Economic Evaluation of New Models of Care: Does the Decision Change Between Cost-Utility Analysis and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis?

OBJECTIVES: To experiment with new approaches of collaboration in healthcare delivery, local authorities implement new models of care. Regarding the local decision context of these models, multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) may be of added value to cost-utility analysis (CUA), because it covers a wider range of outcomes. This study compares the 2 methods using a side-by-side application. METHODS: A new Dutch model of care, Primary Care Plus (PC+), was used as a case study to compare the results of CUA and MCDA. Data of patients referred to PC+ or care-as-usual were retrieved by questionnaires and administrative databases with a 3-month follow-up. Propensity score matching together with generalized linear regression models was used to reduce confounding. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to explore uncertainty in the results. RESULTS: Although both methods indicated PC+ as the dominant alternative, complementary differences were observed. MCDA provided additional evidence that PC+ improved access to care (standardized performance score of 0.742 vs 0.670) and that improvement in health-related quality of life was driven by the psychological well-being component (standardized performance score of 0.710 vs 0.704). Furthermore, MCDA estimated the budget required for PC+ to be affordable in addition to preferable (€521.42 per patient). Additionally, MCDA was less sensitive to the utility measures used. CONCLUSIONS: MCDA may facilitate an auditable and transparent evaluation of new models of care by providing additional information on a wider range of outcomes and incorporating affordability. However, more effort is needed to increase the usability of MCDA among local decision makers.

Patients' perspectives on a new delivery model in primary care: A propensity score matched analysis of patient-reported outcomes in a Dutch cohort study.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVE: Primary Care Plus (PC+) focuses on the substitution of hospital-based medical care to the primary care setting without moving hospital facilities. The aim of this study was to examine whether population health and experience of care in PC+ could be maintained. Therefore, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and experienced quality of care from a patient perspective were compared between patients referred to PC+ and to hospital-based outpatient care (HBOC). METHODS: This cohort study included patients from a Dutch region, visiting PC+ or HBOC between December 2014 and April 2018. With patient questionnaires (T0, T1 and T2), the HRQoL and experience of care were measured. One-to-two nearest neighbour calliper propensity score matching (PSM) was used to control for potential selection bias. Outcomes were compared using marginal linear models and Pearson chi-square tests. RESULTS: One thousand one hundred thirteen PC+ patients were matched to 606 HBOC patients with well-balanced baseline characteristics (SMDs <0.1). Regarding HRQoL outcomes, no significant interaction terms between time and group were found (P > .05), indicating no difference in HRQoL development between the groups over time. Regarding experienced quality of care, no differences were found between PC+ and HBOC patients. Only travel time was significantly shorter in the HBOC group (P ≤ .001). CONCLUSION: Results show equal effects on HRQoL outcomes over time between the groups. Regarding experienced quality of care, only differences in travel time were found. Taken as a whole, population health and quality of care were maintained with PC+ and future research should focus more on cost-related outcomes.

Reorganising dermatology care: predictors of the substitution of secondary care with primary care.

BACKGROUND: The substitution of healthcare is a way to control rising healthcare costs. The Primary Care Plus (PC+) intervention of the Dutch 'Blue Care' pioneer site aims to achieve this feat by facilitating consultations with medical specialists in the primary care setting. One of the specialties involved is dermatology. This study explores referral decisions following dermatology care in PC+ and the influence of predictive patient and consultation characteristics on this decision. METHODS: This retrospective study used clinical data of patients who received dermatology care in PC+ between January 2015 and March 2017. The referral decision following PC+, (i.e., referral back to the general practitioner (GP) or referral to outpatient hospital care) was the primary outcome. Stepwise logistic regression modelling was used to describe variations in the referral decisions following PC+, with patient age and gender, number of PC+ consultations, patient diagnosis and treatment specialist as the predicting factors. RESULTS: A total of 2952 patients visited PC+ for dermatology care. Of those patients with a registered referral, 80.2% (N = 2254) were referred back to the GP, and 19.8% (N = 558) were referred to outpatient hospital care. In the multivariable model, only the treating specialist and patient's diagnosis independently influenced the referral decisions following PC+. CONCLUSION: The aim of PC+ is to reduce the number of referrals to outpatient hospital care. According to the results, the treating specialist and patient diagnosis influence referral decisions. Therefore, the results of this study can be used to discuss and improve specialist and patient profiles for PC+ to further optimise the effectiveness of the initiative.

Changes in problematic activities of daily living in persons with COPD during 1 year of usual care.

