Gender Gap in the Leadership of Health Institutions: The Influence of Hospital-Level Factors.

Objective: To analyze whether the increased representation of women in the health field is accompanied by a greater presence in leadership positions in the public health system and whether there are differences according to the hospital level. Methods: A descriptive study of the distribution of leadership positions by sex and type of hospital within the health centers of a regional public health system. Results: In total, 74.01% of the professionals were women. The representation of women in management positions was 33.1%, and among service chiefs, it was 24.01%. In the service headings, we observed that surgical specialties had a lower representation of women (30.9% in medical specialties vs. 18.1% in surgical specialties, p<0.0001). By type of hospital, no differences were found in the management positions, but there were differences in the medical chiefs, with less female representation in the regional hospitals (28.6% vs. 39.7%, p=0.003). Conclusion: Women represent the majority in the public health system. Nonetheless, their representation in positions of greater responsibility and decision-making is very limited, being particularly low in county hospitals. Increasing female representation in these positions is a current challenge for society, and equality policies need to be developed and applied to minimize this gender gap.

Long-term outcomes in patients presenting with optic neuritis: Analyses of the MSBase registry.

BACKGROUND: Short-term outcomes of optic neuritis (ON) have been well characterized. Limited data exists on longer-term visual outcomes in patients who present with ON. The large MSBase registry allows for characterization of long-term visual outcomes after ON. METHODS: Via the MSBase Registry, data on patients from 41 centers was collected during routine clinical and research visits. Physical and visual disability were measured using the expanded disability status scale (EDSS) and the visual function score (VFS). Inclusion criteria for this analysis included age ≥ 18 years, clinically isolated syndrome (CIS), ON-onset, baseline visit within 6 months of onset, and at least one follow-up visit. Survival analysis was used to evaluate the association of disease-modifying treatment with time to conversion to clinically definite MS or sustained EDSS/VFS progression. RESULTS: Data from 60,933 patients were obtained from the MSBase registry in July 2019. Of these, 1317 patients met inclusion criteria; 935 were treated at some point in disease course, while 382 were never treated. At baseline, mean age was 32.3 ± 8.8 years, 74% were female, median EDSS was 2 (IQR 1-2), and median VFS was 1 (IQR 0-2). Median follow-up time was 5.2 years (IQR 2.4-9.3). Treatment was associated with reduced risk and delayed conversion to clinically definite MS (HR = 0.70, p < 0.001), sustained EDSS progression (HR = 0.46, p < 0.0001) and sustained VFS (HR = 0.41, p < 0.001) progression. CONCLUSIONS: In the MSBase cohort, treatment after ON was associated with better visual and neurological outcomes compared to no treatment. These results support early treatment for patients presenting with ON as the first manifestation of MS.

Effects of High- and Low-Efficacy Therapy in Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effectiveness of high- and low-efficacy treatments in patients with recently active and inactive secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) after accounting for therapeutic lag. METHODS: Patients treated with high-efficacy (natalizumab, alemtuzumab, mitoxantrone, ocrelizumab, rituximab, cladribine, fingolimod) or low-efficacy (interferon beta, glatiramer acetate, teriflunomide) therapies after SPMS onset were selected from MSBase and Observatoire Français de la Sclérose en Plaques (OFSEP), 2 large observational cohorts. Therapeutic lag was estimated for each patient from their demographic and clinical characteristics. Propensity score was used to match patients treated with high- and low-efficacy therapies. Outcomes after the period of therapeutic lag was disregarded were compared in paired, pairwise-censored analyses. RESULTS: One thousand patients were included in the primary analysis. Patients with active SPMS treated with high-efficacy therapy experienced less frequent relapses than those on low-efficacy therapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.7, p = 0.006). In patients with inactive SPMS, there was no evidence for a difference in relapse frequency between groups (HR 0.8, p = 0.39). No evidence for a difference in the risk of disability progression was observed. CONCLUSION: In treated patients with SPMS, high-efficacy therapy is superior to low-efficacy therapy in reducing relapses in patients with active but not those with inactive SPMS. However, more potent therapies do not offer an advantage in reducing disability progression in this patient group. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class III evidence that high-efficacy therapy is superior to low-efficacy therapy in reducing relapses in patients with active SPMS, although we did not find a difference in disability progression between patients treated with high- and low-efficacy therapy.