Impact of an innovative bundled payment to TB health care providers in China: an economic simulation analysis.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis is the second most deadly infectious disease after COVID-19 and the 13th leading cause of death worldwide. Among the 30 countries with a high burden of TB, China ranks third in the estimated number of TB cases. China is in the top four of 75 countries with a deficit in funding for TB strategic plans. To reduce costs and improve the effectiveness of TB treatment in China, the NHSA developed an innovative BP method. This study aimed to simulate the effects of this payment approach on different stakeholders, reduce the economic burden on TB patients, improve the quality of medical services, facilitate policy optimization, and offer a model for health care payment reforms that can be referenced by other regions throughout the world. METHODS: We developed a simulation model based on a decision tree analysis to project the expected effects of the payment method on the potential financial impacts on different stakeholders. Our analysis mainly focused on comparing changes in health care costs before and after receiving BPs for TB patients with Medicare in the pilot areas. The data that were used for the analysis included the TB service claim records for 2019-2021 from the health insurance agency, TB prevalence data from the local Centre for Disease Control, and health care facilities' revenue and expenditure data from the Statistic Yearbook. A Monte Carlo randomized simulation model was used to estimate the results. RESULTS: After adopting the innovative BP method, for each TB patient per year, the total annual expenditure was estimated to decrease from $2,523.28 to $2,088.89, which is a reduction of $434.39 (17.22%). The TB patient out-of-pocket expenditure was expected to decrease from $1,249.02 to $1,034.00, which is a reduction of $215.02 (17.22%). The health care provider's revenue decreased from $2,523.28 to $2,308.26, but the health care provider/institution's revenue-expenditure ratio increased from -6.09% to 9.50%. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the potential of BPs to improve medical outcomes and control the costs associated with TB treatment. It demonstrates its feasibility and advantages in enhancing the coordination and sustainability of medical services, thus offering valuable insights for global health care payment reform.

Changes in Health Care Workers' Economic Outcomes Following Medicaid Expansion.

Importance: The extent to which changes in health sector finances impact economic outcomes among health care workers, especially lower-income workers, is not well known. Objective: To assess the association between state adoption of the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion-which led to substantial improvements in health care organization finances-and health care workers' annual incomes and benefits, and whether these associations varied across low- and high-wage occupations. Design, Setting, and Participants: Difference-in-differences analysis to assess differential changes in health care workers' economic outcomes before and after Medicaid expansion among workers in 30 states that expanded Medicaid relative to workers in 16 states that did not, by examining US individuals aged 18 through 65 years employed in the health care industry surveyed in the 2010-2019 American Community Surveys. Exposure: Time-varying state-level adoption of Medicaid expansion. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was annual earned income; secondary outcomes included receipt of employer-sponsored health insurance, Medicaid, and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits. Results: The sample included 1 322 263 health care workers from 2010-2019. Health care workers in expansion states were similar to those in nonexpansion states in age, sex, and educational attainment, but those in expansion states were less likely to identify as non-Hispanic Black. Medicaid expansion was associated with a 2.16% increase in annual incomes (95% CI, 0.66%-3.65%; P = .005). This effect was driven by significant increases in annual incomes among the top 2 highest-earning quintiles (ß coefficient, 2.91%-3.72%), which includes registered nurses, physicians, and executives. Health care workers in lower-earning quintiles did not experience any significant changes. Medicaid expansion was associated with a 3.15 percentage point increase in the likelihood that a health care worker received Medicaid benefits (95% CI, 2.46 to 3.84; P < .001), with the largest increases among the 2 lowest-earning quintiles, which includes health aides, orderlies, and sanitation workers. There were significant decreases in employer-sponsored health insurance and increases in SNAP following Medicaid expansion. Conclusion and Relevance: Medicaid expansion was associated with increases in compensation for health care workers, but only among the highest earners. These findings suggest that improvements in health care sector finances may increase economic inequality among health care workers, with implications for worker health and well-being.

