Preeclampsia Prevention Using Routine Versus Screening Test-Indicated Aspirin in Low-Risk Women.

The objective was to evaluate whether routine aspirin 75 mg is more cost-effective than the Fetal Medicine Foundation screen-and-treat approach for preeclampsia prevention in low-risk nulliparous women. A health economic decision analytical model was devised to estimate the discounted net health and cost outcomes of routine aspirin versus Fetal Medicine Foundation screening test-indicated aspirin for a cohort of 100 000 low-risk nulliparous women. Both strategies were compared with no intervention. A subanalysis also compared disaggregated components of the algorithm. The analysis used data from hospital administration, literature, and a randomized controlled trial. Sensitivity analyses assessed the impact of aspirin adherence, test cost, and accuracy on study results. Presumed rates of preeclampsia were 3.75% with no intervention versus 0.45% with aspirin use. Results found that routine aspirin was the preferred strategy, in terms of greater health gains and larger cost savings. It provided 163 quality-adjusted life-years relative to no intervention, whereas the screen-and-treat policy achieved 108 quality-adjusted life-years. Routine aspirin would result in an estimated cost saving of €14.9 million annually relative to no intervention, whereas screen-and-treat approach would result in a smaller cost saving of €3.1 million. When the analysis was extended to consider alternative screen-and-treat strategies, routine aspirin remained the optimally cost-effective approach. In conclusion, routine aspirin use in low-risk nulliparous women has a greater health gain and cost saving compared with both the Fetal Medicine Foundation and other screen-and-treat approaches.

Costs of formal and informal care in the last year of life for patients in receipt of specialist palliative care.

BACKGROUND: Economic evaluation of palliative care has been slow to develop and the evidence base remains small. AIM: This article estimates formal and informal care costs in the last year of life for a sample of patients who received specialist palliative care in three different areas in Ireland. DESIGN: Formal care costs are calculated for community, specialist palliative care, acute hospital and other services. Where possible, a bottom-up approach is used, multiplying service utilisation by unit cost. Informal care is valued at the replacement cost of care. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Data on utilisation were collected during 215 'after death' telephone interviews with a person centrally involved in the care in the last year of life of decedents who received specialist palliative care in three areas in Ireland with varying levels of specialist palliative care. RESULTS: Mean total formal and informal costs in the last year of life do not vary significantly across the three areas. The components of formal costs, however, do vary across areas, particularly for hospital and specialist palliative care in the last 3 months of life. CONCLUSION: Costs in the last year of life for patients in receipt of specialist palliative care are considerable. Where inpatient hospice care is available, there are potential savings in hospital costs to offset specialist palliative care inpatient costs. Informal care accounts for a high proportion of costs during the last year of life in each area, underlining the important role of informal caregivers in palliative care.

Predictors of career progression and obstacles and opportunities for non-EU hospital doctors to undertake postgraduate training in Ireland.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization's Global Code on the International Recruitment of Health Personnel urges Member States to observe fair recruitment practices and ensure equality of treatment of migrant and domestically-trained health personnel. However, international medical graduates (IMGs) have experienced difficulties in accessing postgraduate training and in progressing their careers in several destination countries. Ireland is highly dependent on IMGs, but also employs non-European Union (EU) doctors who qualified as doctors in Ireland. However, little is known regarding the career progression of these doctors. In this context, the present study assesses the determinants of career progression of non-EU doctors with particular focus on whether barriers to progression exist for those graduating outside Ireland compared to those who have graduated within. METHODS: The study utilises quantitative data from an online survey of non-EU doctors registered with the Medical Council of Ireland undertaken as part of the Doctor Migration Project (2011-2013). Non-EU doctors registered with the Medical Council of Ireland were asked to complete an online survey about their recruitment, training and career experiences in Ireland. Analysis was conducted on the responses of 231 non-EU hospital doctors whose first post in Ireland was not permanent. Career progression was analysed by means of binary logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: While some of the IMGs had succeeded in accessing specialist training, many experienced slow or stagnant career progression when compared with Irish-trained non-EU doctors. Key predictors of career progression for non-EU doctors working in Ireland showed that doctors who qualified outside of Ireland were less likely than Irish-trained non-EU doctors to experience career progression. Length of stay as a qualified doctor in Ireland was strongly associated with career progression. Those working in anaesthesia were significantly more likely to experience career progression than those in other specialities. CONCLUSIONS: The present study highlights differences in terms of achieving career progression and training for Irish-trained non-EU doctors, compared to those trained elsewhere. However, the findings herein warrant further attention from a workforce planning and policy development perspective regarding Ireland's obligations under the Global Code of hiring, promoting and remunerating migrant health personnel on the basis of equality of treatment with the domestically-trained health workforce.

