RESUMEN
We assessed challenges that the COVID-19 pandemic presented for mental health systems and the responses to these challenges in 14 countries in Europe and North America. Experts from each country filled out a structured questionnaire with closed- and open-ended questions between January and June 2021. We conducted thematic analysis to investigate the qualitative responses to open-ended questions, and we summarized the responses to closed-ended survey items on changes in telemental health policies and regulations. Findings revealed that many countries grappled with the rising demand for mental health services against a backdrop of mental health provider shortages and challenges responding to workforce stress and burnout. All countries in our sample implemented new policies or initiatives to strengthen mental health service delivery - with more than two-thirds investing to bolster their specialized mental health care sector. There was a universal shift to telehealth to deliver a larger portion of mental health services in all 14 countries, which was facilitated by changes in national regulations and policies; 11 of the 14 participating countries relaxed regulations and 10 of 14 countries made changes to reimbursement policies to facilitate telemental health care. These findings provide a first step to assess the long-term challenges and re-organizational effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health systems in Europe and North America.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Salud Mental , Pandemias , Política de Salud , América del Norte/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
STUDY QUESTION: What is the association between day of delivery and measures of quality and safety of maternity services, particularly comparing weekend with weekday performance? METHODS: This observational study examined outcomes for maternal and neonatal records (1,332,835 deliveries and 1,349,599 births between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2012) within the nationwide administrative dataset for English National Health Service hospitals by day of the week. Groups were defined by day of admission (for maternal indicators) or delivery (for neonatal indicators) rather than by day of complication. Logistic regression was used to adjust for case mix factors including gestational age, birth weight, and maternal age. Staffing factors were also investigated using multilevel models to evaluate the association between outcomes and level of consultant presence. The primary outcomes were perinatal mortality and-for both neonate and mother-infections, emergency readmissions, and injuries. STUDY ANSWER AND LIMITATIONS: Performance across four of the seven measures was significantly worse for women admitted, and babies born, at weekends. In particular, the perinatal mortality rate was 7.3 per 1000 babies delivered at weekends, 0.9 per 1000 higher than for weekdays (adjusted odds ratio 1.07, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.13). No consistent association between outcomes and staffing was identified, although trusts that complied with recommended levels of consultant presence had a perineal tear rate of 3.0% compared with 3.3% for non-compliant services (adjusted odds ratio 1.21, 1.00 to 1.45). Limitations of the analysis include the method of categorising performance temporally, which was mitigated by using a midweek reference day (Tuesday). Further research is needed to investigate possible bias from unmeasured confounders and explore the nature of the causal relationship. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: This study provides an evaluation of the "weekend effect" in obstetric care, covering a range of outcomes. The results would suggest approximately 770 perinatal deaths and 470 maternal infections per year above what might be expected if performance was consistent across women admitted, and babies born, on different days of the week. FUNDING, COMPETING INTERESTS, DATA SHARING: The research was partially funded by Dr Foster Intelligence and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Imperial Patient Safety Translational Research Centre in partnership with the Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Healthcare Associated Infection and Antimicrobial Resistance at Imperial College London. WLP was supported by the National Audit Office.
Asunto(s)
Parto Obstétrico , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones del Trabajo de Parto , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Admisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Peso al Nacer , Parto Obstétrico/métodos , Parto Obstétrico/estadística & datos numéricos , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Femenino , Edad Gestacional , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Edad Materna , Servicios de Salud Materna/normas , Complicaciones del Trabajo de Parto/epidemiología , Complicaciones del Trabajo de Parto/etiología , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud , Mortalidad Perinatal , Admisión y Programación de Personal/estadística & datos numéricos , Embarazo , Resultado del Embarazo/epidemiología , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To examine the potential for using routinely collected administrative data to compare the quality and safety of stroke care at a hospital level, including evaluating any bias due to variations in coding practice. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of English hospitals' performance against six process and outcome indicators covering the acute care pathway. We used logistic regression to adjust the outcome measures for case mix. SETTING: Hospitals in England. PARTICIPANTS: Stroke patients (ICD-10 I60-I64) admitted to English National Health Service public acute hospitals between April 2009 and March 2010, accounting for 91 936 admissions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The quality and safety were measured using six indicators spanning the hospital care pathway, from timely access to brain scans to emergency readmissions following discharge after stroke. RESULTS: There were 182 occurrences of hospitals performing statistically differently from the national average at the 99.8% significance level across the six indicators. Differences in coding practice appeared to only partially explain the variation. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital administrative data provide a practical and achievable method for evaluating aspects of stroke care across the acute pathway. However, without improvements in coding and further validation, it is unclear whether the cause of the variation is the quality of care or the result of different local care pathways and data coding accuracy.
Asunto(s)
Administración Hospitalaria/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitales Públicos/organización & administración , Hospitales Públicos/estadística & datos numéricos , Calidad de la Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Calidad de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Inglaterra , Hospitales Públicos/normas , Humanos , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Seguridad del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Calidad de la Atención de Salud/normas , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medicina Estatal/estadística & datos numéricos , Accidente CerebrovascularRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between day of admission and measures of the quality and safety of the care received by patients with stroke. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to hospitals with stroke (codes I60-I64 from the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Version) from April 1, 2009, through March 31, 2010. SETTING: English National Health Service public hospitals. PATIENTS: PATIENTS during the study period accounted for 93 621 admissions. We used logistic regression to adjust the outcome measures for case mix. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Quality and safety measurements using 6 indicators spanning the hospital care pathway, from timely brain scans to emergency readmissions after discharge. RESULTS: Performance across 5 of the 6 measures was significantly lower on weekends (confidence level, 99%). One of the largest disparities was seen in rates of same-day brain scans, which were 43.1% on weekends compared with 47.6% on weekdays (unadjusted odds ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.81-0.86]). In particular, the rate of 7-day in-hospital mortality for Sunday admissions was 11.0% (adjusted odds ratio, 1.26 [95% CI, 1.16-1.37], with Monday used as a reference) compared with a mean of 8.9% for weekday admissions. CONCLUSIONS: Strong evidence suggests that, nationally, stroke patients admitted on weekends are less likely to receive urgent treatments and have worse outcomes across a range of indicators. Although we adjusted the results for case mix, we cannot rule out some of the effect being due to unmeasured differences in patients admitted on weekends compared with weekdays. The findings suggest that approximately 350 in-hospital deaths each year within 7 days are potentially avoidable, and an additional 650 people could be discharged to their usual place of residence within 56 days if the performance seen on weekdays was replicated on weekends.