19 outbreaks, from the perspective of nursing homes. METHODS: We used a mixed methods sequential explanatory design. Based on regional and national databases, 159 nursing homes in Tuscany were divided into four groups by outbreak severity. We tested the significance of the differences between the groups with respect to 13 quality management indicators. The potential relation of these indicators to COVID-19 outbreaks was discussed with 29 managers and other nursing homes' staff through four group interviews. RESULTS: The quantitative analysis showed significant differences between the groups of nursing homes for 3 of the 13 indicators. From the perspective of nursing homes, the indicators might not be good at capturing important aspects of the ability to control COVID-19 outbreaks. For example, while staffing availability is seen as essential, the staff-to-bed ratio does not capture the turn-over of staff and temporary absences due to positive COVID-19 testing of staff. CONCLUSIONS: Though currently collected indicators are key for overall performance monitoring and improvement, further refinement of the set of quality management indicators is needed to clarify the relationship with nursing homes' ability to control COVID-19 outbreaks.

Social care data and its fitness for integrated health and social care service governance: an exploratory qualitative analysis in the Dutch context.

INTRODUCTION: To date, little is known on how social care data could be used to inform performance-based governance to accelerate progress towards integrated health and social care. OBJECTIVES AND DESIGN: This study aims to perform a descriptive evaluation of available social care data in the Netherlands and its fitness for integrated health and social care service governance. An exploratory mixed-method qualitative study was undertaken based on desktop research (41 included indicators), semi-structured expert interviews (13 interviews including 18 experts) and a reflection session (10 experts). SETTING: The Netherlands; social care is care provided in accordance with the Social Support Act, the Participation Law and the Law for Municipal debt-counselling. RESULTS: This study found six current uses for social care data: (a) communication and accountability, (b) monitoring social care policy, (c) early warning systems, (d) controls and fraud detection, (e) outreaching efforts and (f) prioritisation. Further optimisation should be sought through: standardisation, management of data exchange across domains, awareness of the link between registration and financing, strengthening the overall trust in data sharing. The study found five ways the enhanced social care data could be used to improve the governance of integrated health and social care services: (a) cross-domain learning and cooperation (eg, through benchmarks), (b) preventative measures and early warning systems, (c) give insight regarding the quality and effectivity of social care in a broader perspective, (d) clearer accountability of social care towards contracting parties and policy, (e) enable cross-sector data-driven governance model. CONCLUSION: Although there are several innovative initiatives for the optimisation of the use of social care data in the Netherlands, the current social care data landscape and management is not yet fit to support the new policy initiatives to strengthen integrated health and social care service governance. Directions for addressing the shortcomings are provided.

Health system performance assessment: embedding resilience through performance intelligence.

Health systems around the world are facing challenges in achieving their goals. In the wake of the coronavirus disease pandemic, the need for resilient health systems has become even more apparent. This article argues that embedding resilience into health system performance assessment (HSPA) frameworks can be a valuable approach for improving health system performance. This perspective examines key challenges threatening health systems and makes a case for the continued relevance of HSPA by embedding resilience-related performance intelligence.

What can we learn from general practitioners who left Spain? A mixed methods international study.

BACKGROUND: International mobility of health workforce affects the performance of health systems and has major relevance in human resources for health policy and planning. To date, there has been little research exploring the reasons why general practitioners (GPs) migrate. This mixed methods study aimed to investigate the reasons why Spain-trained GPs migrate and develop GP retention and recruitment health policy recommendations relevant to Spanish primary care. METHODS: The study followed an explanatory sequential mixed methods study design combining surveys with semi-structured interviews and focus groups with GPs who qualified in Spain and were living overseas at the time of the study. The survey data examined the reasons why GPs left Spain and their intention to return and were analysed using quantitative methods. The transcripts from interviews and focus groups centred on GPs' insights to enhance retention and recruitment in Spain and were analysed thematically. RESULTS: The survey had 158 respondents with an estimated 25.4% response rate. Insufficient salary (75.3%), job insecurity and temporality (67.7%), excessive workload (67.7%), poor primary care governance (55.7%), lack of flexibility in the workplace (43.7%) and personal circumstances (43.7%) were the main reasons for leaving Spain. Almost half of the respondents (48.7%) would consider returning to Spanish general practice if their working conditions improved. Interviews and focus groups with respondents (n = 24) pointed towards the need to improve the quality of employment contracts, working conditions, opportunities for professional development, and governance in primary care for effective retention and recruitment. CONCLUSION: Efforts to improve GP retention and recruitment in Spain should focus on salary, job security, flexibility, protected workload, professional development, and governance. We draw ten GP retention and recruitment recommendations expected to inform urgent policy action to tackle existing and predicted GP shortages in Spanish primary care.

