Socioeconomic inequalities in the uptake of postpartum care at home across Dutch neighbourhoods.

BACKGROUND: Postpartum care focuses on prevention of health problems by performing medical check-ups and through enhancing maternal empowerment, the parent-infant interaction and knowledge about mother's own health and that of her newborn. We aimed to investigate whether there was significant clustering within neighbourhoods regarding the uptake of postpartum care and to what extent neighbourhood-level differences are explained by individual socio-demographic factors, pregnancy-related factors and neighbourhood-level determinants (i.e. deprivation and urbanization). METHODS: A nationwide population-based observational study was carried out using linked routinely collected healthcare data from appropriate-for-gestational-age weight live-born term singleton deliveries (2015-18) in the Netherlands. We performed two-level multivariable logistic regression analyses, using three different models. Model 1 contained no explanatory variables and was used to assess clustering of postpartum care uptake within neighbourhoods. In model 2, individual-level determinants were added one by one and in model 3, neighbourhood-level determinants were added. RESULTS: About 520 818 births were included. Multilevel modelling showed that 11% of the total variance in postpartum care uptake could be attributed to the neighbourhood of residence. Individual characteristics explained 38% of the neighbourhood variance, of which income and migration background were the most important contributors. An additional 6% of the variation could be explained by neighbourhood-level determinants. CONCLUSION: We found substantial neighbourhood differences in postpartum care uptake. These differences are influenced by a complex interplay between individual-level and neighbourhood-level determinants, highlighting the importance of addressing both individual and neighbourhood-level determinants to improve the uptake of postpartum care and therewith overall community health.

Improving the colorectal cancer care pathway via e-health: a qualitative study among Dutch healthcare providers and managers.

PURPOSE: This study aims to identify improvement opportunities within the colorectal cancer (CRC) care pathway using e-health and to examine how these opportunities would contribute to the Quadruple Aim. METHODS: In total, 17 semi-structured interviews were held (i.e., nine healthcare providers and eight managers involved in Dutch CRC care). The Quadruple Aim was used as a conceptual framework to gather and systematically structure the data. A directed content analysis approach was employed to code and analyze the data. RESULTS: Interviewees believe the available e-health technology could be better exploited in CRC care. Twelve different improvement opportunities were identified to enhance the CRC care pathway. Some opportunities could be applied in one specific phase of the pathway (e.g., digital applications to support patients in the prehabilitation program to enhance the program's effects). Others could be deployed in multiple phases or extended outside the hospital care setting (e.g., digital consultation hours to increase care accessibility). Some opportunities could be easily implemented (e.g., digital communication to facilitate treatment preparation), whereas others require structural, systemic changes (e.g., increasing efficiency in patient data exchanges among healthcare professionals). CONCLUSION: This study provides insights into how e-health could add value to CRC care and contribute to the Quadruple Aim. It shows that e-health has the potential to contribute to the challenges in cancer care. To take the next step forward, the perspectives of other stakeholders must be examined, the identified opportunities should be prioritized, and the requirements for successful implementation should be mapped out.

Exploring colorectal cancer survivors' perspectives on improving care delivery and the role of e-health technology: a qualitative study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to gather insights from colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors on how to improve care for CRC survivors and how e-health technology could be utilized to improve CRC care delivery. METHODS: Three semi-structured focus groups were held with sixteen CRC survivors. To initiate the discussion, an online registration form and two vignettes were used. The data was analyzed using the framework method. RESULTS: Based on survivors' experiences, five themes were identified as opportunities for improving CRC care delivery. These themes include better recognition of complaints and faster referrals, more information as part of the care delivery, more guidance and monitoring of health outcomes, more collaboration between practitioners, and more attention for partners and relatives. In addition, survivors expressed opportunities for using e-health to facilitate information provision, improve communication, and monitor survivors' health conditions. CONCLUSION: Several suggestions for improvement of CRC care delivery were identified. These often translated into possibilities for e-health to support or improve CRC care delivery. The ideas of survivors align with the vast array of existing e-health resources that can be utilized to enhance CRC care delivery. Therefore, the next step involves addressing the implementation gap between the needs of stakeholders, such as CRC survivors and healthcare providers, and the e-health tools currently available in clinical practice.