Passing through - reasons why migrant doctors in Ireland plan to stay, return home or migrate onwards to new destination countries.

BACKGROUND: International recruitment is a common strategy used by high-income countries to meet their medical workforce needs. Ireland, despite training sufficient doctors to meet its internal demand, continues to be heavily dependent on foreign-trained doctors, many of whom may migrate onwards to new destination countries. A cross-sectional study was conducted to measure and analyse the factors associated with the migratory intentions of foreign doctors in Ireland. METHODS: A total of 366 non-European nationals registered as medical doctors in Ireland completed an online survey assessing their reasons for migrating to Ireland, their experiences whilst working and living in Ireland, and their future plans. Factors associated with future plans - whether to remain in Ireland, return home or migrate to a new destination country - were tested by bivariate and multivariate analyses, including discriminant analysis. RESULTS: Of the 345 foreign doctors who responded to the question regarding their future plans, 16 % of whom were Irish-trained, 30 % planned to remain in Ireland, 23 % planned to return home and 47 % to migrate onwards. Country of origin, personal and professional reasons for migrating, experiences of training and supervision, opportunities for career progression, type of employment contract, citizenship status, and satisfaction with life in Ireland were all factors statistically significantly associated with the three migratory outcomes. CONCLUSION: Reported plans may not result in enacted emigration. However, the findings support a growing body of evidence highlighting dissatisfaction with current career opportunities, contributing to the emigration of Irish doctors and onward migration of foreign doctors. Implementation of the WHO Global Code, which requires member states to train and retain their own health workforce, could also help reduce onward migration of foreign doctors to new destination countries. Ireland has initiated the provision of tailored postgraduate training to doctors from Pakistan, enabling these doctors to return home with improved skills of benefit to the source country.

Applying a typology of health worker migration to non-EU migrant doctors in Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Research on health worker migration in the Irish context has categorized migrant health workers by country or region of training (for example, non-EU nurses or doctors) or recruitment mechanism (for example, actively recruited nurses). This paper applies a new typology of health worker migrants - livelihood, career-oriented, backpacker, commuter, undocumented and returner migrants (European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies and WHO, vol. 2:129-152, 2014) - to the experiences of non-EU migrant doctors in Ireland and tests its utility for understanding health worker migration internationally. METHODS: The paper draws on quantitative survey (N = 366) and qualitative interview (N = 37) data collected from non-EU migrant doctors in Ireland between 2011 and 2013. RESULTS: Categorizing non-EU migrant doctors in Ireland according to the typology (European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies and WHO, vol. 2:129-152, 2014) offers insight into their differing motivations, particularly on arrival. Findings suggest that the career-oriented migrant is the most common type of doctor among non-EU migrant doctor respondents, accounting for 60 % (N = 220) of quantitative and 54 % (N = 20) of qualitative respondents. The authors propose a modification to the typology via the addition of two additional categories - the family migrant and the safety and security migrant. CONCLUSIONS: Employing a typology of health worker migration can facilitate a more comprehensive understanding of the migrant medical workforce, a necessary prerequisite for the development of useful policy tools (European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies and WHO, vol. 2:129-152, 2014). The findings indicate that there is some fluidity between categories, as health worker motivations change over time. This indicates the potential for policy levers to influence migrant health worker decision-making, if they are sufficiently "tuned in" to migrant health worker motivation.

A cycle of brain gain, waste and drain - a qualitative study of non-EU migrant doctors in Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Ireland is heavily reliant on non-EU migrant health workers to staff its health system. Shortages of locally trained health workers and policies which facilitate health worker migration have contributed to this trend. This paper provides insight into the experiences of non-EU migrant doctors in the Irish health workforce. METHOD: In-depth interviews were conducted with 37 non-EU migrant doctors in Ireland in 2011/2012. RESULTS: Respondents believed they had been recruited to fill junior hospital doctor 'service' posts. These posts are unpopular with locally trained doctors due to the limited career progression they provide. Respondents felt that their hopes for career progression and postgraduate training in Ireland had gone unrealised and that they were becoming de-skilled. As a result, most respondents were actively considering onward migration from Ireland. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS: Failure to align the expectations of non-EU migrant doctors with the requirements of the health system has resulted in considerable frustration and a cycle of brain gain, waste and drain. The underlying reasons for high mobility into and out of the Irish medical workforce must be addressed if this cycle is to be broken. The heavy reliance on non-EU migrant doctors to staff the medical workforce has distracted from the underlying workforce challenges facing the Irish medical workforce.