A two-year longitudinal evaluation of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pre-existing mental health service attenders.

BACKGROUND: To examine if the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a differential effect longitudinally in relation to its psychological and functional impact on patients with bipolar disorder and Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder (EUPD). METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 individuals attending the Galway-Roscommon Mental Health Services with an ICD-10 diagnosis of either bipolar disorder (n = 18) or EUPD (n = 11). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic was assessed in relation to anxiety and mood symptoms, social and occupational functioning, and quality of life utilising psychometric instruments and Likert scale data, with qualitative data assessing participants' subjective experiences. RESULTS: Individuals with EUPD exhibited significant anxiety and depressive symptoms and increased hopelessness compared to individuals with bipolar disorder. Repeated measures data demonstrated no significant change in symptomatology for either the EUPD or bipolar disorder group over time, but demonstrated an improvement in social (t = 4.40, p < 0.001) and occupational functioning (t = 3.65, p = 0.03), and in quality of life (t = 4.03, p < 0.001) for both participant groups. Themes attained from qualitative data included the positive impact of the discontinuation of COVID-19 mandated restrictions (n = 19), and difficulties experienced secondary to reductions in the provision of mental health services during the COVID-19 pandemic (n = 17). CONCLUSION: Individuals with EUPD demonstrated increased symptomatology over a two-year period compared to those with bipolar disorder. The importance of face-to-face mental health supports for this cohort are indicated, particularly if future pandemics impact the delivery of mental health services.

Prevalence of Hip and Groin Pain Across Eras Amongst Former Elite Gaelic Footballers and Hurlers.

Introduction Gaelic football and hurling are the most commonly played amateur sports in Ireland with elite level athletes participating at inter-county level. Over time, the intensity and frequency of inter-county training has approached levels of professional sports. Previous studies have not assessed differences in hip and groin injury between eras. We aimed to examine differences in hip and groin injury, incidence of surgery and Hip and Groin Outcome Scores between elite GAA players of different eras and duration of intercountry career. Methods Members of the squads from the 1976, 1986, 1996 and 2006 hurling and football All-Ireland Finals provided data on age starting intercounty career and previous hip and groin injury and surgery. 372 players were surveyed in total. The hip and groin outcome score (HAGOS), a validated questionnaire assessing hip and groin problems suffered was also assessed. Results There were significant differences in four of the six HAGOS categories between eras with lower scores in 2006 group and in those who were younger starting their intercounty career. In addition, those with younger start and those who played in more recent times had higher rates of groin surgery (23.9% of 2006 cohort, N = 17). As expected, older players had higher rates of total hip replacement (19.7% of the 1976 cohort, N = 12). Conclusion This study highlights the influence of early playing career at elite level on hip and groin injury and that those playing in more modern times had higher incidence of groin surgery and lower HAGOS scores.

Evolution of Haemophilia Care in Europe: 10 years of the principles of care.

INTRODUCTION: The European principles of care in haemophilia marked their first decade in 2018. These guiding principles were the beginning of the European Haemophilia Consortium (EHC) review of countries' adherence to these principles in 2009, 2012, 2015 and 2018. The aim of this paper was to examine the implementation of the principles and how they have impacted the evolution of care in the last decade, as well as to identify remaining gaps and proposes future directions. METHODS: In 2018, the EHC distributed a survey to EHC national member organisations in English and Russian and encouraged them to discuss responses with local clinicians for accuracy. Data was also cross-referenced and validated for countries in earlier surveys using additional available resources. RESULTS: The 10-year-old European principles had a significant impact on the development of care for haemophilia and related bleeding disorders in Europe. They set objectives around which multi-stakeholder groups have established recommendations and specific steps for the progressive improvement of care for bleeding disorders. However, some have been promoted and implemented more than others. CONCLUSION: Monitoring adherence to, and impact of, the European Principles of Care significantly assists in tracking developments and highlighting gaps. Countries' inability to report consistent and coherent data remains a challenge and hinders both provision of treatment and care for patients as well as optimal national and European healthcare systems.

European principles of inhibitor management in patients with haemophilia.