The Dutch Solid Start program: describing the implementation and experiences of the program's first thousand days.

BACKGROUND: In 2018, the Dutch government initiated the Solid Start program to provide each child the best start in life. The program focuses on the crucial first thousand days of life, which span from preconception to a child's second birthday, and has a specific focus towards (future) parents and young children in vulnerable situations. A key program element is improving collaboration between the medical and social sector by creating Solid Start coalitions. This study aimed to describe the implementation of the Dutch Solid Start program, in order to learn for future practice and policy. Specifically, this paper describes to what extent Solid Start is implemented within municipalities and outlines stakeholders' experiences with the implementation of Solid Start and the associated cross-sectoral collaboration. METHODS: Quantitative and qualitative data were collected from 2019 until 2021. Questionnaires were sent to all 352 Dutch municipalities and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were obtained through focus group discussions(n = 6) and semi-structured interviews(n = 19) with representatives of care and support organizations, knowledge institutes and professional associations, Solid Start project leaders, advisors, municipal officials, researchers, clients and experts-by-experience. Qualitative data were analyzed using the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care. RESULTS: Findings indicated progress in the development of Solid Start coalitions(n = 40 in 2019, n = 140 in 2021), and an increase in cross-sectoral collaboration. According to the stakeholders, initiating Solid Start increased the sense of urgency concerning the importance of the first thousand days and stimulated professionals from various backgrounds to get to know each other, resulting in more collaborative agreements on cross-sectoral care provision. Important elements mentioned for effective collaboration within coalitions were an active coordinator as driving force, and a shared societal goal. However, stakeholders experienced that Solid Start is not yet fully incorporated into all professionals' everyday practice. Most common barriers for collaboration related to systemic integration at macro-level, including limited resources and collaboration-inhibiting regulations. Stakeholders emphasized the importance of ensuring Solid Start and mentioned various needs, including sustainable funding, supportive regulations, responsiveness to stakeholders' needs, ongoing knowledge development, and client involvement. CONCLUSION: Solid Start, as a national program with strong local focus, has led to various incremental changes that supported cross-sectoral collaboration to improve care during the first thousand days, without major transformations of systemic structures. However, to ensure the program's sustainability, needs such as sustainable funding should be addressed.

Achieving diabetes treatment targets in people with registered mental illness is similar or improved compared with those without: Analyses of linked observational datasets.

AIMS: To determine the association between registered mental illness and type 2 diabetes mellitus treatment targets, while taking into account the effects of health expenditure and social determinants of health. METHODS: This observational cross-sectional study was based on routine primary care data, linked to socio-economic and medical claims data. The main outcomes, analysed by multivariate logistic regression, were achieving primary care guideline treatment targets for HbA1c , systolic blood pressure (SBP) and LDL-cholesterol in 2017. We examined the association with diagnosed mental illness registered by the general practitioner (GP) or treated via specialist' mental healthcare between 2016 and 2018, adjusting for, medication use, body mass index, co-morbidity, smoking, and additionally examining effect-modification of healthcare expenditures, migration status, income and demographics. RESULTS: Overall (N = 2862), 64.0% of participants achieved their treatment targets for HbA1c , 65.1% for SBP and 53.0% for LDL-cholesterol. Adjusted for migrant background, income and care expenditures, individuals <65 years of age with mental illness achieved their HbA1c treatment target more often than those without (OR (95% CI)): treatment by GP: 1.46 (1.01, 2.11), specialist care: 1.61 (1.11, 2.34), as did men with mental illness for SBP: GP OR 1.61 (1.09, 2.40), specialist care OR 1.59 (1.09, 2.45). LDL-cholesterol target was not associated with mental illness. A migrant background or low income lowered the likelihood of reaching HbA1c targets. CONCLUSIONS: People with registered mental illness appear comparable or better able to achieve diabetes treatment targets than those without. Achieving HbA1c targets is influenced by social disadvantage.

