General practitioners ending their practice and impact on patients' health, healthcare use and mortality: a protocol for national registry cohort studies in Norway, 2008 to 2021.

INTRODUCTION: Continuous general practitioner (GP) and patient relations associate with positive health outcomes. Termination of GP practice is unavoidable, while consequences of final breaks in relations are less explored. We will study how an ended GP relation affects patient's healthcare utilisation and mortality compared with patients with a continuous GP relation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We link national registries data on individual GP affiliation, sociodemographic characteristics, healthcare use and mortality. From 2008 to 2021, we identify patients whose GP stopped practicing and will compare acute and elective, primary and specialist healthcare use and mortality, with patients whose GP did not stop practicing. We match GP-patient pairs on age and sex (both), immigrant status and education (patients), and number of patients and practice period (GPs). We analyse the outcomes before and after an ended GP-patient relation, using Poisson regression with high-dimensional fixed effects. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study protocol is part of the approved project Improved Decisions with Causal Inference in Health Services Research, 2016/2159/REK Midt (the Regional Committees for Medical and Health Research Ethics) and does not require consent. HUNT Cloud provides secure data storage and computing. We will report using the STROBE guideline for observational case-control studies and publish in peer-reviewed journals, accessible in NTNU Open and present at scientific conferences. To reach a broader audience, we will summarise articles in the project's web page, regular and social media, and disseminate to relevant stakeholders.

Impact of altering referral threshold from out-of-hours primary care to hospital on patient safety and further health service use: a cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the impact of altering referral thresholds from out-of-hours services on older patients' further use of health services and risk of death. DESIGN: Cohort study using patient data from primary and specialised health services and demographic data from Statistics Norway and the Norwegian Cause of Death Registry. SETTING: Norway PARTICIPANTS: 491 653 patients aged 65 years and older contacting Norwegian out-of-hours services between 2008 and 2016. ANALYSIS: Multivariable adjusted and instrumental variable associations between referrals to hospital from out-of-hours services and further health services use and death for up to 6 months.Physicians' proportions of acute referrals of older, unknown patients from out-of-hours work were used as an instrumental variable ('physician referral preference') for their threshold of referral for such patients whose clinical presentations were less clear cut. RESULTS: For older patients, whose referrals could be attributed to their physicians' threshold for referral, mean length of stay in hospital increased 3.30 days (95% CI 3.13 to 3.27) within the first 10 days, compared with non-referred patients. Such referrals also increased 6 months use of outpatient specialist clinics and primary care physicians. Importantly, patients with referrals attributable to their physicians' threshold had a substantially reduced risk of death the first 10 days (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.91), an effect sustaining through the 6-month follow-up period (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Out-of-hours patients whose referrals are affected by physician referral threshold contribute substantially to the use of health services. However, the referral seems protective by reducing the risk of death in the first 6 months after the referral. Thus, raising the threshold for referral to lower pressure on overcrowded emergency departments and hospitals should not be encouraged without ensuring the accuracy of the referral decisions, ideally through high-quality randomised controlled trial evidence.

Cross-country comparisons of health-care costs: the case of cancer treatment in the Nordic countries.

The objective of this study is to perform a cross-country comparison of cancer treatment costs in the Nordic countries, and to demonstrate the added value of decomposing documented costs in interpreting national differences. The study is based on individual-level data from national patient and prescription drug registers, and data on cancer prevalence from the NORDCAN database. Hospital costs were estimated on the basis of information on diagnosis-related groups (DRG) cost weights and national unit costs. Differences in per capita costs were decomposed into two stages: stage one separated the price and volume components, and stage two decomposed the volume component, relating the level of activity to service needs and availability. Differences in the per capita costs of cancer treatment between the Nordic countries may be as much as 30 per cent. National differences in the costs of treatment mirror observed differences in total health care costs. Differences in health care costs between countries may relate to different sources of variation with different policy implications. Comparisons of per capita spending alone can be misleading if the purpose is to evaluate, for example, differences in service provision and utilisation. The decomposition analysis helps to identify the relative influence of differences in the prevalence of cancer, service utilisation and productivity.