BACKGROUND: In spite of recent major advances in the understanding and treatment of inhibitor development in patients with haemophilia, multidisciplinary management of many of these patients remains suboptimal and highly heterogenous across Europe. METHODS: Following a series of multidisciplinary meetings and a review of the literature, the European haemophilia community of health professionals and patients jointly defined practical optimum standards for ensuring and harmonizing treatment and care for patients with an inhibitor. RESULTS: Ten complementary principles for the management of inhibitors in haemophilia have been developed, emphasizing the importance and benefits of a centralized, multidisciplinary, expert and holistic approach. CONCLUSIONS: This document will serve as a benchmark to improve the multidisciplinary and practical management of patients with inhibitor. Implementation and adherence to each of these principles should have a major positive impact on the management and outcomes of patients developing an inhibitor.

Patient-centred value framework for haemophilia.

INTRODUCTION: Growing budgetary demands have led to increased scrutiny of healthcare spending for rare diseases, leading to a unified goal within the haemophilia community to define objectively patient-centred value in haemophilia care. AIM: To develop a patient-centred outcomes framework with global applicability for assessing value in haemophilia healthcare. METHODS: An international, multidisciplinary panel of experts convened to identify the range of patient impacts of haemophilia health care and organize these into a three-tiered, patient-centred outcomes framework based on Porter's model for assessing value. RESULTS: In addition to measures common to other chronic diseases (eg survival and quality of life), Tier 1, health status achieved or retained, includes haemophilia-specific outcomes of bleeding frequency, musculoskeletal complications and life-threatening bleeds, as well as measures of function or activity. Tier 2, process of recovery, includes such outcomes as time to initial treatment, time to recovery and time missed at education/work; also included are disutility of care, measured by inhibitor development, pathogen transmission/infections, orthopaedic intervention and difficult venous access. Tier 3, sustainability of health, is measured by bleed avoidance, maintenance of productive lives and good health over time; potential long-term negative consequences include insufficient or inappropriate therapy and age-related complications. The applicability of the outcomes framework for different types of haemophilia healthcare interventions is described. CONCLUSION: Haemophilia health care can affect multiple patient-centred outcomes across diverse patient types and healthcare systems. This framework organizes those outcomes for informing value-based decision making by multiple stakeholders and provides the basis for further refinement and development of a standardized outcomes set.

The Patient Reported Outcomes, Burdens and Experiences (PROBE) Project: development and evaluation of a questionnaire assessing patient reported outcomes in people with haemophilia.

BACKGROUND: The interest of health care agencies, private payers and policy makers for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) is continuously increasing. There is a substantial need to improve capacity to collect and interpret relevant PRO data to support implementation of patient-centered research and optimal care in haemophilia. The Patient Reported Outcomes, Burdens and Experiences (PROBE) Project aims to develop a patient-led research network, to develop a standardized questionnaire to gather patient-reported outcomes and to perform a feasibility study of implementing the PROBE questionnaire. METHODS: A pilot questionnaire was developed using focus group methodology. Content and face validity were assessed by a pool of persons living with haemophilia (PWH) and content experts through interactive workshops. The PROBE questionnaire was translated with the forward-backward approach. PROBE recruited national haemophilia patient non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to administer the questionnaire to people with and without haemophilia. PROBE measured the time to complete the questionnaire and gathered feedback on its content and clarity; staff time and cost required to implement the questionnaire were also collected. RESULTS: The PROBE questionnaire is comprised of four major sections (demographic data, general health problems, haemophilia-related health problems and health-related quality of life using EQ-5D-5L and EQ-VAS). Seventeen NGOs participated in the pilot study of the PROBE Project, recruiting 656 participants. Of these, 71% completed the questionnaire within 15 min, and all participants completed within 30 min. The median total staff and volunteer time required for the NGOs to carry out the study within their country was 9 h (range 2 to 40 h). NGO costs ranged from $22.00 to $543.00 USD per country, with printing and postage being the most commonly reported expenditures. CONCLUSIONS: The PROBE questionnaire assesses patient-important reported outcomes in PWH and control participants, with a demonstrated short completion time. PROBE proved the feasibility to engage diverse patient communities in the structured generation of real-world outcome research at all stages. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration: NCT02439710.

