Using PROMs during routine medical consultations: The perspectives of people with Parkinson's disease and their health professionals.

BACKGROUND: The use of patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs), such as quality of life or symptoms like pain or fatigue, is increasingly embraced within patient-centred care and shared decision making. OBJECTIVES: To investigate: (a) how patients and health professionals think about using PROMs during routine medical consultations; (b) for which purpose(s), patients and health professionals want to use PROMs during those consultations; and (c) how patients interpret PROMs information presented in various formats. People with Parkinson's disease and their health professionals served as case example. METHODS: We performed semi-structured interviews with patients (N = 13) and professionals (N = 7 neurologists; N = 7 physiotherapists). We also used a survey in which patients (N = 115) were shown six figures displaying different information types. Presentation formats of this information varied (line/bar graphs). Interpretation by patients, perceived usefulness of information, attitude towards using information during routine medical consultations and (hypothetical) decisions were assessed. FINDINGS: Patients and professionals were generally positive about using PROMs during medical consultations. Professionals stressed the opportunity to monitor changes in individual PROMs over time. Patients were primarily positive about aggregated PROMs to make treatment decisions. This information was also most often interpreted correctly, especially when presented through a line graph (90.1% correct). Professionals thought patients should take the initiative in discussing PROMs, whereas patients thought professionals should do so. CONCLUSION/DISCUSSION: When used in routine medical consultations, PROMs seem to have potential to support shared decision making and facilitate patient-professional communication. However, training seems needed for both patients and professionals to facilitate actual discussion and proper interpretation.

The impact and utility of encounter patient decision aids: Systematic review, meta-analysis and narrative synthesis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of encounter patient decision aids (PDAs) as evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and conduct a narrative synthesis of non-randomized studies assessing feasibility, utility and their integration into clinical workflows. METHODS: Databases were systematically searched for RCTs of encounter PDAs to enable the conduct of a meta-analysis. We used a framework analysis approach to conduct a narrative synthesis of non-randomized studies. RESULTS: We included 23 RCTs and 30 non-randomized studies. Encounter PDAs significantly increased knowledge (SMD = 0.42; 95% CI 0.30, 0.55), lowered decisional conflict (SMD= -0.33; 95% CI -0.56, -0.09), increased observational-based assessment of shared decision making (SMD = 0.94; 95% CI 0.40, 1.48) and satisfaction with the decision-making process (OR = 1.78; 95% CI 1.19, 2.66) without increasing visit durations (SMD= -0.06; 95% CI -0.29, 0.16). The narrative synthesis showed that encounter tools have high utility for patients and clinicians, yet important barriers to implementation exist (i.e. time constraints) at the clinical and organizational level. CONCLUSION: Encounter PDAs have a positive impact on patient-clinician collaboration, despite facing implementation barriers. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The potential utility of encounter PDAs requires addressing the systemic and structural barriers that prevent adoption in clinical practice.

Developing quality criteria for patient-directed knowledge tools related to clinical practice guidelines. A development and consensus study.

BACKGROUND: Patient-directed knowledge tools such as patient versions of guidelines and patient decision aids are increasingly developed to facilitate shared decision making. In this paper, we report how consensus was reached within the Netherlands on quality criteria for development, content and governance of these tools. METHOD: A 12-month development and consensus study. The consortium worked on four work packages: (a) reviewing existing criteria; (b) drafting the quality criteria; (c) safe-guarding the acceptability and feasibility of the draft criteria by participatory research in on-going tool development projects; and (d) gaining formal support from national stakeholders on the quality criteria. RESULTS: We reached consensus on a 8-step guidance; describing minimal quality criteria for (a) the team composition; (b) setting the scope; (c) identifying needs; (d) the content and format; (e) testing the draft; (f) finalizing and approval; (g) dissemination and application, and (h) ownership and revision. The participants of the on-going tool development projects were positive about the quality criteria in general, but divided as to the degree of detail. Whereas some expressed a clear desire for procedural standards, others felt that it would be sufficient to provide only general directions. Despite the different views as to the degree of detail, consensus was reached in three stakeholder meetings. DISCUSSION: We successfully collaborated with all stakeholders and achieved formal support from national stakeholders on a set of minimum criteria for the development process, content and governance of patient-directed knowledge tools.