Unraveling the Complexity in the Design and Implementation of Bundled Payments: A Scoping Review of Key Elements From a Payer's Perspective.

Policy Points Because bundled payments are relatively new and require a different type of collaboration among payers, providers, and other actors, their design and implementation process is complex. By sorting the 53 key elements that contribute to this complexity into specific pre- and postcontractual phases as well as the actors involved in the health system, this framework provides a comprehensive overview of this complexity from a payer's perspective. Strategically, the design and implementation of bundled payments should not be approached by payers as merely the introduction of a new contracting model, but as part of a broader transformation into a more sustainable, value-based health care system. CONTEXT: Traditional fee-for-service (FFS) payment models in health care stimulate volume-driven care rather than value-driven care. To address this issue, increasing numbers of payers are adopting contracts based on bundled payments. Because their design and implementation are complex, understanding the elements that contribute to this complexity from a payer's perspective might facilitate their adoption. Consequently, the objective of our study was to identify and structure the key elements in the design and implementation of bundled payment contracts. METHODS: Two of us independently and systematically examined the literature to identify all the elements considered relevant to our objective. We then developed a framework in which these elements were arranged according to the specific phases of a care procurement process and actors' interactions at various levels of the health system. FINDINGS: The final study sample consisted of 147 articles in which we identified the 53 elements included in the framework. These elements were found in all phases of the pre- and postcontractual procurement process and involved actors at different levels of the health care system. Examples of elements that were cited frequently and are typical of bundled payment procurement, as opposed to FFS procurement, are (1) specification of care services, patients' characteristics, and corresponding costs, (2) small and heterogeneous patient populations, (3) allocation of payment and savings/losses among providers, (4) identification of patients in the bundle, (5) alignment of the existing care delivery model with the new payment model, and (6) limited effects on quality and costs in the first pilots and demonstrations. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with traditional FFS payment models, bundled payment contracts tend to introduce an alternative set of (financial) incentives, touch on almost all aspects of governance within organizations, and demand a different type of collaboration among organizations. Accordingly, payers should not strategically approach their design and implementation as merely the adoption of a new contracting model, but rather as part of a broader transformation toward a more sustainable value-based health care system, based less on short-term transactional negotiations and more on long-term collaborative relationships between payers and providers.

Unraveling the drivers of regional variation in healthcare spending by analyzing prevalent chronic diseases.

BACKGROUND: To indicate inefficiencies in health systems, previous studies examined regional variation in healthcare spending by analyzing the entire population. As a result, population heterogeneity is taken into account to a limited extent only. Furthermore, it clouds a detailed interpretation which could be used to inform regional budget allocation decisions to improve quality of care of one chronic disease over another. Therefore, we aimed to gain insight into the drivers of regional variation in healthcare spending by studying prevalent chronic diseases. METHODS: We used 2012 secondary health survey data linked with claims data, healthcare supply data and demographics at the individual level for 18 Dutch regions. We studied patients with diabetes (n = 10,767) and depression (n = 3,735), in addition to the general population (n = 44,694). For all samples, we estimated the cross-sectional relationship between spending, supply and demand variables and region effects using linear mixed models. RESULTS: Regions with above (below) average spending for the general population mostly showed above (below) average spending for diabetes and depression as well. Less than 1% of the a-priori total variation in spending was attributed to the regions. For all samples, we found that individual-level demand variables explained 62-63% of the total variance. Self-reported health status was the most prominent predictor (28%) of healthcare spending. Supply variables also explained, although a small part, of regional variation in spending in the general population and depression. Demand variables explained nearly 100% of regional variation in spending for depression and 88% for diabetes, leaving 12% of the regional variation left unexplained indicating differences between regions due to inefficiencies. CONCLUSIONS: The extent to which regional variation in healthcare spending can be considered as inefficiency may differ between regions and disease-groups. Therefore, analyzing chronic diseases, in addition to the traditional approach where the general population is studied, provides more insight into the causes of regional variation in healthcare spending, and identifies potential areas for efficiency improvement and budget allocation decisions.