Progression of hepatitis C in the haemophiliac population in Ireland, after 30 years of infection in the pre-DAA treatment era.

INTRODUCTION: Prior to the introduction of viral inactivation of factor concentrates and screening of blood, 225 people with haemophilia became infected with hepatitis C (HCV) in Ireland. AIM: Our aim was to assess liver disease progression and mortality in this population after 30 years of infection. METHODS: Demographic and clinical data were collected from medical records in five hepatology units and one infectious disease unit retrospectively in 2005, and on four subsequent occasions. RESULTS: The participation rate was 73% (165/225). Eighty three percent of patients, who had been tested for RNA (n = 106/128), developed chronic HCV infection. Thirty four percent were co-infected with HIV. All-cause mortality, after approximately 30 years of infection with chronic HCV, was 44% in HIV positive patients and 29% in HIV negative patients. Liver-related mortality was 12.5% and did not vary significantly by HIV status. Thirty seven percent of patients had developed advanced liver disease, including 20% with cirrhosis and 9% with hepatocellular carcinoma. In the pre-interferon-free direct acting antivirals era, 57% (n = 60/106) of patients were treated for HCV, 65% of whom achieved a sustained virological response. Successfully treated patients had few adverse liver outcomes. CONCLUSION: After 30 years of infection, 40% of the patients who had evidence of chronic HCV had developed advanced liver disease, such as cirrhosis and HCC, or had died from liver-related causes. This proportion is high relative to similar international cohorts despite good anti-HCV treatment uptake and responses.

Kreuth IV: European consensus proposals for treatment of haemophilia with coagulation factor concentrates.

INTRODUCTION: This report summarizes recommendations relating to haemophilia therapy arising from discussions among experts from 36 European countries during the 'Kreuth IV' meeting in May 2016. AIM: The objective of the meeting was for experts in the field of haemophilia from across Europe to draft resolutions regarding current issues relating to the treatment of haemophilia. RESULTS: Hospitals providing clinical care for people with haemophilia and related disorders are strongly recommended to seek formal designation as either European Haemophilia Treatment Centres (EHTC) or European Haemophilia Comprehensive Care Centres (EHCCC). There should be agreed national protocols or guidelines on management of the ageing patient with haemophilia. The minimum consumption of factor VIII and IX concentrate in any country should be 4 IU and 0.5 IU per capita of general population respectively. Treatment for hepatitis C with direct-acting antiviral agents should be provided to all people with haemophilia on a priority basis. Genotype analysis should be offered to all patients with severe haemophilia. Genetic counselling, when given, should encompass the recommendation that genetic relatives of the affected person be advised to seek genetic counselling. People with inhibitors should have access to bypassing agents, immune tolerance and elective surgery. National or regional tenders for factor concentrates are encouraged. Outcome data including health related quality of life should be collected. Treatment with extended half-life factors should be individualized and protection against bleeding should be improved by increasing trough levels. Steps should be taken to understand and minimize the risk of inhibitor development. CONCLUSION: It is hoped that these recommendations will help to foster equity of haemophilia care throughout Europe.

Survey of coagulation factor concentrates tender and procurement procedures in 38 European Countries.

INTRODUCTION: Procurement of coagulation factor concentrates (CFCs) for the treatment of haemophilia is a vital process that determines the quantity and quality of factor replacement therapy. AIM: The aim of this study was to examine the different tender and procurement systems used in Europe for the procurement of CFCs and the outcomes produced by the various systems. METHODS: The survey questionnaire consisted of 30 items and explored various aspects of the procurement process including the prices of CFCs. In 2014, the survey was sent out by the European Haemophilia Consortium (EHC) to 45 national haemophilia patient organizations affiliated to the EHC in all European countries as well as to a designated clinician familiar with the procurement process. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 38 European countries. Nineteen countries use a tender process, 17 an alternative procurement process and 2 use a combination of methods. A wide variety of agencies and individuals are involved in the process. Factors associated with optimum outcome and lower prices include a tender process with a specific legal framework and a tender board including haemophilia clinicians and patient organization representatives. Safety was reported as the most important selection criterion but given the safety profile of almost all currently licensed products, price was the main criterion used in many countries. CONCLUSION: The involvement of both clinicians and patient organizations greatly improves the outcome of a tender or procurement process, as does the presence of a legal framework that governs the process.