INTRODUCTION: Persons with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are often limited in performing their activities of daily living (ADLs). However, it remains unknown whether and to what extent problematic ADLs change over time and whether exacerbation-related hospitalisations affect problematic ADLs. Therefore, we investigated self-reported problematic ADLs of persons with COPD during 1 year of usual care (i.e. without a specific experimental intervention). METHODS: Stable persons with moderate to very severe COPD (n = 137) were included in this longitudinal study (registered in the Dutch Trial Register [NTR 3941]). Participants were visited at home at baseline and after 1 year. Participants with an exacerbation-related hospitalisation during follow-up were visited additionally within 2 weeks after hospital discharge. During all visits, participants' personalised problematic ADLs were assessed using the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), and perceived performance and satisfaction of important problematic ADLs were rated on a 10-point scale. RESULTS: In total, 90% of the participants reported at least one new important problematic ADL after 1 year. In the subgroup of participants with an exacerbation-related hospitalisation (n = 31), 92% of the participants reported new problematic ADLs 2 weeks after discharge and 90% reported new problematic ADLs again after 1 year. Only the satisfaction score of problematic ADLs as mentioned during baseline improved after 1-year follow-up in all participants (p = .002) and in participants without an exacerbation-related hospitalisation (n = 106; p = .014). CONCLUSION: Problematic ADLs changed during 1 year of usual care, which underlines the need for regular assessment of problematic ADLs and referral to treatment options like monodisciplinary occupational therapy and/or a comprehensive pulmonary rehabilitation programme.

Referral decisions and its predictors related to orthopaedic care. A retrospective study in a novel primary care setting.

Due to the ageing population, the prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders will continue to rise, as well as healthcare expenditure. To overcome these increasing expenditures, integration of orthopaedic care should be stimulated. The Primary Care Plus (PC+) intervention aimed to achieve this by facilitating collaboration between primary care and the hospital, in which specialised medical care is shifted to a primary care setting. The present study aims to evaluate the referral decision following orthopaedic care in PC+ and in particular to evaluate the influence of diagnostic tests on this decision. Therefore, retrospective monitoring data of patients visiting PC+ for orthopaedic care was used. Data was divided into two periods; P1 and P2. During P2, specialists in PC+ were able to request additional diagnostic tests (such as ultrasounds and MRIs). A total of 2,438 patients visiting PC+ for orthopaedic care were included in the analysis. The primary outcome was the referral decision following PC+ (back to the general practitioner (GP) or referral to outpatient hospital care). Independent variables were consultation- and patient-related predictors. To describe variations in the referral decision, logistic regression modelling was used. Results show that during P2, significantly more patients were referred back to their GP. Moreover, the multivariable analysis show a significant effect of patient age on the referral decision (OR 0.86, 95% CI = 0.81-0.91) and a significant interaction was found between the treating specialist and the period (p = 0.015) and between patient's diagnosis and the period (p ≤ 0.001). Despite the significant impact of the possibility of requesting additional diagnostic tests in PC+, it is important to discuss the extent to which the availability of diagnostic tests fits within the vision of PC+. In addition, selecting appropriate profiles for specialists and patients for PC+ are necessary to further optimise the effectiveness and cost of care.

Does the implementation of a care pathway for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis lead to fewer diagnostic imaging and referrals by general practitioners? A pre-post-implementation study of claims data.

BACKGROUND: The Dutch care for hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) is of good quality, but there is room for improvement regarding the efficient use of diagnostic imaging and conservative treatment. Therefore a stepped-care approach, in the shape of the care pathway 'Better exercise in osteoarthritis', was implemented to reduce the number of diagnostic imaging requested by GPs and referrals of GPs to orthopaedic care. METHODS: In 2015, the pathway is implemented with the use of educational meetings, distributing guidelines and incorporating reminders in the GPs' referral application. To evaluate the effect of the pathway on the diagnostic and referral behaviour of GPs, hip and knee related health insurance claims are used together with claims of other joints and of a control region for comparison. The average number of claims and the percentage change in the post-implementation period are described. Binary logistic regression analysis is used to examine the interaction between region (intervention and control) and period (pre- and post-implementation). Using random sampling of patient records, information about the practical application of the pathway and the number of hip or knee arthroplasties is added. RESULTS: In both regions, the number of diagnostic imaging decreased and the number of initial orthopaedic consultations increased during the post-implementation period. Significant interaction effects were found in knee-related diagnostics (p ≤ 0.001) and diagnostics of other joints (p = 0.039). No significant interaction effects were found in hip-related diagnostics (p = 0.060) and in initial orthopaedic consultation claims of hip (p = 0.979), knee (p = 0.281), and other joints (p = 0.464). Being referred according to the pathway had no significant effect on the probability of undergoing arthroplasty. CONCLUSION: The implementation of the pathway had a positive effect on GPs diagnostic behaviour related to the knee, but not to the hip. The referral behaviour of GPs to orthopaedic care needs attention for future interventions and research, since an increase (instead of a desired decrease) in the number of initial orthopaedic consultations was found. Focusing on the entire width of care for hip and knee OA could be helpful.