Acute care pathway assessed through performance indicators during the COVID-19 pandemic in OECD countries (2020-2021): a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic severely impacted care for non-COVID patients. Performance indicators to monitor acute care, timely reported and internationally accepted, lacked during the pandemic in OECD countries. This study aims to summarize the performance indicators available in the literature to monitor changes in the quality of acute care in OECD countries during the first year and a half of the pandemic (2020-July 2021) and to assess their trends. METHODS: Scoping review. Search in Embase and MEDLINE (07-07-2022). Acute care performance indicators and indicators related to acute general surgery were collected and collated following a care pathway approach. Indicators assessing identical clinical measures were grouped under a common indicator title. The trends from each group of indicators were collated (increase/decrease/stable). RESULTS: A total of 152 studies were included. 2354 indicators regarding general acute care and 301 indicators related to acute general surgery were included. Indicators focusing on pre-hospital services reported a decreasing trend in the volume of patients: from 225 indicators, 110 (49%) reported a decrease. An increasing trend in pre-hospital treatment times was reported by most of the indicators (n = 41;70%) and a decreasing trend in survival rates of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (n = 61;75%). Concerning care provided in the emergency department, most of the indicators (n = 752;71%) showed a decreasing trend in admissions across all levels of urgency. Concerning the mortality rate after admission, most of the indicators (n = 23;53%) reported an increasing trend. The subset of indicators assessing acute general surgery showed a decreasing trend in the volume of patients (n = 50;49%), stability in clinical severity at admission (n = 36;53%), and in the volume of surgeries (n = 14;47%). Most of the indicators (n = 28;65%) reported no change in treatment approach and stable mortality rate (n = 11,69%). CONCLUSION: This review signals relevant disruptions across the acute care pathway. A subset of general surgery performance indicators showed stability in most of the phases of the care pathway. These results highlight the relevance of assessing this care pathway more regularly and systematically across different clinical entities to monitor disruptions and to improve the resilience of emergency services during a crisis.

COVID-19 Disruption To Routine Health Care Services: How 8 Latin American And Caribbean Countries Responded.

Latin America and the Caribbean was one of the regions hardest hit globally by SARS-CoV-2. This qualitative exploratory study examined how the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the delivery of routine health services from the perspective of health care system decision makers and managers. Between May and December 2022, we conducted forty-two semistructured interviews with decision makers from ministries of health and health care managers with responsibilities during the COVID-19 pandemic in eight countries in Latin America and the Caribbean. On the basis of these interviews, we identified themes in three domains: impacts on the provision of routine health services, including postponed and forgone primary care and hospital services; barriers to maintaining routine health services due to preexisting structural health care system weaknesses and difficulties attributed to the pandemic; and innovative strategies to sustain and recover services such as public-private financing and coordination, telemedicine, and new roles for primary care. In the short term, policy efforts should focus on recovering postponed services, including those for noncommunicable diseases. Medium- and long-term health care system reforms should strengthen primary care and address structural issues, such as fragmentation, to promote more resilient health care systems.

Data-Driven Collaboration between Hospitals and Other Healthcare Organisations in Europe During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Explanatory Sequential Mixed-Methods Study among Mid-Level Hospital Managers.