The Voice of the Parkinson Customer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To improve the care for patients with chronic neurological conditions like Parkinson's disease, identifying the core needs of patients is crucial. In this article, we present the Voice of the Customer approach (originally developed in the field of industry to probe the clients' needs), a novel methodology to identify these needs. METHODS: A group of 12 discussants carried out in depth interviews to patients (n = 20), relatives (n = 12) and healthcare professionals (n = 11). The interviewers combined the most informative quotations into a comprehensive video, which was used as feedback to the interviewees. The interviewees then identified the most important needs in a consensus meeting. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The approach revealed that patients were more concerned about the impact of Parkinson's disease on their daily lives than about the bio-medical aspects of the disease. Their top unmet needs were: (1) more self management; (2) better interdisciplinary collaboration between different healthcare professionals; (3) more time to discuss the future and possible scenarios; and (4) a healthcare professional acting as a single point of access, acting as personal case manager, either to solve problems directly or to direct patients to the professional best equipped to address the problem at hand. These results can now be used to further optimize the care for patients with Parkinson's disease.

Implementation of Patient Engagement in the Netherlands: A Stimulating Environment within a Large Academic Medical Centre.

Patients are the official third party of the Dutch healthcare system, apart from healthcare providers and insurers. Radboud university medical center (Radboudumc) is a regional centre for specialized secondary care in the Netherlands. Here innovation is recognized as a decisive factor when it comes to the implementation of patient engagement. Therefore, all employees are invited to innovate, experiment, fail and implement promising innovations into practice. In this paper, we demonstrate how this stimulating environment led to a rich collection of patient engagement activities in organizational (re-)design and in educational programs for students and employees.

Improving shared decision-making in advanced Parkinson's disease: protocol of a mixed methods feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: In advanced stages of Parkinson's disease (PD), patients and neurologists regularly face complex treatment decisions. Shared decision-making (SDM) can support the process where evidence, the clinician's expertise and the patient's preferences jointly contribute to reach an optimal decision. Here, we describe the rationale of our feasibility study protocol.The aim of the study is to test the feasibility of the SDM intervention by (1) analysing the acceptability of the intervention by users (i.e. professionals and patients), (2) assessing the level of implementation, (3) testing efficacy on a small scale and (4) evaluating the study procedures. METHODS: Using an uncontrolled before-after mixed methods design, patients in the pre-intervention group will receive information and decisional support as usual. Patients in the post-intervention group will receive the SDM intervention, consisting of an Option Grid™ patient decision aid and a website with supplementary information plus a value clarification tool for both patients and professionals. An Option Grid is a one-page, evidence-based summary of available options, listing the frequently asked questions that patients consider when making treatment decisions. A value clarification tool helps patients identify which option he/she prefers based on attributes in the treatment decision context. Neurologists and PD nurse specialists will receive a 1-h instruction on SDM and how to use the SDM intervention.Through purposive sampling, neurologists and PD nurse specialists will be recruited from both specialised neurology clinics and community-based hospitals. Included professionals will invite consecutive patients who are eligible for the advanced therapies.Data will be collected using questionnaires, interviews and audio observations of the consultations and by tracking users' logging behaviour of the website. Data will be analysed using a mixed methods design. DISCUSSION: The mixed methods design will create a deeper understanding of how the SDM intervention affects the interactions between professionals (a neurologist and/or a PD nurse specialist) and the patient, when an advanced treatment is chosen. The results of the study will inform the design of an RCT to test the effectiveness of the SDM intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR6649, retrospectively registered 28 August 2017.