Resource and Infrastructure-Appropriate Management of ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

The 143 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) of the world constitute 80% of the world's population or roughly 5.86 billion people with much variation in geography, culture, literacy, financial resources, access to health care, insurance penetration, and healthcare regulation. Unfortunately, their burden of cardiovascular disease in general and acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in particular is increasing at an unprecedented rate. Compounding the problem, outcomes remain suboptimal because of a lack of awareness and a severe paucity of resources. Guideline-based treatment has dramatically improved the outcomes of STEMI in high-income countries. However, no such focused recommendations exist for LMICs, and the unique challenges in LMICs make directly implementing Western guidelines unfeasible. Thus, structured solutions tailored to their individual, local needs, and resources are a vital need. With this in mind, a multicountry collaboration of investigators interested in LMIC STEMI care have tried to create a consensus document that extracts transferable elements from Western guidelines and couples them with local realities gathered from expert experience. It outlines general operating principles for LMICs focused best practices and is intended to create the broad outlines of implementable, resource-appropriate paradigms for management of STEMI in LMICs. Although this document is focused primarily on governments and organizations involved with improvement in STEMI care in LMICs, it also provides some specific targeted information for the frontline clinicians to allow standardized care pathways and improved outcomes.

Examining Wage Disparities by Race and Ethnicity of Health Care Workers.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies demonstrated that wage disparities exist across race and ethnicity within selected health care occupations. Wage disparities may negatively affect the industry's ability to recruit and retain a diverse workforce throughout the career ladder. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether wage disparities by race and ethnicity persist across health care occupations and whether disparities vary across the skill spectrum. RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of 2011-2018 data from the Current Population Survey using Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition regression methods to identify sources of variation in wage disparities. Separate models were run for 9 health care occupations. SUBJECTS: Employed individuals 18 and older working in health care occupations, categorized by race/ethnicity. MEASURES: Annual wages were predicted as a function of race/ethnicity, age, sex, marital status, having a child under 5 in the household, living in a metro area, highest education attained, and usual hours worked. RESULTS: Non-Hispanics consistently made more than Hispanic licensed practical/vocational nurses (LPNs/LVNs), aides/assistants, technicians, and community-based workers. Asian/Pacific Islanders consistently made more than Black, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Multiracial individuals across occupations except physicians, advanced practitioners, or therapists. Asian/Pacific Islanders only made significantly less when compared with White physicians, but more than White advanced practitioners, registered nurses, LPNs/LVNs, and aides/assistants. Based on observed attributes, Black registered nurses, LPNs/LVNs, and aides/assistants were predicted to make more than their White peers, but unexplained variation negated these gains. CONCLUSIONS: Many wage gaps remained unexplained based on measured factors warranting further study. Addressing wage disparities is critical to advance in careers and reduce job turnover.

Characterizing the providers of and reimbursement for chronic migraine chemodenervation among the Medicare population.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize reimbursement trends and providers for chronic migraine (CM) chemodenervation treatment within the Medicare population since the introduction of the migraine-specific CPT code in 2013. METHODS: We describe trends in procedure volume and total allowed charge on cross-sectional data obtained from 2013 to 2018 Medicare Part B National Summary files. We also utilized the 2017 Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data to analyze higher volume providers (>10 procedures) of this treatment modality. RESULTS: The total number of CM chemodenervation treatments rose from 37,863 in 2013 to 135,023 in 2018 in a near-linear pattern (r = 0.999) and total allowed charges rose from ~$5,217,712 to $19,166,160 (r = 0.999). The majority of high-volume providers were neurologists (78.4%; 1060 of 1352), but a substantial proportion were advanced practice providers (APPs) (10.2%; 138 of 1352). Of the physicians, neurologists performed a higher mean number of procedures per physician compared to non-neurologists (59.6 [95% CI: 56.6-62.6] vs. 45.4 [95% CI: 41.0-50.0], p < 0.001). When comparing physicians and APPs, APPs were paid significantly less ($146.5 [95% CI: $145.6-$147.5] vs. $119.7 [95% CI: $117.6-$121.8], p < 0.001). As a percent of the number of total beneficiaries in each state, the percent of Medicare patients receiving ≥1 CM chemodenervation treatment from a high-volume provider in 2017 ranged from 0.024% (24 patients of 98,033 beneficiaries) in Wyoming to 0.135% (997 of 736,521) in Arizona, with six states falling outside of this range. CONCLUSION: Chemodenervation is an increasingly popular treatment for CM among neurologists and other providers, but the reason for this increase is unclear. There is substantial geographic variation in its use.