Identifying causes of perceptual differences in problematic activities of daily life between patients with COPD and proxies: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Proxies of patients with COPD are often unable to identify the patients' most important problematic activities of daily life (ADLs). The aim was to explore causes of perceptual differences between patients with COPD and their proxies about the problematic ADLs of the patient. METHODS: Ten open structured interviews were conducted in the presence of both the patient and proxy. Patients' five most important problematic ADLs identified by the couple were compared and discussed. For data analysis, open coding, axial coding and selective coding were conducted. RESULTS: Ten main causes were identified: differences in the level of satisfaction, or acceptance; estimation of own capabilities; problematic ADL goes unnoticed; proxy is not present during problematic ADL; problematic ADL is not performed (often or anymore), or not (longer) talked about; masked by another problematic ADL; value judgement; solution for problematic ADL. CONCLUSION: The causes of perceptual differences between patients and proxies about patients' problematic ADLs were related to both the patient's and the proxy's perception.

Knowledge gaps in patients with COPD and their proxies.

BACKGROUND: Although proxies of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) need health-related knowledge to support patients in managing their disease, their current level of knowledge remains unknown. We aimed to compare health-related knowledge (generic and COPD-related knowledge) between patients with COPD and their resident proxies. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we included stable patients with moderate to very severe COPD and their resident proxies (n = 194 couples). Thirty-four statements about generic health and COPD-related topics were assessed in patients and proxies separately. Statements could be answered by 'true', 'false', or 'do not know'. This study is approved by the Medical Research Ethics Committees United (MEC-U), the Netherlands (NL42721.060.12/M12-1280). RESULTS: Patients answered on average 17% of the statements incorrect, and 19% with 'do not know'. The same figure (19%) for the incorrect and unknown statements was shown by proxies. Patients who attended pulmonary rehabilitation previously answered more statements correct (about three) compared to patients who did not attend pulmonary rehabilitation. More correct answers were reported by: younger patients, patients with a higher level of education, patients who previously participated in pulmonary rehabilitation, patients with better cognitive functioning, and patients with a COPD diagnosis longer ago. CONCLUSIONS: Proxies of patients with COPD as well as patients themselves answer about two third of 34 knowledge statements about COPD correct. So, both patients and proxies seem to have an incomplete knowledge about COPD and general health. Therefore, education about general health and COPD should be offered to all subgroups of patients with COPD and their proxies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered in the Dutch Trial Register ( NTR3941 ). Registered 19 April 2013.

Activity Levels and Exercise Motivation in Patients With COPD and Their Resident Loved Ones.

BACKGROUND: Resident loved ones of patients with COPD can play an important role in helping these patients engage in physical activity. We aimed to compare activity levels and exercise motivation between patients with COPD and their resident loved ones; to compare the same outcome measures in patients after stratification for the physical activity level of the loved ones; and to predict the likelihood of being physically active in patients with a physically active resident loved one. METHODS: One hundred twenty-five patient/loved one dyads were cross-sectionally and simultaneously assessed. Sedentary behavior, light activities, and moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) were measured with a triaxial accelerometer during free-living conditions for at least 5 days. Five exercise-motivation constructs were investigated: amotivation, external regulation, introjected regulation, identified regulation, and intrinsic regulation. RESULTS: Patients spent more time in sedentary behavior and less time in physical activity than their loved ones (P < .0001). More intrinsic regulation was observed in loved ones compared with patients (P = .003), with no differences in other constructs. Despite similar exercise motivation, patients with an active loved one spent more time in MVPA (mean 31 min/d; 95% CI, 24-38 min/d vs mean, 18 min/d; 95% CI, 14-22 min/d; P = .002) and had a higher likelihood of being active (OR, 4.36; 95% CI, 1.41-13.30; P = .01) than did patients with an inactive loved one after controlling for age, BMI, and degree of airflow limitation. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with COPD are more physically inactive and sedentary than their loved ones, despite relatively similar exercise motivation. Nevertheless, patients with an active loved one are more active themselves and have a higher likelihood of being active. TRIAL REGISTRY: Dutch Trial Register (NTR3941).