Introduction: Data and digital infrastructure drive collaboration and help develop integrated healthcare systems and services. COVID-19 induced changes to collaboration between healthcare organisations, which previously often happened in fragmented and competitive ways. New collaborative practices relied on data and were crucial in managing coordinated responses to the pandemic. In this study, we explored data-driven collaboration between European hospitals and other healthcare organisations in 2021 by identifying common themes, lessons learned and implications going forward. Methods: Study participants were recruited from an existing Europe-wide community of mid-level hospital managers. For data collection, we ran an online survey, conducted multi-case study interviews and organised webinars. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, thematic analysis and cross-case synthesis. Results: Mid-level hospital managers from 18 European countries reported an increase in data exchange between healthcare organisations during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data-driven collaborative practices were goal-oriented and focused on the optimisation of hospitals' governance functions, innovation in organisational models and improvements to data infrastructure. This was often made possible by temporarily overcoming system complexities, which would otherwise hinder collaboration and innovation. Sustainability of these developments remains a challenge. Discussion: Mid-level hospital managers form a huge potential of reacting and collaborating when needed, including rapidly setting up novel partnerships and redefining established processes. Major post-COVID unmet medical needs are linked to hospital care provision, including diagnostic and therapeutic backlogs. Tackling these will require rethinking of the position of hospitals within healthcare systems, including their role in care integration. Conclusion: Learning from COVID-19-induced developments in data-driven collaboration between hospitals and other healthcare organisations is important to address systemic barriers, sustain resilience and further build transformative capacity to help build better integrated healthcare systems.

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Experiences Assessment in Women with Breast Cancer: Portuguese Case Study.

In 2020, female breast cancer was the most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide, representing the type of cancer with the highest incidence among women and the second most common cause of cancer death among women in all OECD countries. The conventional measures addressing the burden of breast cancer by measuring mortality, incidence, and survival do not entirely reflect the quality of life and patients experience when receiving breast cancer care. The main objective of this study is to capture patient-reported outcomes and experiences in women with breast cancer in Portugal using methods developed for international benchmarking purposes, such as the OECD Patient-reported Indicators Surveys. The study included 378 women with breast cancer, with the age distribution being 19.8% aged 15 to 49 years and 80.2% aged 50 years and over. The data collection procedure and analysis followed the "OECD Breast Cancer Patient Reported Outcomes Working Group" protocol, allowing subsequent comparability with data from other OECD member countries. Most women were satisfied with the treatment outcome regarding the shape of their lumpectomy breast when wearing a bra (96.1%) and with the equal size of both breasts (78.3%). Findings on the WHO QOL-BREF showed that women manifest a lower score in well-being when compared with the general population or populations living with chronic diseases. This study shows the feasibility of implementing and using patient-reported metrics (PROM and PREM) in breast cancer services in Portugal. Measuring PROMs and PREMs from Portuguese women receiving breast cancer care provides insightful evidence into the quality and value of cancer care.

How are regulatory oversight organisations using long-term care performance indicators: a qualitative descriptive study in 10 high-income countries.

OBJECTIVES: Regulatory oversight organisations play an important role in quality stewardship in long-term care (LTC) facilities. Performance indicators are a key tool for any quality-related work. Our aim was to better understand how and what performance indicators are used by regulatory oversight organisations for long-term care facilities oversight and which features are affecting their fitness for use. DESIGN: Qualitative descriptive. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We explored the use of LTC facility performance indicators by 10 regulatory oversight organisations from England, Ireland, Malta, New Zealand, Norway, Scotland, Singapore, Slovenia, Sweden and the Netherlands. We collected information by means of a questionnaire, 13 follow-up interviews with 20 experts from these organisations and document review. RESULTS: Performance indicators are used by participating oversight organisations to choose priority topics for audits, prioritise facilities to be audited and to identify areas within an audited facility, that require more attention. The indicators of most interest to oversight organisations are related to the dimensions of care articulated in the preset requirements on which audits are based. When the purpose of using indicators is to design a risk assessment model, the fitness for use of indicators ultimately depends on their ability to predict non-compliances on subsequent audits. When indicators are used directly by auditors, the ease of access, clear guidance to evaluate the data and the provision of contextual information are used by oversight organisations to increase fitness for use. CONCLUSIONS: Oversight organisations do not use LTC facility performance indicators to assess quality, but rather to assess the risk of lower quality or of non-compliance with requirements. This risk-related purpose has to be considered when the indicators used in oversight are chosen and when other aspects of fitness for use, such as data analysis and displaying findings, are developed.