SEeking AnsweRs for Care Homes during the COVID-19 pandemic (COVID SEARCH).

The care and support of older people residing in long-term care facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic has created new and unanticipated uncertainties for staff. In this short report, we present our analyses of the uncertainties of care home managers and staff expressed in a self-formed closed WhatsApp™ discussion group during the first stages of the pandemic in the UK. We categorised their wide-ranging questions to understand what information would address these uncertainties and provide support. We have been able to demonstrate that almost one-third of these uncertainties could have been tackled immediately through timely, responsive and unambiguous fact-based guidance. The other uncertainties require appraisal, synthesis and summary of existing evidence, commissioning or provision of a sector- informed research agenda for medium to long term. The questions represent wider internationally relevant care home pandemic-related uncertainties.

Payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings.

BACKGROUND: Changes to the method of payment for healthcare providers, including pay-for-performance schemes, are increasingly being used by governments, health insurers, and employers to help align financial incentives with health system goals. In this review we focused on changes to the method and level of payment for all types of healthcare providers in outpatient healthcare settings. Outpatient healthcare settings, broadly defined as 'out of hospital' care including primary care, are important for health systems in reducing the use of more expensive hospital services. OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of different payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings on the quantity and quality of health service provision, patient outcomes, healthcare provider outcomes, cost of service provision, and adverse effects. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase (searched 5 March 2019), and several other databases. In addition, we searched clinical trials platforms, grey literature, screened reference lists of included studies, did a cited reference search for included studies, and contacted study authors to identify additional studies. We screened records from an updated search in August 2020, with any potentially relevant studies categorised as awaiting classification. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials, non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series, and repeated measures studies that compared different payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient care settings. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We conducted a structured synthesis. We first categorised the payment methods comparisons and outcomes, and then described the effects of different types of payment methods on different outcome categories. Where feasible, we used meta-analysis to synthesise the effects of payment interventions under the same category. Where it was not possible to perform meta-analysis, we have reported means/medians and full ranges of the available point estimates. We have reported the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and the relative difference (as per cent change or mean difference (MD)) for continuous outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We included 27 studies in the review: 12 randomised trials, 13 controlled before-and-after studies, one interrupted time series, and one repeated measure study. Most healthcare providers were primary care physicians. Most of the payment methods were implemented by health insurance schemes in high-income countries, with only one study from a low- or middle-income country. The included studies were categorised into four groups based on comparisons of different payment methods. (1) Pay for performance (P4P) plus existing payment methods compared with existing payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings P4P incentives probably improve child immunisation status (RR 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.36; 3760 patients; moderate-certainty evidence) and may slightly increase the number of patients who are asked more detailed questions on their disease by their pharmacist (MD 1.24, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.54; 454 patients; low-certainty evidence). P4P may slightly improve primary care physicians' prescribing of guideline-recommended antihypertensive medicines compared with an existing payment method (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.12; 362 patients; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effects of extra P4P incentives on mean blood pressure reduction for patients and costs for providing services compared with an existing payment method (very low-certainty evidence). Outcomes related to workload or other health professional outcomes were not reported in the included studies. One randomised trial found that compared to the control group, the performance of incentivised professionals was not sustained after the P4P intervention had ended. (2) Fee for service (FFS) compared with existing payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings We are uncertain about the effect of FFS on the quantity of health services delivered (outpatient visits and hospitalisations), patient health outcomes, and total drugs cost compared to an existing payment method due to very low-certainty evidence. The quality of service provision and health professional outcomes were not reported in the included studies. One randomised trial reported that physicians paid via FFS may see more well patients than salaried physicians (low-certainty evidence), possibly implying that more unnecessary services were delivered through FFS. (3) FFS mixed with existing payment methods compared with existing payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings FFS mixed payment method may increase the quantity of health services provided compared with an existing payment method (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.76; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of FFS mixed payment on quality of services provided, patient health outcomes, and health professional outcomes compared with an existing payment method due to very low-certainty evidence. Cost outcomes and adverse effects were not reported in the included studies. (4) Enhanced FFS compared with FFS for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings Enhanced FFS (higher FFS payment) probably increases child immunisation rates (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.48; moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether higher FFS payment results in more primary care visits and about the effect of enhanced FFS on the net expenditure per year on covered children with regular FFS (very low-certainty evidence). Quality of service provision, patient outcomes, health professional outcomes, and adverse effects were not reported in the included studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: For healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings, P4P or an increase in FFS payment level probably increases the quantity of health service provision (moderate-certainty evidence), and P4P may slightly improve the quality of service provision for targeted conditions (low-certainty evidence). The effects of changes in payment methods on health outcomes is uncertain due to very low-certainty evidence. Information to explore the influence of specific payment method design features, such as the size of incentives and type of performance measures, was insufficient. Furthermore, due to limited and very low-certainty evidence, it is uncertain if changing payment models without including additional funding for professionals would have similar effects. There is a need for further well-conducted research on payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings in low- and middle-income countries; more studies comparing the impacts of different designs of the same payment method; and studies that consider the unintended consequences of payment interventions.