Assessment of outcomes.

Effective healthcare delivery necessitates evaluation of the effect of interventions in the form of outcome assessment. Treatment effect includes measurement of how the patient feels, functions and survives following healthcare interventions. In haemophilia, which is a rare bleeding disorder, outcome assessment was characterized by a lack of validated outcome measurement tools and the challenges of hemophilia study design to collect outcome data. The aim of this communication is to share current thinking and, through practical examples, provide a state of the art practice in the assessment of hemophilia outcomes from a healthcare provider, patient/family and funder perspective. This discussion is timely and particularly relevant to the care of people with hemophilia on the eve of a number of novel hemophilia treatment products which are about to be licensed for use, specifically the long-acting factor VIII and factor IX concentrates. The first section by Dr Blanchet gives an overview of the tools currently available for assessment of structure/function, patient activities and patient participation in hemophilia healthcare delivery, pointing out the challenge of developing new tools and appropriate validation of currently available tools. The second section by Mr Brian O'Mahony emphasizes the essential collaboration and partnership between healthcare providers and people with hemophilia in collating the outcome data. In the third and final section, Mr Leigh McJames, gives a funder's perspective of the desirable outcomes of hemophilia care.

Haemophilia care in Europe - a survey of 35 countries.

A questionnaire was circulated in 2012 to national haemophilia patient organizations in Europe affiliated to the European Haemophilia Consortium (EHC) and the World Federation of Hemophilia (WFH) to seek information about the organization of haemophilia care and treatment available at a national level. The 35 responses received highlighted major differences in the availability of treatment and care. There was a wide range in factor VIII consumption with usage ranging from 0.20 IU per capita in Armenia to 8.56 IU per capita in Sweden (median: IU per capita). The decrease in health budgets in many countries was not matched by decreases in use of FVIII per capita. In the 19 countries that responded to the previous survey, there was a significant improvement in access to prophylaxis and home treatment.

Treatment for life for severe haemophilia A- A cost-utility model for prophylaxis vs. on-demand treatment.

Prophylaxis has been established as the treatment of choice in children with haemophilia and its continuation into the adult years has been shown to decrease morbidity throughout life. The cost of factor therapy has made the option questionable in cost-effectiveness studies. The role of prophylaxis in pharmacokinetic dosage and tolerization against inhibitor formation were used to model the cost utility of prophylaxis vs. on-demand (OD) therapy over a lifetime horizon in severe haemophilia A. The model was applied to a single provider national health system exemplified by the United Kingdom's National Health Service and a third party provider in the United States. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated and compared to threshold values used by payer agencies to guide reimbursement decisions. A cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was also estimated for Sweden. Prophylaxis was dominant over OD treatment in the UK. The model resulted in an ICER - $68 000 - within the range of treatments reimbursed in the USA. In Sweden, a cost/QALY of SEK 1.1 million was also within the range of reimbursed treatments in that country. Dosage- and treatment-induced inhibitor incidence were the most important variables in the model. Subject to continuing clinical evidence of the effectiveness of pharmacokinetic dosage and the role of prophylaxis in decreasing inhibitor incidence, treatment for life with prophylaxis is a cost-effective therapy, using current criteria for the reimbursement of health care technologies in a number of countries.

A survey of the outcome of prophylaxis, on-demand treatment or combined treatment in 18-35-year old men with severe haemophilia in six countries.