Harvesting the wisdom of the crowd: using online ratings to explore care experiences in regions.

BACKGROUND: Regional population health management (PHM) initiatives need an understanding of regional patient experiences to improve their services. Websites that gather patient ratings have become common and could be a helpful tool in this effort. Therefore, this study explores whether unsolicited online ratings can provide insight into (differences in) patient's experiences at a (regional) population level. METHODS: Unsolicited online ratings from the Dutch website Zorgkaart Nederland (year = 2008-2017) were used. Patients rated their care providers on six dimensions from 1 to 10 and these ratings were geographically aggregated based on nine PHM regions. Distributions were explored between regions. Multilevel analyses per provider category, which produced Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC), were performed to determine clustering of ratings of providers located within regions. If ratings were clustered, then this would indicate that differences found between regions could be attributed to regional characteristics (e.g. demographics or regional policy). RESULTS: In the nine regions, 70,889 ratings covering 4100 care providers were available. Overall, average regional scores (range = 8.3-8.6) showed significant albeit small differences. Multilevel analyses indicated little clustering between unsolicited provider ratings within regions, as the regional level ICCs were low (ICC pioneer site < 0.01). At the provider level, all ICCs were above 0.11, which showed that ratings were clustered. CONCLUSIONS: Unsolicited online provider-based ratings are able to discern (small) differences between regions, similar to solicited data. However, these differences could not be attributed to the regional level, making unsolicited ratings not useful for overall regional policy evaluations. At the provider level, ratings can be used by regions to identify under-performing providers within their regions.

Shifting hospital care to primary care: An evaluation of cardiology care in a primary care setting in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: In an attempt to deal with the pressures on the healthcare system and to guarantee sustainability, changes are needed. This study is focused on a cardiology Primary Care Plus intervention in which cardiologists provide consultations with patients in a primary care setting in order to prevent unnecessary referrals to the hospital. This study explores which patients with non-acute and low-complexity cardiology-related health complaints should be excluded from Primary Care Plus and referred directly to specialist care in the hospital. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study based on quantitative data. Data collected between January 1 and December 31, 2015 were extracted from the electronic medical record system. Logistic regression analyses were used to select patient groups that should be excluded from referral to Primary Care Plus. RESULTS: In total, 1525 patients were included in the analyses. Results showed that male patients, older patients, those with the referral indication 'Stable Angina Pectoris' or 'Dyspnoea' and patients whose reason for referral was 'To confirm disease' or 'Screening of unclear pathology' had a significantly higher probability of being referred to hospital care after Primary Care Plus. CONCLUSIONS: To achieve efficiency one should exclude patient groups with a significantly higher probability of being referred to hospital care after Primary Care Plus. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR6629 (Data registered: 25-08-2017) (registered retrospectively).

Does an in-house internist at a GP practice result in reduced referrals to hospital-based specialist care?

OBJECTIVE: Consistent evidence on the effects of specialist services in the primary care setting is lacking. Therefore, this study evaluated the effects of an in-house internist at a GP practice on the number of referrals to specialist care in the hospital setting. Additionally, the involved GPs and internist were asked to share their experiences with the intervention. DESIGN: A retrospective interrupted times series study. SETTING: Two multidisciplinary general practitioner (GP) practices. INTERVENTION: An internist provided in-house patient consultations in two GP practices and participated in the multidisciplinary meetings. SUBJECTS: The referral data extracted from the electronic medical record system of the GP practices, including all referral letters from the GPs to specialist care in the hospital setting. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The number of referrals to internal medicine in the hospital setting. This study used an autoregressive integrated moving average model to estimate the effect of the intervention taking account of a time trend and autocorrelation among the observations, comparing the pre-intervention period with the intervention period. RESULTS: It was found that the referrals to internal medicine did not statistically significant decrease during the intervention period. CONCLUSIONS: This small explorative study did not find any clues to support that an in-house internist at a primary care setting results in a decrease of referrals to internal medicine in the hospital setting. Key Points An in-house internist at a primary care setting did not result in a significant decrease of referrals to specialist care in the hospital setting. The GPs and internist experience a learning-effect, i.e. an increase of knowledge about internal medicine issues.