Use of Performance Data by Mid-Level Hospital Managers in Ontario: Results of a Province-Wide Survey and a Comparison with Hospital Managers in Europe.

This paper provides insights into the use of performance data by middle managerial staff in Ontario hospitals in 2019 and compares the results to a study conducted in Europe in the same year. A total of 236 managers working in 61 hospitals across Ontario provided responses to the survey. Compared to their European colleagues, Ontario respondents self-assessed using significantly more performance data for managerial decision making. The use of performance data in Ontario was mostly motivated by external accountability requirements, followed by internal quality improvement efforts. Ontario managers also reported accessibility, appropriateness and timeliness of data and human resources and engagement as the biggest barriers to further performance data utilization. Comparative studies, such as the one this paper is based on, provide the foundation for drawing lessons across jurisdictions. This paper also affirms the importance of hospital middle management in moving from quality assurance to quality improvement efforts and developing sustainable learning healthcare organizations and systems.

Citizen engagement in healthcare procurement decision-making by healthcare insurers: recent experiences in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: In insurance-based healthcare systems, healthcare insurers are interested in engaging citizens in care procurement to contract healthcare services that matter to people. In the Netherlands, an amendment to the Health Insurance Act was set forth in 2021 to formalize and strengthen the engagement of the insured population with healthcare insurers' procurement cycles. This study explores the role of Dutch healthcare insurers in operationalizing citizen engagement in procurement cycles before changes occur linked to the amendment to the Health Insurance Act. METHODS: A phenomenological qualitative design was employed in two phases: (1) we consulted academics and policy experts on the role of healthcare insurers regarding citizen engagement; (2) we conducted focus groups with representatives of healthcare insurers to understand how citizens' engagement is being operationalized. Transcripts of the interviews with experts and detailed notes of focus group meetings were analysed using a qualitative inductive approach. Selected excerpts were analysed on discourse and content and organized by a coding scheme following a rigorous and accelerated data reduction technique. RESULTS: We identified four strategies used by healthcare insurers to operationalize citizen engagement: (1) broadening their population health orientation; (2) developing and improving mechanisms for engaging citizens; (3) strengthening features of data governance for effective use of value-driven data; (4) implementing financial and incentive mechanisms among healthcare providers in support of value-based healthcare. However, regulated market mechanisms and low institutional trust in healthcare insurers undermine their transition from merely funding healthcare towards becoming people-centred value-based healthcare purchasers. CONCLUSION: Dutch healthcare insurers seem to be strengthening the community orientation of their functioning while enhancing the end-to-end experience of the insured. The expected practical effects of the amendment to the Health Insurance Act include broadening the role of the council of insurees in decision-making processes and systematically documenting the efforts set forth by healthcare insurers in engaging citizens. Further research is needed to better understand how the regulated competitive market could be hampering the engagement of citizens in healthcare procurement decision-making and value creation from the citizens' perspective.

Status of the health information system in Ireland and its fitness to support health system performance assessment: a multimethod assessment based on stakeholder involvement.