Building a patient-centered and interprofessional training program with patients, students and care professionals: study protocol of a participatory design and evaluation study.

BACKGROUND: A common approach to enhance patient-centered care is training care professionals. Additional training of patients has been shown to significantly improve patient-centeredness of care. In this participatory design and evaluation study, patient education and medical education will be combined by co-creating a patient-centered and interprofessional training program, wherein patients, students and care professionals learn together to improve patient-centeredness of care. METHODS: In the design phase, scientific literature regarding interventions and effects of student-run patient education will be synthesized in a scoping review. In addition, focus group studies will be performed on the preferences of patients, students, care professionals and education professionals regarding the structure and content of the training program. Subsequently, an intervention plan of the training program will be constructed by combining these building blocks. In the evaluation phase, patients with a chronic disease, that is rheumatoid arthritis, diabetes and hypertension, and patients with an oncologic condition, that is colonic cancer and breast cancer, will learn together with medical students, nursing students and care professionals in training program cycles of three months. Process and effect evaluation will be performed using the plan-do-study-act (PDSA) method to evaluate and optimize the training program in care practice and medical education. A modified control design will be used in PDSA-cycles to ensure that students who act as control will also benefit from participating in the program. DISCUSSION: Our participatory design and evaluation study provides an innovative approach in designing and evaluating an intervention by involving participants in all stages of the design and evaluation process. The approach is expected to enhance the effectiveness of the training program by assessing and meeting participants' needs and preferences. Moreover, by using fast PDSA cycles and a modified control design in evaluating the training program, the training program is expected to be efficiently and rapidly implemented into and adjusted to care practice and medical education.

Automated Quality Control for Sensor Based Symptom Measurement Performed Outside the Lab.

The use of wearable sensing technology for objective, non-invasive and remote clinimetric testing of symptoms has considerable potential. However, the accuracy achievable with such technology is highly reliant on separating the useful from irrelevant sensor data. Monitoring patient symptoms using digital sensors outside of controlled, clinical lab settings creates a variety of practical challenges, such as recording unexpected user behaviors. These behaviors often violate the assumptions of clinimetric testing protocols, where these protocols are designed to probe for specific symptoms. Such violations are frequent outside the lab and affect the accuracy of the subsequent data analysis and scientific conclusions. To address these problems, we report on a unified algorithmic framework for automated sensor data quality control, which can identify those parts of the sensor data that are sufficiently reliable for further analysis. Combining both parametric and nonparametric signal processing and machine learning techniques, we demonstrate that across 100 subjects and 300 clinimetric tests from three different types of behavioral clinimetric protocols, the system shows an average segmentation accuracy of around 90%. By extracting reliable sensor data, it is possible to strip the data of confounding factors in the environment that may threaten reproducibility and replicability.

Impact of motor fluctuations on real-life gait in Parkinson's patients.

BACKGROUND: People with PD (PWP) have an increased risk of becoming inactive. Wearable sensors can provide insights into daily physical activity and walking patterns. RESEARCH QUESTIONS: (1) Is the severity of motor fluctuations associated with sensor-derived average daily walking quantity? (2) Is the severity of motor fluctuations associated with the amount of change in sensor-derived walking quantity after levodopa intake? METHODS: 304 Dutch PWP from the Parkinson@Home study were included. At baseline, all participants received a clinical examination. During the follow-up period (median: 97 days; 25-Interquartile range-IQR: 91 days, 75-IQR: 188 days), participants used the Fox Wearable Companion app and streamed smartwatch accelerometer data to a cloud platform. The first research question was assessed by linear regression on the sensor-derived mean time spent walking/day with the severity of fluctuations (MDS-UPDRS item 4.4) as independent variable, controlled for age and MDS-UPDRS part-III score. The second research question was assessed by linear regression on the sensor-derived mean post-levodopa walking quantity, with the sensor-derived mean pre-levodopa walking quantity and severity of fluctuations as independent variables, controlled for mean time spent walking per day, age and MDS-UPDRS part-III score. RESULTS: PWP spent most time walking between 8am and 1pm, summing up to 72 ±â€¯39 (mean ±â€¯standard deviation) minutes of walking/day. The severity of motor fluctuations did not influence the mean time spent walking (B = 2.4 ±â€¯1.9, p = 0.20), but higher age (B = -1.3 ±â€¯0.3, p = < 0.001) and greater severity of motor symptoms (B = -0.6 ±â€¯0.2, p < 0.001) was associated with less time spent walking (F(3216) = 14.6, p < .001, R2 = .17). The severity of fluctuations was not associated with the amount of change in time spent walking in relation to levodopa intake in any part of the day. SIGNIFICANCE: Analysis of sensor-derived gait quantity suggests that the severity of motor fluctuations is not associated with changes in real-life walking patterns in mildly to moderate affected PWP.