Evaluation of N95 respirators, modified snorkel masks and low-cost powered air-purifying respirators: a prospective observational cohort study in healthcare workers.

Disposable N95 respirator masks are the current standard for healthcare worker respiratory protection in the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to shortages, qualitative fit testing can have low sensitivity for detecting poor fit, leading to inconsistent protection. Multiple groups have developed alternative solutions such as modified snorkel masks to overcome these limitations, but validation of these solutions has been lacking. We sought to determine if N95s and snorkel masks with attached high-efficiency filters provide consistent protection levels in healthcare workers and if the addition of positive pressure via an inexpensive powered-air purifying respirator to the snorkel mask would provide enhanced protection. Fifty-one healthcare workers who were qualitatively fitted with N95 masks underwent quantitative mask fit testing according to a simulated workplace exercise protocol. N95, snorkel masks with high-efficiency filters and snorkel masks with powered-air purifying respirators were tested. Respiratory filtration ratios were collected for each step and averaged to obtain an overall workplace protocol fit factor. Failure was defined as either an individual filtration ratio or an overall fit factor below 100. N95s and snorkel masks with high-efficiency filters failed one or more testing steps in 59% and 20% of participants, respectively, and 24% and 12% failed overall fit factors, respectively. The snorkel masks with powered-air purifying respirators had zero individual or overall failures. N95 and snorkel masks with high-efficiency filter respirators were found to provide inconsistent respiratory protection in healthcare workers.

Stopping exploitation: Properly remunerating healthcare workers for risk in the COVID-19 pandemic.

We argue that we should provide extra payment not only for extra time worked but also for the extra risks healthcare workers (and those working in healthcare settings) incur while caring for COVID-19 patients-and more generally when caring for patients poses them at significantly higher risks than normal. We argue that the extra payment is warranted regardless of whether healthcare workers have a professional obligation to provide such risky healthcare. Payment for risk would meet four essential ethical requirements. First, assuming healthcare workers do not have a professional obligation to take on themselves the risks, payments in the form of incentives would preserve autonomy in deciding what risks to take on oneself. Second, even assuming that healthcare workers do have a professional obligation to take on themselves the risks, payments for risk would create fair working conditions by avoiding exploitation. Third, payments for risk would make it more likely that public healthcare systems can discharge their institutional responsibility to provide healthcare in circumstances where healthcare workers may otherwise (perhaps legitimately) opt out. Fourth, payments for risk would guarantee an efficient healthcare system in pandemic situations. Finally, we address two likely objections that some might raise against our proposal, particularly with regard to incentives, namely that such payments or incentives can themselves be coercive and that they represent a form of undue inducement.