BACKGROUND: Between 2019 and 2021, the first Irish health system performance assessment (HSPA) framework was developed. As routinely collected health data are necessary to continuously populate indicators of an HSPA framework, a purpose-driven assessment of the health information system (HIS) in Ireland and its fitness to support the implementation of an HSPA framework was conducted. This study reports on the status of the Irish HIS through a multimethod assessment based on continuous broad stakeholder involvement. METHODS: Between May and November 2020, over 50 informants were engaged in individual and group interviews and stakeholder consultation workshops as part of the HIS assessment process. Descriptive themes and high-level data availability heatmaps were derived from interview and workshop data using thematic analysis. Indicator "passports" for the HSPA framework were populated during stakeholder consultation workshops and analysed using univariate descriptive statistics. RESULTS: The HIS in Ireland was able to provide administrative, survey and registry-based data for public sector acute care services, focusing on structure, process and output metrics. Significant data availability gaps, most notably from primary care, private hospitals and community care, were reported, with little availability of electronic health record and people-reported data. Data on outcome metrics were mostly missing, as were linkage possibilities across datasets for care pathway monitoring. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the national HIS's shortcomings but also the capacity for rapid development and improvement. CONCLUSIONS: A tailor-made assessment of the HIS in Ireland, involving a broad set of relevant stakeholders, revealed strengths, weaknesses and areas for improvement in the Irish health data landscape. It also contributed to the development of a national HSPA framework and momentum to further strengthen data infrastructure and governance, while working towards a more data-driven and person-centred healthcare system. This work demonstrates the utility of an inclusive HIS assessment process and is applicable beyond Ireland, where this case study was conducted.

The experiences of 33 national COVID-19 dashboard teams during the first year of the pandemic in the World Health Organization European Region: A qualitative study.

Background: Governments across the World Health Organization (WHO) European Region have prioritised dashboards for reporting COVID-19 data. The ubiquitous use of dashboards for public reporting is a novel phenomenon. Objective: This study explores the development of COVID-19 dashboards during the first year of the pandemic and identifies common barriers, enablers and lessons from the experiences of teams responsible for their development. Methods: We applied multiple methods to identify and recruit COVID-19 dashboard teams, using a purposive, quota sampling approach. Semi-structured group interviews were conducted from April to June 2021. Using elaborative coding and thematic analysis, we derived descriptive and explanatory themes from the interview data. A validation workshop was held with study participants in June 2021. Results: Eighty informants participated, representing 33 national COVID-19 dashboard teams across the WHO European Region. Most dashboards were launched swiftly during the first months of the pandemic, February to May 2020. The urgency, intense workload, limited human resources, data and privacy constraints and public scrutiny were common challenges in the initial development stage. Themes related to barriers or enablers were identified, pertaining to the pre-pandemic context, pandemic itself, people and processes and software, data and users. Lessons emerged around the themes of simplicity, trust, partnership, software and data and change. Conclusions: COVID-19 dashboards were developed in a learning-by-doing approach. The experiences of teams reveal that initial underpreparedness was offset by high-level political endorsement, the professionalism of teams, accelerated data improvements and immediate support with commercial software solutions. To leverage the full potential of dashboards for health data reporting, investments are needed at the team, national and pan-European levels.

Mental Health Patient-Reported Outcomes and Experiences Assessment in Portugal.

Mental ill-health is increasingly recognized by policymakers for its significant human and economic toll. The main objective of this study is to capture patient-reported outcomes and experiences on mental health care in Portugal using methods developed for international benchmarking purposes, such as the OECD Patient-reported Indicators Surveys. The study included 397 participants, 247 (62.2%) women, divided into four age groups: ages 16-24 years, ages 25-44 years, ages 45-65 years, and ages 66 years or older. The data collection procedure and analysis followed the OECD PaRIS Mental Health Working Group 2021 protocol allowing subsequent comparability with data from other OECD member countries. Findings on the WHO-5 Well-Being Index showed that women manifest a lower score in well-being following mental health care services use. This finding may be, at least in part, explained by the study population (mental health services users), including individuals with clinical depression which is more frequently observed in women. In terms of the level of satisfaction with treatment (provided by nurses, doctors, phycologists, etc.) the response "Yes, definitely" varied from 67% of answers regarding "time spent by care providers", 76.3% "involvement in decisions" to 79.7% regarding "clarity of explanations" and 84.4% regarding the item courtesy and respect. This study shows the feasibility of implementing and using patient-reported metrics (PROM and PREM) in mental health services in Portugal. The study results generate useful clinical information to help meet the expectations and needs of patients, contributing to a continuous improvement of mental health community services.