Exploring Dutch surgeons' views on volume-based policies: a qualitative interview study.

Objective In many countries, the evidence for volume-outcome associations in surgery has been transferred into policy. Despite the large body of research that exists on the topic, qualitative studies aimed at surgeons' views on, and experiences with, these volume-based policies are lacking. We interviewed Dutch surgeons to gain more insight into the implications of volume-outcome policies for daily clinical practice, as input for effective surgical quality improvement. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 purposively selected surgeons from a stratified sample for hospital type and speciality. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and underwent inductive content analysis. Results Two overarching themes were inductively derived from the data: (1) minimum volume standards and (2) implications of volume-based policies. Although surgeons acknowledged the premise 'more is better', they were critical about the validity and underlying evidence for minimum volume standards. Patients often inquire about caseload, which is met with both understanding and discomfort. Surgeons offered many examples of controversies surrounding the process of determining thresholds as well as the ways in which health insurers use volume as a purchasing criterion. Furthermore, being held accountable for caseload may trigger undesired strategic behaviour, such as unwarranted operations. Volume-based policies also have implications for the survival of low-volume providers and affect patient travel times, although the latter is not necessarily problematic in the Dutch context. Conclusions Surgeons in this study acknowledged that more volume leads to better quality. However, validity issues, undesired strategic behaviour and the ways in which minimum volume standards are established and applied have made surgeons critical of current policy practice. These findings suggest that volume remains a controversial quality measure and causes polarization that is not conducive to a collective effort for quality improvement. We recommend enforcing thresholds that are based on the best achievable level of consensus and assessing additional criteria when passing judgement on quality of care.

Assessment of goals and priorities in patients with a chronic condition: a secondary quantitative analysis of determinants across 11 countries.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of patient characteristics, patient-professional engagement, communication and context on the probability that healthcare professionals will discuss goals or priorities with older patients. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of cross-sectional data from the 2014 Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey of Older Adults. SETTING: 11 western countries. SUBJECTS: Community-dwelling adults, aged 55 or older. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Assessment of goals and priorities. RESULTS: The final sample size consisted of 17,222 respondents, 54% of whom reported an assessment of their goals and priorities (AGP) by healthcare professionals. In logistic regression model 1, which was used to analyse the entire population, the determinants found to have moderate to large effects on the likelihood of AGP were information exchange on stress, diet or exercise, or both. Country (living in Sweden) and continuity of care (no regular professional or organisation) had moderate to large negative effects on the likelihood of AGP. In model 2, which focussed on respondents who experienced continuity of care, country and information exchange on stress and lifestyle were the main determinants of AGP, with comparable odds ratios to model 1. Furthermore, a professional asking questions also increased the likelihood of AGP. CONCLUSIONS: Continuity of care and information exchange is associated with a higher probability of AGP, while people living in Sweden are less likely to experience these assessments. Further study is required to determine whether increasing information exchange and professionals asking more questions may improve goal setting with older patients. Key points A patient goal-oriented approach can be beneficial for older patients with chronic conditions or multimorbidity; however, discussing goals with these patients is not a common practice. The likelihood of discussing goals varies by country, occurring most commonly in the USA, and least often in Sweden. Country-level differences in continuity of care and questions asked by a regularly visited professional affect the goal discussion probability. Patient characteristics, including age, have less impact than expected on the likelihood of sharing goals.

