Defining and Using Preoperative Predictors of Diabetic Remission Following Bariatric Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes remission is defined as the return of glycemic control in the absence of medication or insulin use after bariatric surgery. We sought to identify and assess the clinical utility of a predictive model for remission of type 2 diabetes mellitus in a population seeking bariatric surgery. METHOD: A retrospective cohort design was applied to presurgical data on patients referred for Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or vertical sleeve gastrectomy (VSG). The model developed from logistic regression was compared with a published model through receiver operating characteristic analyses. RESULTS: At 12 months postoperatively, 59.7% of the cohort was remitted, with no differences between RYGB and VSG. Logistic regression analyses yielded a model in which 4 preoperative variables reliably predicted remission. A Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test result of 0.204 indicated good fit of the developed prediction model to our outcome data. The predictive accuracy of this prediction model was compared with a published model, and an associated variation with diabetes years was substituted for age in our patient population. Our model was the most accurate. CONCLUSIONS: Using these predictors, healthcare providers may be able to better counsel patients who are living with diabetes and considering bariatric surgery on the likelihood of achieving remission from the intervention. This refined prediction model requires further testing in a larger sample to evaluate its external validity.

Mental health services for children and youth: a survey of physicians' knowledge, attitudes and use of telehealth services.

Rural physicians in Ontario, whose practice included children, were surveyed on their awareness, attitudes and use of telemental health services for children and young people in their region. Of 95 rural physicians, 70 completed and returned the telehealth section of the survey (74% response rate). The survey comprised 14 questions. Only 27% of responders were aware of the available videoconferencing services. The proportion of physicians who reported having referred patients for the various mental health services through videoconferencing was 0-24%. The proportion of physicians who reported that they would refer patients through videoconferencing was 55-92%. Reduced travel time and care provided closer to home were seen as the primary benefits of referring patients to mental health services through videoconferencing. Unclear referral patterns and technology compromises were seen as limitations of referring patients to videoconferencing. Access to rural populations and improved access to patients were seen as benefits to practice, and undeveloped remuneration procedures as the primary limitation. Promotion may be important to successful implementation of telemental health services for children and young people.

What do hospital decision-makers in Ontario, Canada, have to say about the fairness of priority setting in their institutions?

BACKGROUND: Priority setting, also known as rationing or resource allocation, occurs at all levels of every health care system. Daniels and Sabin have proposed a framework for priority setting in health care institutions called 'accountability for reasonableness', which links priority setting to theories of democratic deliberation. Fairness is a key goal of priority setting. According to 'accountability for reasonableness', health care institutions engaged in priority setting have a claim to fairness if they satisfy four conditions of relevance, publicity, appeals/revision, and enforcement. This is the first study which has surveyed the views of hospital decision makers throughout an entire health system about the fairness of priority setting in their institutions. The purpose of this study is to elicit hospital decision-makers' self-report of the fairness of priority setting in their hospitals using an explicit conceptual framework, 'accountability for reasonableness'. METHODS: 160 Ontario hospital Chief Executive Officers, or their designates, were asked to complete a survey questionnaire concerning priority setting in their publicly funded institutions. Eight-six Ontario hospitals completed this survey, for a response rate of 54%. Six close-ended rating scale questions (e.g. Overall, how fair is priority setting at your hospital?), and 3 open-ended questions (e.g. What do you see as the goal(s) of priority setting in your hospital?) were used. RESULTS: Overall, 60.7% of respondents indicated their hospitals' priority setting was fair. With respect to the 'accountability for reasonableness' conditions, respondents indicated their hospitals performed best for the relevance (75.0%) condition, followed by appeals/revision (56.6%), publicity (56.0%), and enforcement (39.5%). CONCLUSIONS: For the first time hospital Chief Executive Officers within an entire health system were surveyed about the fairness of priority setting practices in their institutions using the conceptual framework 'accountability for reasonableness'. Although many hospital CEOs felt that their priority setting was fair, ample room for improvement was noted, especially for the enforcement condition.