Assessing the outcomes and experiences of care from the perspective of people living with chronic conditions, to support countries in developing people-centred policies and practices: study protocol of the International Survey of People Living with Chronic Conditions (PaRIS survey).

INTRODUCTION: In view of growing populations with chronic conditions, many countries are redesigning their health systems. However, little information is available about how health systems perform from the perspective of people living with chronic conditions. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Member States therefore mandated the OECD to initiate the International Survey of People Living with Chronic Conditions (PaRIS survey), which aims to provide insight in outcomes and experiences of care as reported by people living with chronic conditions. The PaRIS-SUR consortium has been tasked by the OECD to support the development and implementation of the survey. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: As primary care services play a pivotal role in the management of chronic conditions, the PaRIS survey will be implemented in the primary care setting. Data will be collected with a survey among users of primary care services aged 45 years or older, of whom many have chronic conditions. An additional survey is conducted among their primary care providers. The nested study design will allow analysis of the patient-reported data in relation to characteristics of and care provided by primary care providers within and across countries. In 2022, the survey will be tested in a Field Trial in participating countries. Data for cross-country comparison will be collected by the Main Survey in 2023. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Informed consent will be obtained from primary care providers and service users. National Project Managers search ethical approval of the survey in their country, if required. Reporting by the OECD will focus on questions for international comparison. A secured information technology platform will be developed for participants and stakeholders in countries to receive feedback and answer their own questions. Findings will also be disseminated through an international OECD flagship report, conferences, scientific papers and policy briefs, to inform strategies to improve care for people living with chronic conditions throughout the world.

Optimising the secondary use of primary care prescribing data to improve quality of care: a qualitative analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To explore available data sources, secondary uses and key considerations for optimising the actionability of primary care prescribing data to improve quality of care in the Dutch context. DESIGN: An exploratory qualitative study was undertaken based on semi-structured interviews. We anchored our investigation around three tracer prescription types: antibiotics; benzodiazepines and opioids. Descriptive and explanatory themes were derived from interview data using thematic analysis. SETTING: Stakeholders were sampled from across the micro (clinical), meso (organisational) and macro (policy) contexts of the Dutch primary care system. PARTICIPANTS: The study involved 28 informants representing general practitioners (GPs), community pharmacists, regional chronic care networks (care groups), academia and research institutes, insurers, professional associations, electronic health record (EHR) vendors and national authorities. RESULTS: In the Netherlands, three main sources of data for improving prescribing in primary care are in use: clinical data in the EHRs of GP practices; pharmacy data in community pharmacy databases and claims data of insurers. While the secondary use of pharmacy and claims data is well-established across levels, the use of these data together with EHR data is limited. Important differences in the types of prescribing information needed by micro-meso-macro context are found, though the extent to which current indicators address these varies by prescription type. Five main themes were identified as areas for optimising data use: (1) measuring what matters, (2) increasing data linkages, (3) improving data quality, (4) facilitating data sharing and (5) optimising fit for use analysis. CONCLUSIONS: To make primary care prescribing data useful for improving quality, consolidated patient-specific data on the indication for a prescription and dispensed medicine, over time, is needed. In the Netherlands, the selection of indicators requires further prioritisation to better signal the appropriateness and long-term use of prescription drugs. Prioritising data linkages is critical towards more actionable use.

How do Patient-reported Outcome Scores in International Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Registries Compare?