Evaluating a Dutch cardiology primary care plus intervention on the Triple Aim outcomes: study design of a practice-based quantitative and qualitative research.

BACKGROUND: In an attempt to deal with the pressures on the health-care system and to guarantee sustainability, changes are needed. This study focuses on a cardiology primary care plus intervention. Primary care plus (PC+) is a new health-care delivery model focused on substitution of specialist care in the hospital setting with specialist care in the primary care setting. The intervention consists of a cardiology PC+ centre in which cardiologists, supported by other health-care professionals, provide consultations in a primary care setting. The PC+ centre aims to improve the health of the population and quality of care as experienced by patients, and reduce the number of referrals to hospital-based outpatient specialist care in order to reduce health-care costs. These aims reflect the Triple Aim principle. Hence, the objectives of the study are to evaluate the cardiology PC+ centre in terms of the Triple Aim outcomes and to evaluate the process of the introduction of PC+. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a practice-based, quantitative study with a longitudinal observational design, and an additional qualitative study to supplement, interpret and improve the quantitative study. The study population of the quantitative part will consist of adult patients (≥18 years) with non-acute and low-complexity cardiology-related health complaints, who will be referred to the cardiology PC+ centre (intervention group) or hospital-based outpatient cardiology care (control group). All eligible patients will be asked to complete questionnaires at three different time points consisting of questions about their demographics, health status and experience of care. Additionally, quantitative data will be collected about health-care utilization and related health-care costs at the PC+ centre and the hospital. The qualitative part, consisting of semi-structured interviews, focus groups, and observations, is designed to evaluate the process as well as to amplify, clarify and explain quantitative results. CONCLUSIONS: This study will evaluate a cardiology PC+ centre using quantitative and supplementary qualitative methods. The findings of both sub-studies will fill a gap in knowledge about the effects of PC+ and in particular whether PC+ is able to pursue the Triple Aim outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR6629 (Data registered: 25-08-2017) (registered retrospectively).

The impact of comorbid chronic conditions on quality of life in type 2 diabetes patients.

OBJECTIVE: To study the prevalence, impact and dose-response relationship of comorbid chronic conditions on quality of life of type 2 diabetes patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Cross-sectional data of 1676 type 2 diabetes patients, aged 31-96 years, and treated in primary care, were analyzed. Quality of life (QoL) was measured using the mental component summary (MCS) and the physical component summary (PCS) scores of the Short Form-12. Diagnosis of type 2 diabetes was obtained from medical records and comorbidities from self-reports. RESULTS: Only 361 (21.5%) of the patients reported no comorbidities. Diabetes patients with comorbidities showed significantly lower mean difference in PCS [-8.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) -9.8 to -7.3] and MCS scores (-1.9; 95% CI -3.0 to -0.9), compared to diabetes patients without. Additional adjustments did not substantially change these associations. Both MCS and PCS scores decrease significantly with the number of comorbid conditions, yet most pronounced regarding physical QoL. Comorbidities that reduced physical QoL most significantly were retinopathy, heart diseases, atherosclerosis in abdomen or legs, lung diseases, incontinence, back, neck and shoulder disorder, osteoarthritis and chronic rheumatoid arthritis, using the backwards stepwise regression procedure. CONCLUSION: Comorbidities are highly prevalent among type 2 diabetes patients and have a negative impact on the patient's QoL. A strong dose-response relationship between comorbidities and physical QoL was found. Reduced physical QoL is mainly determined by musculoskeletal and cardiovascular disorders.