A three-goal model for patients with multimorbidity: A qualitative approach.

BACKGROUND: To meet the challenge of multimorbidity in decision making, a switch from a disease-oriented to a goal-oriented approach could be beneficial for patients and clinicians. More insight about the concept and the implementation of this approach in clinical practice is needed. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop conceptual descriptions of goal-oriented care by examining the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) and clinical geriatricians (CGs), and how the concept relates to collaborative communication and shared decision making with elderly patients with multimorbidity. METHOD: Qualitative interviews with GPs and CGs were conducted and analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Clinicians distinguished disease- or symptom-specific goals, functional goals and a new type of goals, which we labelled as fundamental goals. "Fundamental goals" are goals specifying patient's priorities in life, related to their values and core relationships. These fundamental goals can be considered implicitly or explicitly in decision making or can be ignored. Reasons to explicate goals are the potential mismatch between medical standards and patient preferences and the need to know individual patient values in case of multimorbidity, including the management in acute situations. CONCLUSION: Based on the perspectives of clinicians, we expanded the concept of goal-oriented care by identifying a three-level goal hierarchy. This model could facilitate collaborative goal-setting for patients with multiple long-term conditions in clinical practice. Future research is needed to refine and validate this model and to provide specific guidance for medical training and practice.

Feasibility of large-scale deployment of multiple wearable sensors in Parkinson's disease.

Wearable devices can capture objective day-to-day data about Parkinson's Disease (PD). This study aims to assess the feasibility of implementing wearable technology to collect data from multiple sensors during the daily lives of PD patients. The Parkinson@home study is an observational, two-cohort (North America, NAM; The Netherlands, NL) study. To recruit participants, different strategies were used between sites. Main enrolment criteria were self-reported diagnosis of PD, possession of a smartphone and age≥18 years. Participants used the Fox Wearable Companion app on a smartwatch and smartphone for a minimum of 6 weeks (NAM) or 13 weeks (NL). Sensor-derived measures estimated information about movement. Additionally, medication intake and symptoms were collected via self-reports in the app. A total of 953 participants were included (NL: 304, NAM: 649). Enrolment rate was 88% in the NL (n = 304) and 51% (n = 649) in NAM. Overall, 84% (n = 805) of participants contributed sensor data. Participants were compliant for 68% (16.3 hours/participant/day) of the study period in NL and for 62% (14.8 hours/participant/day) in NAM. Daily accelerometer data collection decreased 23% in the NL after 13 weeks, and 27% in NAM after 6 weeks. Data contribution was not affected by demographics, clinical characteristics or attitude towards technology, but was by the platform usability score in the NL (χ2 (2) = 32.014, p<0.001), and self-reported depression in NAM (χ2(2) = 6.397, p = .04). The Parkinson@home study shows that it is feasible to collect objective data using multiple wearable sensors in PD during daily life in a large cohort.

Evaluation of minimum volume standards for surgery in the Netherlands (2003-2017): A successful policy?

PURPOSE: To evaluate the introduction and implications of minimum volume standards for surgery in Dutch health care from 2003 to 2017 and formulate policy lessons for other countries. SETTING: Dutch health care. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Three eras were identified, representing a trust-and-control cycle in keeping with changing roles of different stakeholders in Dutch context. In the first era 'regulated trust' (2003-2009), the Dutch Inspectorate introduced national volume criteria and relied on yearly hospital reported data for information on compliance. In the second era 'contract and control' (2009-2017), the effects of market-oriented reform became more evident. The Dutch government intervened in the market and health insurers introduced selective contracting. Medical professionals were prompted to reclaim the initiative. In the current era (2017-), a return of trust in self-regulation seems visible. The number of low-volume hospitals performing complex surgeries in the Netherlands has decreased and research has shown improved outcomes as a result. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the Dutch experience, the following lessons can be useful for other health care systems: 1. professionals should be in the lead in the development of national quality standards, 2. external pressure can be helpful for professionals to take the initiative and 3. volume remains a controversial quality measure. Future research and policies should focus on the underlying mechanism of volume-outcome relationships and overall effects of volume-based policies.