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are the only systematic approach through which the patient's perspective can be considered by surgeons (in determining a procedure's efficacy or appropriateness) or healthcare systems (in the context of value-based healthcare). PROMs in registries enable international comparison of patient-centered outcomes after total joint arthroplasty, but the extent to which those scores may vary between different registry populations has not been clearly defined. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) To what degree do mean change in general and joint-specific PROM scores vary across arthroplasty registries, and to what degree is the proportion of missing PROM scores in an individual registry associated with differences in the mean reported change scores? (2) Do PROM scores vary with patient BMI across registries? (3) Are comorbidity levels comparable across registries, and are they associated with differences in PROM scores? METHODS: Thirteen national, regional, or institutional registries from nine countries reported aggregate PROM scores for patients who had completed PROMs preoperatively and 6 and/or 12 months postoperatively. The requested aggregate PROM scores were the EuroQol-5 Dimension Questionnaire (EQ-5D) index values, on which score 1 reflects "full health" and 0 reflects "as bad as death." Joint-specific PROMs were the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), with total scores ranging from 0 to 48 (worst-best), and the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function shortform (HOOS-PS) and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function shortform (KOOS-PS) values, scored 0 to 100 (worst-best). Eligible patients underwent primary unilateral THA or TKA for osteoarthritis between 2016 and 2019. Registries were asked to exclude patients with subsequent revisions within their PROM collection period. Raw aggregated PROM scores and scores adjusted for age, gender, and baseline values were inspected descriptively. Across all registries and PROMs, the reported percentage of missing PROM data varied from 9% (119 of 1354) to 97% (5305 of 5445). We therefore graphically explored whether PROM scores were associated with the level of data completeness. For each PROM cohort, chi-square tests were performed for BMI distributions across registries and 12 predefined PROM strata (men versus women; age 20 to 64 years, 65 to 74 years, and older than 75 years; and high or low preoperative PROM scores). Comorbidity distributions were evaluated descriptively by comparing proportions with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification of 3 or higher across registries for each PROM cohort. RESULTS: The mean improvement in EQ-5D index values (10 registries) ranged from 0.16 to 0.33 for hip registries and 0.12 to 0.25 for knee registries. The mean improvement in the OHS (seven registries) ranged from 18 to 24, and for the HOOS-PS (three registries) it ranged from 29 to 35. The mean improvement in the OKS (six registries) ranged from 15 to 20, and for the KOOS-PS (four registries) it ranged from 19 to 23. For all PROMs, variation was smaller when adjusting the scores for differences in age, gender, and baseline values. After we compared the registries, there did not seem to be any association between the level of missing PROM data and the mean change in PROM scores. The proportions of patients with BMI 30 kg/m 2 or higher ranged from 16% to 43% (11 hip registries) and from 35% to 62% (10 knee registries). Distributions of patients across six BMI categories differed across hip and knee registries. Further, for all PROMs, distributions also differed across 12 predefined PROM strata. For the EQ-5D, patients in the younger age groups (20 to 64 years and 65 to 74 years) had higher proportions of BMI measurements greater than 30 kg/m 2 than older patients, and patients with the lowest baseline scores had higher proportions of BMI measurements more than 30 kg/m 2 compared with patients with higher baseline scores. These associations were similar for the OHS and OKS cohorts. The proportions of patients with ASA Class at least 3 ranged across registries from 6% to 35% (eight hip registries) and from 9% to 42% (nine knee registries). CONCLUSION: Improvements in PROM scores varied among international registries, which may be partially explained by differences in age, gender, and preoperative scores. Higher BMI tended to be associated with lower preoperative PROM scores across registries. Large variation in BMI and comorbidity distributions across registries suggest that future international studies should consider the effect of adjusting for these factors. Although we were not able to evaluate its effect specifically, missing PROM data is a recurring challenge for registries. Demonstrating generalizability of results and evaluating the degree of response bias is crucial in using registry-based PROMs data to evaluate differences in outcome. Comparability between registries in terms of specific PROMs collection, postoperative timepoints, and demographic factors to enable confounder adjustment is necessary to use comparison between registries to inform and improve arthroplasty care internationally. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.