Are low-value care measures up to the task? A systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Reducing low-value care is a core component of healthcare reforms in many Western countries. A comprehensive and sound set of low-value care measures is needed in order to monitor low-value care use in general and in provider-payer contracts. Our objective was to review the scientific literature on low-value care measurement, aiming to assess the scope and quality of current measures. METHODS: A systematic review was performed for the period 2010-2015. We assessed the scope of low-value care recommendations and measures by categorizing them according to the Classification of Health Care Functions. Additionally, we assessed the quality of the measures by 1) analysing their development process and the level of evidence underlying the measures, and 2) analysing the evidence regarding the validity of a selected subset of the measures. RESULTS: Our search yielded 292 potentially relevant articles. After screening, we selected 23 articles eligible for review. We obtained 115 low-value care measures, of which 87 were concentrated in the cure sector, 25 in prevention and 3 in long-term care. No measures were found in rehabilitative care and health promotion. We found 62 measures from articles that translated low-value care recommendations into measures, while 53 measures were previously developed by institutions as the National Quality Forum. Three measures were assigned the highest level of evidence, as they were underpinned by both guidelines and literature evidence. Our search yielded no information on coding/criterion validity and construct validity for the included measures. Despite this, most measures were already used in practice. CONCLUSION: This systematic review provides insight into the current state of low-value care measures. It shows that more attention is needed for the evidential underpinning and quality of these measures. Clear information about the level of evidence and validity helps to identify measures that truly represent low-value care and are sufficiently qualified to fulfil their aims through quality monitoring and in innovative payer-provider contracts. This will contribute to creating and maintaining the support of providers, payers, policy makers and citizens, who are all aiming to improve value in health care.

Incorporating shared savings programs into primary care: from theory to practice.

BACKGROUND: In several countries, health care policies gear toward strengthening the position of primary care physicians. Primary care physicians are increasingly expected to take accountability for overall spending and quality. Yet traditional models of paying physicians do not provide adequate incentives for taking on this new role. Under a so-called shared savings program physicians are instead incentivized to take accountability for spending and quality, as the program lets them share in cost savings when quality targets are met. We provide a structured approach to designing a shared savings program for primary care, and apply this approach to the design of a shared savings program for a Dutch chain of primary care providers, which is currently being piloted. METHODS: Based on the literature, we defined five building blocks of shared savings models that encompass the definition of the scope of the program, the calculation of health care expenditures, the construction of a savings benchmark, the assessment of savings and the rules and conditions under which savings are shared. We apply insights from a variety of literatures to assess the relative merits of alternative design choices within these building blocks. The shared savings program uses an econometric model of provider expenditures as an input to calculating a casemix-corrected benchmark. RESULTS: The minimization of risk and uncertainty for both payer and provider is pertinent to the design of a shared savings program. In that respect, the primary care setting provides a number of unique opportunities for achieving cost and quality targets. Accountability can more readily be assumed due to the relatively long-lasting relationships between primary care physicians and patients. A stable population furthermore improves the confidence with which savings can be attributed to changes in population management. Challenges arise from the institutional context. The Dutch health care system has a fragmented structure and providers are typically small in size. CONCLUSION: Shared savings programs fit the concept of enhanced primary care. Incorporating a shared savings program into existing payment models could therefore contribute to the financial sustainability of this organizational form.

Associations among health literacy, diabetes knowledge, and self-management behavior in adults with diabetes: results of a dutch cross-sectional study.