Shared agenda making for quality improvement; towards more synergy in maternity care.

OBJECTIVES: Professionals in maternity care have started working in a network approach. To further enhance the efficacy of this multidisciplinary maternity network, the identification of priorities for improvement is warranted. The aim of this study was to create key recommendations for the improvement agenda, in co-production with patients and professionals. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a Delphi study to inventory (round 1), prioritize (round 2) and eventually approve (round 3) the improvement agenda for the maternity network. Both patients and professionals joined this study. Initial input for the study consisted of experiences from 397 patients, collected using the ReproQ questionnaire. In round 1, the expert panel, gave improvement recommendations, based on the ReproQ results. This resulted in 11 recommendations. In the second round, the expert panel prioritised these recommendations. In the consensus meeting then finally the concrete improvement agenda was composed. RESULTS: Priority scores differed considerably between patients and professionals in seven items, while four items received similar priority scores from both groups. The four most important improvement activities were: Realise more single bedrooms in hospitals; Create more opportunities for the continued presence of the community midwife during labour; Initiate a digital patient record view system for the network with a view function for patients; and Introduce a case manager for pregnant woman. CONCLUSION: Based on patient experience and the active involvement of patients and professionals, we were able to compose the shared agenda for quality improvement in maternity care.

Collaborative goal setting with elderly patients with chronic disease or multimorbidity: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: It is challenging to use shared decision-making with patients who have a chronic health condition or, especially, multimorbidity. A patient-goal-oriented approach can thus be beneficial. This study aims to identify and evaluate studies on the effects of interventions that support collaborative goal setting or health priority setting compared to usual care for elderly people with a chronic health condition or multimorbidity. METHODS: This systematic review was based on EPOC, PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. Pubmed, PsychInfo, CINAHL, Web of Science, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched systematically. The following eligibility criteria were applied: 1. Randomised (cluster) controlled trials, non-randomised controlled trials, controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series or repeated measures study design; 2. Single intervention directed specifically at collaborative goal setting or health priority setting or a multifactorial intervention including these elements; 3. Study population of patients with multimorbidity or at least one chronic disease (mean age ± standard deviation (SD) incl. age 65). 4. Studies reporting on outcome measures reducible to outcomes for collaborative goal setting or health priority setting. RESULTS: A narrative analysis was performed. Eight articles describing five unique interventions, including four cluster randomised controlled trials and one randomised controlled trial, were identified. Four intervention studies, representing 904, 183, 387 and 1921 patients respectively, were multifactorial and showed statistically significant effects on the application of goal setting (Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) goal setting subscale), the number of advance directives or the inclusion of goals in care plans. Explicit attention for goal setting or priority setting by a professional was a common element in these multifactorial interventions. One study, which implemented a single-factor intervention on 322 patients, did not have significant effects on doctor-patient agreement. All the studies had methodological concerns in varying degrees. CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative goal setting and/or priority setting can probably best be integrated in complex care interventions. Further research should determine the mix of essential elements in a multifactorial intervention to provide recommendations for daily practice. In addition, the necessity of methodological innovation and the application of mixed evaluation models must be highlighted to deal with the complexity of goal setting and/or priority setting intervention studies.