Workers' compensation costs for healthcare caregivers: Home healthcare, long-term care, and hospital nurses and nursing aides.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (nurses and nursing aides) often have different exposures and injury risk factors depending on their occupational subsector and location (hospital, long-term care, or home health care). METHODS: A total of 5234 compensation claims for nurses and nursing aides who suffered injuries to their lower back, knee, and/or shoulder over a 5-year period were obtained from the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation and analyzed. Injury causation data was also collected for each claim. The outcome variables included indemnity costs, medical costs, total costs, and the number of lost work days. The highest prescribed morphine equivalent dose for opioid medications was also calculated for each claim. RESULTS: Home healthcare nurses and nursing aides had the highest average total costs per claim. Hospital nurses and nursing aides had the highest total claim costs, of $5 million/year. Shoulder injuries for home healthcare nursing aides (HHNAs) had the highest average total claim costs ($20,600/injury) for all occupation, setting, and body area combinations. Opioids were most frequently prescribed for home healthcare nurses (HHNs) and nursing aides (18.9% and 17.7% having been prescribed opioids, respectively). Overexertion was the most common cause for HHN and nursing aide claims. CONCLUSIONS: With the rapidly expanding workforce in the home healthcare sector, there is a potential health crisis from the continued expansion of home healthcare worker injuries and their associated costs. In addition, the potential for opioid drug usage places these workers at risk for future dependence, overdose, and prolonged disability. Future research is needed to investigate the specific and ideally reversible causes of injury in claims categorized as caused by overexertion.

A Study Looking at a Lower Cost Option for Cultural Competence Education.

To meet the growing demands in the US healthcare system caused by multiculturalism and the expansion of health inequities, due diligence must be given to testing the efficacy of tools used in teaching nurses to provide culturally competent care. This project assessed the utility of a free US government-developed training module. The team found an improved trend in nurse-patient communication scores and improved willingness to ask for help with cultural issues for the intervention unit. The use of no-cost, publicly available resources may be a cost-effective option for training materials.

Applicability of European Union Competition Law to Health Care Providers: The Dividing Line between Economic and Noneconomic Activities.

Ever-increasing health spending, which, according to future projections, continues to outpace economic growth, will further endanger the financial sustainability of health systems. In a quest to improve the efficacy and efficiency of the health system and thus strengthen its financial sustainability, member states are employing market-based mechanisms to finance, manage, and provide health care. However, the introduction of elements of competition is constrained by the application of EU competition law, which raises significant concerns regarding the applicability of competition law and its limits in the field of health care. Due to the lack of a clear definition in EU legislation, the applicability and scope of competition law are determined on a case-by-case basis, which reveals an inconsistent approach by the European Commission and the CJEU regarding the application of competition law to health care providers and has created legal uncertainty. The aim of this article is to analyze relevant decisions by the commission and the CJEU case law in the pursuit of "boundaries" that may trigger the applicability of competition law with regard to health care providers. Based on the findings of the analysis, the article proposes a set of principles or guidelines for determining whether a health care provider should be considered as an undertaking and, as such, subject to EU competition law.

Utilization and Costs by Primary Care Provider Type: Are There Differences Among Diabetic Patients of Physicians, Nurse Practitioners, and Physician Assistants?