Various studies have examined the association between health literacy and self-management behavior, but few have explored ways through which this occurs. The present study examines to what extent health literacy is associated with diabetes self-management behavior and to what extent diabetes knowledge is a mechanism in this association. The study was based on cross-sectional data retrieved from patient registrations and questionnaires completed in 2010. The sample included 1,714 predominantly type 2 diabetes patients, with a mean age of 67 years. Diabetes self-management was indicated by HbA1c level, glucose self-control and self-reported monitoring of glucose levels, physical activity, and smoking. Multilevel analyses were applied based on multiple imputed data. Lower health literacy was significantly associated with less diabetes knowledge, higher HbA1c level, less self-control of glucose level, and less physical activity. Participants with more diabetes knowledge were less likely to smoke and more likely to control glucose levels. Diabetes knowledge was a mediator in the association between health literacy and glucose self-control and between health literacy and smoking. This study indicates that higher health literacy may contribute to participation in certain self-management activities, in some cases through diabetes knowledge. Diabetes knowledge and health literacy skills may be important targets for interventions promoting diabetes self-management.

From test to rest: evaluating socioeconomic differences along the COVID-19 care pathway in the Netherlands.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated healthcare needs and caused excess mortality, especially among lower socioeconomic groups. This study describes the emergence of socioeconomic differences along the COVID-19 pathway of testing, healthcare use and mortality in the Netherlands. METHODOLOGY: This retrospective observational Dutch population-based study combined individual-level registry data from June 2020 to December 2020 on personal socioeconomic characteristics, COVID-19 administered tests, test results, general practitioner (GP) consultations, hospital admissions, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admissions and mortality. For each outcome measure, relative differences between income groups were estimated using log-link binomial regression models. Furthermore, regression models explained socioeconomic differences in COVID-19 mortality by differences in ICU/hospital admissions, test administration and test results. RESULTS: Among the Dutch population, the lowest income group had a lower test probability (RR = 0.61) and lower risk of testing positive (RR = 0.77) compared to the highest income group. However, among individuals with at least one administered COVID-19 test, the lowest income group had a higher risk of testing positive (RR = 1.40). The likelihood of hospital admissions and ICU admissions were higher for low income groups (RR = 2.11 and RR = 2.46, respectively). The lowest income group had an almost four times higher risk of dying from COVID-19 (RR = 3.85), which could partly be explained by a higher risk of hospitalization and ICU admission, rather than differences in test administration or result. DISCUSSION: Our findings indicated that socioeconomic differences became more pronounced at each step of the care pathway, culminating to a large gap in mortality. This underlines the need for enhancing social security and well-being policies and incorporation of health equity in pandemic preparedness plans.

Stakeholder perspectives on payment reform in maternity care in the Netherlands: A Q-methodology study.

Based on theoretical notions, there is consensus that alternative payment models to the common fee-for-service model have the potential to improve healthcare quality through increased collaboration and reduced under- and overuse. This is particularly relevant for maternity care in the Netherlands because perinatal mortality rates are relatively high in comparison to other Western countries. Therefore, an experiment with bundled payments for maternity care was initiated in 2017. However, the uptake of this alternative payment model remains low, as also seen in other countries, and fee-for-service models prevail. A deeper understanding of stakeholders' perspectives on payment reform in maternity care is necessary to inform policy makers about the obstacles to implementing alternative payment models and potential ways forward. We conducted a Q-methodology study to explore perspectives of stakeholders (postpartum care managers, midwives, gynecologists, managers, health insurers) in maternity care in the Netherlands on payment reform. Participants were asked to rank a set of statements relevant to payment reform in maternity care and explain their ranking during an interview. Factor analysis was used to identify patterns in the rankings of statements. We identified three distinct perspectives on payment reform in maternity care. One general perspective, broadly supported within the sector, focusing mainly on outcomes, and two complementary perspectives, one focusing more on equality and one focusing more on collaboration. This study shows there is consensus among stakeholders in maternity care in the Netherlands that payment reform is required. However, stakeholders have different views on the purpose and desired design of the payment reform and set different conditions. Working towards payment reform in co-creation with all involved parties may improve the general attitude towards payment reform, may enhance the level of trust among stakeholders, and may contribute to a higher uptake in practice.