A number of studies have been published on the benefits of prophylactic treatment in adults with haemophilia. However, in many countries, it is considered as optional due to financial constraints. This survey was carried out to examine the long-term effects of prophylaxis and the continuing benefit of the treatment into adulthood. Self-assessed health-related data and the EQ-5D questionnaire measuring health utility were collected from 124 men (26.9 ± 4.6 years) from Canada (N = 40), France (N = 14), Ireland (N = 17), the Netherlands (N = 16), Poland (N = 24) and the UK (N = 13). The respondents were split into four groups: On-Demand, <50% life on prophylaxis, ≥ 50% life on prophylaxis, Prophylaxis. Overall, long-term prophylaxis results in lower presence of target joints (P ≤ 0.001), occurrence of serious bleeding episodes (P ≤ 0.05), recurring bleeding episodes (P ≤ 0.01) and requirement for surgical procedures (P ≤ 0.05). Furthermore, health utility (P ≤ 0.01) in the On-demand group was significantly lower (P ≤ 0.01) compared to the ≥ 50% life on prophylaxis and the Prophylaxis group. No significant differences between countries were found except between the Netherlands and Poland, with Poland showing the lowest health utility (P ≤ 0.01) and the most problems with mobility (P ≤ 0.05) and pain/discomfort (P ≤ 0.001). The Netherlands showed the highest health utility (0.915) followed by Canada (0.791), Ireland (0.786), UK (0.768), France (0.687) and Poland (0.629). The results demonstrate consistently higher quality of life of individuals who are on long-term prophylactic treatment when compared to on-demand treatment or intermittent prophylaxis and on -demand treatment.

The development of a patient partnership programme and its impact on quality improvements in a comprehensive haemophilia care service.

It has long been advocated that patient input in service quality development is essential. We have developed a model of quality evaluation and improvement within a comprehensive haemophilia service, and describe the issues and improvements that resulted from the process. The project utilized an action research methodology. Seven patients were recruited from the haemophilia service for the initial focus groups. The main themes initially explored were as follows: patient experience of the outpatient, inpatient and weekend services and provision of information. The focus group data were analysed using basic content analysis. The main themes the initial focus group identified were the need to optimize the annual review, emergency care and inpatient facilities. Following this, the haemophilia care team worked on improving these issues. At the second focus group the patients contributed at a higher level - patient participation. Patients assisted in addressing outstanding issues such as ID alert card content and the algorithm of care for emergency services. Finally, a patient panel was developed and the relationship became one of direct negotiation and partnership with the haemophilia team to address issues within the service. The expectations and needs of patients attending the haemophilia comprehensive care service are complex. The process of including patients as partners at the highest level of patient involvement evolved and proved an effective method of service evaluation and development, facilitating lateral decision-making, not only improving care directly, but also improving the user experience.

Health technology assessment and haemophilia.

Although the funding of rare diseases such as haemophilia in developing countries remains a low priority, pressures on the funding of haemophilia treatment are also emerging in developed economies affected by the global economic downturn and the other demands on health care budgets. This is leading advisory bodies and payers alike to explore the tools of Health Technology Assessment (HTAs) in deriving recommendations for reimbursement policies. In particular, the use of cost utility analysis (CUA) in deriving costs per quality adjusted life year (QALY) for different interventions is being used to rank interventions in order of priorities relative to a threshold cost per QALY. In these exercises, rare chronic disorders such as haemophilia emerge as particularly unattractive propositions for reimbursement, as the accepted methodology of deriving a CUA. For e.g. the use of prophylaxis in haemophilia leads to a range of costs/QALY which exceed the willingness to pay thresholds of most payers. In this commentary, we review the principles utilized in a recent systematic review of the use of haemophilia products carried out in Sweden as part of an HTA. We suggest that ranking haemophilia related interventions with the standard interventions of therapeutics and public health in CUA comparisons is inappropriate. Given that haemophilia treatment is a form of blood replacement therapy, we propose that such comparisons should be made with the interventions of mainstream blood transfusion. We suggest that unequivocally effective treatments such as haemophilia therapies should be assessed differently from mainstream interventions, that new methodologies are required for these kinds of diseases and that evidence of a societal willingness to support people with rare disorders needs to be recognized when reimbursement policies are developed.