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare health care utilization and costs among diabetes patients with physician, nurse practitioner (NP), or physician assistant (PA) primary care providers (PCPs). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Cohort study using Veterans Affairs (VA) electronic health record data to examine the relationship between PCP type and utilization and costs over 1 year in 368,481 adult, diabetes patients. Relationship between PCP type and utilization and costs in 2013 was examined with extensive adjustment for patient and facility characteristics. Emergency department and outpatient analyses used negative binomial models; hospitalizations used logistic regression. Costs were analyzed using generalized linear models. RESULTS: PCPs were physicians, NPs, and PAs for 74.9% (n=276,009), 18.2% (n=67,120), and 6.9% (n=25,352) of patients respectively. Patients of NPs and PAs have lower odds of inpatient admission [odds ratio for NP vs. physician 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.87-0.93; PA vs. physician 0.92, 95% CI=0.87-0.97], and lower emergency department use (0.67 visits on average for physicians, 95% CI=0.65-0.68; 0.60 for NPs, 95% CI=0.58-0.63; 0.59 for PAs, 95% CI=0.56-0.63). This translates into NPs and PAs having ~$500-$700 less health care costs per patient per year (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Expanded use of NPs and PAs in the PCP role for some patients may be associated with notable cost savings. In our cohort, substituting care patterns and creating similar clinical situations in which they practice, NPs and PAs may have reduced costs of care by up to 150-190 million dollars in 2013.

Multilevel determinants of financial toxicity in breast cancer care: perspectives of healthcare professionals and Latina survivors.

PURPOSE: Financial toxicity is a multidimensional side effect of cancer treatment. Yet, most relevant research has focused on individual-level determinants of financial toxicity and characterized only patient perspectives. This study examined the multilevel determinants of financial toxicity from the perspectives of Latina breast cancer survivors and healthcare professionals. METHODS: We analyzed qualitative data from focus groups with 19 Latina breast cancer survivors and interviews with 10 healthcare professionals recruited through community partners and venues in Chicago. RESULTS: At the individual-level, the lack of knowledge and prioritization regarding financial aspects of care (e.g., costs of treatment, insurance coverage) was identified as important determinants of financial toxicity. However, healthcare professionals emphasized the need for early financial planning, while survivors prioritized survival over financial concerns immediately after diagnosis. At the interpersonal-level, social networks were identified as important platforms for disseminating information on financial resources. At the community-level, community norms and dynamics were identified as important barriers to seeking financial assistance. Access to culturally astute community-based organizations was considered one potential solution to eliminate these barriers. At the organizational/healthcare policy-level, financial assistance programs' restrictive eligibility criteria, lack of coverage post-treatment, limited availability, and instability were identified as major determinants of financial toxicity. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that multilevel interventions at the individual-, interpersonal-, community-, and organizational/healthcare policy-levels are needed to adequately address financial toxicity among Latina and other survivors from disadvantaged communities.

"If the Big Fish are Doing It Then Why Not Me Down Here?": Informal Fee Payments and Reproductive Health Care Provider Motivation in Kenya.

Informal fees are payments made by patients to their health care provider that are over and above the official cost of services. Payments may be motivated by a combination of factors such as low supervision, weak sanctions, and inadequate provider salaries. The practice of soliciting informal fees from patients may result in restricted access to medical care and reduced care-seeking behavior among vulnerable populations. The objective of this study is to examine nuanced health care provider perspectives on informal fee payments solicited from reproductive health patients in Kenya. We conducted in-depth semistructured interviews in 2015-2016 among a sample of 20 public and private-sector Kenyan health care workers. Interviews were coded and analyzed using an iterative thematic approach. More than half of participants reported that solicitation of informal fees is common practice in health care facilities. Providers reported low public-sector wages were a primary driver of informal fee solicitation coupled with collusion among senior staff. Additionally, patients may be unaware that they are being asked to pay more than the official cost of services. Strategies for reducing this behavior include more adequate and timely remuneration within the public sector, educating patient populations of free or low-cost services, and evidence-based methods to increase provider motivation.

The influence of corruption and governance in the delivery of frontline health care services in the public sector: a scoping review of current and future prospects in low and middle-income countries of south and south-east Asia.