Do studies evaluating early-life policy interventions fully adhere to the critical conditions of difference-in-differences? A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the reporting and methodological quality of early-life policy intervention papers that applied difference-in-differences (DiD) analysis. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Papers applying DiD of early-life policy interventions in high-income countries as identified by searching Medline, Embase and Scopus databases up to December, 2022. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Studies evaluating policy interventions targeting expectant mothers, infants or children up to two years old and conducted in high income countries were included. We focused on seven critical conditions of DiD as proposed in a comprehensive checklist: data requirements, parallel trends, no-anticipation, standard statistical assumptions, common shocks, group composition and spillover. RESULTS: The DiD included studies (n=19) evaluating early-life policy interventions in childhood development (n=4), healthcare utilisation and providers (n=4), nutrition programmes (n=3) and economic policies such as prenatal care expansion (n=8). Although none of the included studies met all critical conditions, the most reported and adhered to critical conditions were data requirements (n=18), standard statistical assumptions (n=11) and the parallel trends assumption (n=9). No-anticipation and spillover were explicitly reported and adhered to in two studies and one study, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights current deficiencies in the reporting and methodological quality of studies using DiD to evaluate early-life policy interventions. As the validity of study conclusions and consequent implications for policy depend on the extent to which critical conditions are met, this shortcoming is concerning. We recommend that researchers use the described checklist to improve the transparency and validity of their evaluations. The checklist should be further refined by adding order of importance or knock-out criteria and may also help facilitate uniform terminology. This will hopefully encourage reliable DiD evaluations and thus contribute to better policies relating to expectant mothers, infants and children.

Disentangling Population Health Management Initiatives in Diabetes Care: A Scoping Review.

Introduction: Population Health Management (PHM) focusses on keeping the whole population as healthy as possible. As such, it could be a promising approach for long-term health improvement in type 2 diabetes. This scoping review aimed to examine the extent to which and how PHM is used in the care for people with type 2 diabetes. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase were searched between January 2000 and September 2021 for papers on self-reported PHM initiatives for type 2 diabetes. Eligible initiatives were described using the analytical framework for PHM. Results: In total, 25 studies regarding 18 PHM initiatives for type 2 diabetes populations were included. There is considerable variation in whether and how the PHM steps are operationalized in existing PHM initiatives. Population identification, impact evaluation, and quality improvement processes were generally part of the PHM initiatives. Triple Aim assessment and risk stratification actions were scarce or explained in little detail. Moreover, cross-sector integration is key in PHM but scarce in practice. Conclusion: Operationalization of PHM in practice is limited compared to the PHM steps described in the analytical framework. Extended risk stratification and integration efforts would contribute to whole-person care and further health improvements within the population.

Evaluation of Healthcare Utilisation and Expenditures in Persons with Type 2 Diabetes Undergoing Bariatric-Metabolic Surgery.

PURPOSE: Changes in healthcare utilisation and expenditures after bariatric-metabolic surgery (BMS) for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are unclear. We used the Dutch national all-payer claims database (APCD) to evaluate utilisation and expenditures in people with T2DM who underwent BMS. METHODS: In this cohort study, patients with T2DM who had BMS in 2016 were identified in the APCD. This group was matched 1:2 to a control group with T2DM who did not undergo BMS based on age, gender and healthcare expenditures. Data on healthcare expenditures and utilisation were collected for 2013-2019. RESULTS: In total, 1751 patients were included in the surgery group and 3502 in the control group. After BMS, total median expenditures in the surgery group stabilised (€ 3156 to € 3120) and increased in the control group (€ 3174 to € 3434). Total pharmaceutical expenditures decreased 28% in the surgery group (€957 to €494) and increased 55% in the control group (€605 to €936). In the surgery group, 67.1% did not use medication for T2DM in 2019 compared to 13.3% in the control group. Healthcare use for microvascular complications increased in the control group, but not in the surgery group. CONCLUSION: BMS in people with T2DM stabilises healthcare expenditures and decreases medication use and care use for microvascular complications. In contrast, healthcare use and expenditures in T2DM patients who do not undergo surgery gradually increase over time. Due to the progressive nature of T2DM, it is expected that these differences will become larger in the long-term.