Patient versus proxy-reported problematic activities of daily life in patients with COPD.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Loved ones (proxies) of patients with COPD are confronted with the patients' limitations in activities of daily living (ADLs). However, it remains unknown whether proxies are able to correctly estimate the problematic ADLs of the patient. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the level of agreement between patient-reported and proxy-reported problematic ADLs of the patient. METHODS: Stable outpatients with moderate to very severe COPD (n = 194) and their resident proxies (n = 194) were included in this cross-sectional study. Patients' problematic ADLs were assessed in the domains 'self-care', 'mobility', 'productivity' and 'leisure' using the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) in both patients and resident proxies. Furthermore, the perceived performance and satisfaction for important problematic ADLs were rated on a 10-point scale. RESULTS: In total, 830 problematic ADLs were reported by patients, and 735 by proxies. Agreement in reporting problematic ADLs within a domain was poor (productivity and leisure; κ; = 0.20 and 0.16, respectively) to fair (self-care and mobility; κ = 0.32 and 0.22, respectively). Similar performance and satisfaction scores, for equally reported problematic ADLs, were given by 24.0% and 17.6% of the pairs, respectively. CONCLUSION: Proxies were often not able to identify the patients' most important problematic ADLs. Moreover, when patient and proxy agreed about the presence of a specific problematic ADL, the perception of the performance and the satisfaction with that performance differed within most pairs. This emphasizes the importance of involving proxies, besides patients alone, in identifying patients' problematic ADLs.

Health Status and Morbidities in Resident Relatives of Patients With COPD.

OBJECTIVES: Resident relatives of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may play a major role in obtaining a healthy lifestyle for patients. Little is known about resident relatives. This study aimed to compare health status, morbidities, care dependency, and mobility between patients with COPD and their resident relatives. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Stable patients with moderate to very severe COPD (n = 194) and their resident relatives (n = 194) were visited in their home environment. MEASUREMENTS: Post-bronchodilator spirometry was assessed and generic health status was measured using the EuroQol-5 Dimensions and the Assessment of Quality of Life with 8 dimensions. Care dependency was measured using the Care Dependency Scale. Mobility was measured using the Timed "Up and Go" test (TUG). Morbidities (COPD, hypertension, anxiety and depression, obesity, and muscle wasting) were determined using accepted disease cutoff points and/or receiving specific treatment. RESULTS: Age (patients: 66.0 [8.7], resident relatives: 64.8 [9.7]) and gender (male patients: 53%, male resident relatives: 45%) were comparable. Patients had worse generic health status, higher level of care dependency, and worse mobility. 29% of the resident relatives had airflow limitation based on the Tiffeneau index and 19% based on the lower limit of normal, 33% were current smokers, and 92% had at least one chronic condition. Resident relatives more frequently had hypertension (46% versus 69%). CONCLUSION: Resident relatives of patients with COPD are often current smokers and often have undiagnosed morbidities. Although their health status is better compared with patients, their disease management and health behavior should also be considered when advising patients in obtaining a healthier lifestyle and also when involving them as informal caregivers.

Informal caregivers of patients with COPD: Home Sweet Home?

The burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) on society is increasing. Healthcare systems should support patients with COPD in achieving an optimal quality of life, while limiting the costs of care. As a consequence, a shift from hospital care to home care seems inevitable. Therefore, patients will have to rely to a greater extent on informal caregivers. Patients with COPD as well as their informal caregivers are confronted with multiple limitations in activities of daily living. The presence of an informal caregiver is important to provide practical help and emotional support. However, caregivers can be overprotective, which can make patients more dependent. Informal caregiving may lead to symptoms of anxiety, depression, social isolation and a changed relationship with the patient. The caregivers' subjective burden is a major determinant of the impact of caregiving. Therefore, the caregiver's perception of the patient's health is an important factor. This article reviews the current knowledge about these informal caregivers of patients with COPD, the impact of COPD on their lives and their perception of the patient's health status.

An observational, longitudinal study on the home environment of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: the research protocol of the Home Sweet Home study.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) represents an important public health challenge. Patients are confronted with limitations during activities of daily living (ADLs). Resident loved ones of patients with COPD may be uniquely positioned to witness these limitations. COPD may have an impact on not only the patients' life, but also on the lives of the resident loved ones. Furthermore, COPD exacerbation-related hospital admissions often occur in patients with COPD. However, whether and to what extent these admissions influence resident loved ones' burden and health status remains currently unknown. Therefore, the primary objectives of this study are to investigate the differences between patients with COPD and resident loved ones' perceptions of patients' health status and problematic ADLs and to study prospectively the effects of a COPD exacerbation on resident loved ones' perceptions of patients' health status and problematic ADLs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: An observational, longitudinal study will be performed in 192 patients with COPD and their 192 resident loved ones. Primary outcomes are daily functioning, ADL, disease-specific health status, generic health status and dyspnoea. These will be assessed during home visits at baseline and after 12 months. Additional home visits will be performed when a COPD exacerbation-related hospital admission occurs during the 12-month follow-up period. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, the Netherlands (NL42721.060.12/M12-1280) and is registered in the Dutch Trial Register (NTR3941).