Involving Medical Students in Providing Patient Education for Real Patients: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Studies suggest that involving students in patient education can contribute to the quality of care and medical education. Interventions and outcomes in this field, however, have not yet been systematically reviewed. The authors examined the scientific literature for studies on interventions and outcomes of student-provided patient education. METHODS: Four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, ERIC, PsycINFO) were searched for studies reporting patient education, undergraduate medical students, and outcomes of patient education, published between January 1990 and October 2015. Facilitators of and barriers to educational interventions were assessed using the Learning Transfer System Inventory. The learning yield, impact on quality of care, and practical feasibility of the interventions were rated by patients, care professionals, researchers, and education professionals. RESULTS: The search resulted in 4991 hits. Eighteen studies were included in the final synthesis. Studies suggested that student-provided patient education improved patients' health knowledge, attitude, and behavior (nine studies), disease management (three studies), medication adherence (one study), and shared decision-making (one study). In addition, involving students in patient education was reported to enhance students' patient education self-efficacy (four studies), skills (two studies), and behavior (one study), their relationships with patients (two studies), and communication skills (two studies). DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest that student-provided patient education-specifically, student-run patient education clinics, student-provided outreach programs, student health coaching, and clerkships on patient education-has the potential to improve quality of care and medical education. To enhance the learning effectiveness and quality of student-provided patient education, factors including professional roles for students, training preparation, constructive supervision, peer support on organizational and individual levels, and learning aids should be taken into account. Future research should focus on further investigating the effects found in this study with high-level evidence.

Freezing of gait and fall detection in Parkinson's disease using wearable sensors: a systematic review.

Despite the large number of studies that have investigated the use of wearable sensors to detect gait disturbances such as Freezing of gait (FOG) and falls, there is little consensus regarding appropriate methodologies for how to optimally apply such devices. Here, an overview of the use of wearable systems to assess FOG and falls in Parkinson's disease (PD) and validation performance is presented. A systematic search in the PubMed and Web of Science databases was performed using a group of concept key words. The final search was performed in January 2017, and articles were selected based upon a set of eligibility criteria. In total, 27 articles were selected. Of those, 23 related to FOG and 4 to falls. FOG studies were performed in either laboratory or home settings, with sample sizes ranging from 1 PD up to 48 PD presenting Hoehn and Yahr stage from 2 to 4. The shin was the most common sensor location and accelerometer was the most frequently used sensor type. Validity measures ranged from 73-100% for sensitivity and 67-100% for specificity. Falls and fall risk studies were all home-based, including samples sizes of 1 PD up to 107 PD, mostly using one sensor containing accelerometers, worn at various body locations. Despite the promising validation initiatives reported in these studies, they were all performed in relatively small sample sizes, and there was a significant variability in outcomes measured and results reported. Given these limitations, the validation of sensor-derived assessments of PD features would benefit from more focused research efforts, increased collaboration among researchers, aligning data collection protocols, and sharing data sets.

Use of social network analysis in maternity care to identify the profession most suited for case manager role.

OBJECTIVE: To improve Dutch maternity care, professionals start working in interdisciplinary patient-centred networks, which includes the patients as a member. The introduction of the case manager is expected to work positively on both the individual and the network level. However, case management is new in Dutch maternity care. The present study aims to define the profession that would be most suitable to fulfil the role of case manager. DESIGN: The maternal care network in the Nijmegen region was determined by using Social Network Analysis (SNA). SNA is a quantitative methodology that measures and analyses patient-related connections between different professionals working in a network. To identify the case manager we focused on the position, reach, and connections in the network of the maternal care professionals. SETTING: Maternity healthcare professionals in a single region of the Netherlands with an average of 4,500 births/year. PARTICIPANTS: The participants were 214 individual healthcare workers from eight different professions. MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS: The total network showed 3948 connections between 214 maternity healthcare professionals with a density of 0.08. Each profession had some central individuals in the network. The 52 community-based midwives were responsible for 51% of all measured connections. The youth health doctors and nurses were mostly situated on the periphery and less connected. The betweenness centrality had the highest score in obstetricians and community-based midwives. Only the community-based midwives had connections with all other groups of professions. Almost all professionals in the network could reach other professionals in two steps.