Characteristics of Persons Registrated Due to Cannabinoid Abuse in Croatia - Do We Have enough Effective Intervention?

BACKGROUND: It is known that cannabis increases mood, decreases anxiety and causes mild euphoria, but also it can cause serious mental diseases. Previous studies showed harmful effects of cannabis and the aim of this study is to show characteristics of persons registrated because of cannabinoids abuse in Croatia in the period 2008-2018 and show effectiveness of interventions using statistic methods. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Research data were collected based on the national Registry of Treated Psychoactive Drug Abusers in period 2008 to 2018 and included 10 533 registrated persons. Statistical analysis was performed by chi-square test and binary logistic regression. RESULTS: Results showed that men and very young people took cannabinoids more often than women and older people. There was a changing trend of registrated people in a ten-year period. The most commonly used intervention of obligatory healthcare treatment is consultation, but the difference between apstinents and people with unchanged status isn't statistically significant. The most people are referred by repressive mechanism and they are more likely to have apstinent status compared to unrepressive source of referral, with one exception - referred by the family. The highest probability of abstinence have those referred by the center for social welfare. CONCLUSIONS: Registrated people were mostly referred by repressive way, which makes question of its efficiency and prevention of long term addiction, because system like that more likely stigmatizes and punishes young people, opposite to giving support and help.

QUALITY ASSURANCE OF REGISTRIES FOR HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify guidelines and assessment tools used by health technology agencies for quality assurance of registries and investigate the current use of registry data by HTA organizations worldwide. METHODS: As part of a European Network for Health Technology Assessment Joint Action work package, we undertook a literature search and sent a questionnaire to all partner organizations on the work package and all organizations listed in the International Society for Pharmaco-economics and Outcomes Research directory. RESULTS: We identified thirteen relevant documents relating to quality assurance of registries. We received fifty-five responses from organizations representing twenty-one different countries, a response rate of 40.5 percent (43/110). Many agencies, particularly in Europe, are already drawing on a range of registries to provide data for their HTA. Less than half, however, use criteria or standards to assess the quality of registry data. Nearly all criteria or standards in use have been internally defined by organizations rather than referring to those produced by an external body. A comparison of internal and external standards identified consistency in several quality dimensions, which can be used as a starting point for the development of a standardized tool. CONCLUSION: The use of registry data is more prevalent than expected, strengthening the need for a standardized registry quality assessment tool. A user-friendly tool developed in conjunction with stakeholders will support the consistent application of approved quality standards, and reassure critics who have traditionally considered registry data to be unreliable.

Addressing the Data Linking Challenges.

BACKGROUND: PARENT JA (cross-border Patient Registries iNiTiative Joint Action), a joint EU and Member States project, has conducted a research among EU patient registries aimed at gathering information on the registries' interoperability readiness. Leaning on the information and data collected through the previous PARENT JA research, this study aims to provide more detailed view into the registry holders' practical challenges with data linking. Since the studies which dealt with patient data exchange have often neglected the registry holders' performance of data exchange, we wanted to put a spotlight on various EU registry holders' practices and operations, aiming to detect their needs and concerns in the process of running an interoperable registry. The focus of this study was identifying the main practices and challenges in patient registries interoperability improvement. METHODS: The basis for this analysis were the data collected in the series of structured interviews. The size of the interview sample was 13 patient registries, each from a different EU country. The structured interview consisted of nine questions and was conducted in two parts: oral and written. The answers were analysed using open coding. RESULTS: Results are interpreted in the context of the six main themes that emerged through a comprehensive analysis. (1) Examples of data exchange: The most common reported data exchange practices were seen only as a way to achieve the most immediate needs and interests of the individual registries. (2) Awareness and use of international standards: International data and clinical standards were not widely used by the interviewed registries. (3) Use of data models and formats: In the area of data models and formats there is no universally used practice. (4) Data request protocols and procedures: Procedures and protocols varied, mostly depending on the national legal systems in which the patient registries operated. (5) Data security and integrity: Security of personal data was a universal concern for all registry holders that were interviewed; identifiable individual data was shared only in one case. (6) Opportunities and challenges of registry interoperability: most registry holders responded that their registries were well prepared for interoperability practices and that data exchange has never been their primary operative concern. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the difficulties regarding data linking were not necessarily associated with technical issues, which registry holders listed outright. Our analysis showed that the lack of interoperability came as a result of organizational or legal constraints that made the registries unable to process and conduct data linking quickly and effectively with other sources.