BACKGROUND: The dynamic intersection of a pluralistic health system, large informal sector, and poor regulatory environment have provided conditions favourable for 'corruption' in the LMICs of south and south-east Asia region. 'Corruption' works to undermine the UHC goals of achieving equity, quality, and responsiveness including financial protection, especially while delivering frontline health care services. This scoping review examines current situation regarding health sector corruption at frontlines of service delivery in this region, related policy perspectives, and alternative strategies currently being tested to address this pervasive phenomenon. METHODS: A scoping review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) was conducted, using three search engines i.e., PubMed, SCOPUS and Google Scholar. A total of 15 articles and documents on corruption and 18 on governance were selected for analysis. A PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist was filled-in to complete this report. Data were extracted using a pre-designed template and analysed by 'mixed studies review' method. RESULTS: Common types of corruption like informal payments, bribery and absenteeism identified in the review have largely financial factors as the underlying cause. Poor salary and benefits, poor incentives and motivation, and poor governance have a damaging impact on health outcomes and the quality of health care services. These result in high out-of-pocket expenditure, erosion of trust in the system, and reduced service utilization. Implementing regulations remain constrained not only due to lack of institutional capacity but also political commitment. Lack of good governance encourage frontline health care providers to bend the rules of law and make centrally designed anti-corruption measures largely in-effective. Alternatively, a few bottom-up community-engaged interventions have been tested showing promising results. The challenge is to scale up the successful ones for measurable impact. CONCLUSIONS: Corruption and lack of good governance in these countries undermine the delivery of quality essential health care services in an equitable manner, make it costly for the poor and disadvantaged, and results in poor health outcomes. Traditional measures to combat corruption have largely been ineffective, necessitating the need for innovative thinking if UHC is to be achieved by 2030.

COVID-19 outbreak and its monetary implications for dental practices, hospitals and healthcare workers.

The novel COVID-19 came under limelight few months back (December 2019) and has recently been declared a pandemic by WHO. It has resulted in serious financial implications being faced by dental practices, hospitals and healthcare workers. Dental practice currently is restricted to provision of emergency dental care whereas, many hospitals have also cancelled elective procedures to save finances for COVID-19 treatment which is expensive and unpredictable. In addition, healthcare workers are also facing financial challenges in this difficult time. Competent authorities should step in to help dental practices, hospitals and healthcare workers in order to ensure the provision of all types of healthcare efficiently in these testing times and beyond.

A pay for performance scheme in primary care: Meta-synthesis of qualitative studies on the provider experiences of the quality and outcomes framework in the UK.

BACKGROUND: The Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) is an incentive scheme for general practice, which was introduced across the UK in 2004. The Quality and Outcomes Framework is one of the biggest pay for performance (P4P) scheme in the world, worth £691 million in 2016/17. We now know that P4P is good at driving some kinds of improvement but not others. In some areas, it also generated moral controversy, which in turn created conflicts of interest for providers. We aimed to undertake a meta-synthesis of 18 qualitative studies of the QOF to identify themes on the impact of the QOF on individual practitioners and other staff. METHODS: We searched 5 electronic databases, Medline, Embase, Healthstar, CINAHL and Web of Science, for qualitative studies of the QOF from the providers' perspective in primary care, published in UK between 2004 and 2018. Data was analysed using the Schwartz Value Theory as a theoretical framework to analyse the published papers through the conceptual lens of Professionalism. A line of argument synthesis was undertaken to express the synthesis. RESULTS: We included 18 qualitative studies that where on the providers' perspective. Four themes were identified; 1) Loss of autonomy, control and ownership; 2) Incentivised conformity; 3) Continuity of care, holism and the caring role of practitioners' in primary care; and 4) Structural and organisational changes. Our synthesis found, the Values that were enhanced by the QOF were power, achievement, conformity, security, and tradition. The findings indicated that P4P schemes should aim to support Values such as benevolence, self-direction, stimulation, hedonism and universalism, which professionals ranked highly and have shown to have positive implications for Professionalism and efficiency of health systems. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding how practitioners experience the complexities of P4P is crucial to designing and delivering schemes to enhance and not compromise the values of professionals. Future P4P schemes should aim to permit professionals with competing high priority values to be part of P4P or other quality improvement initiatives and for them to take on an 'influencer role' rather than being 'responsive agents'. Through understanding the underlying Values and not just explicit concerns of professionals, may ensure higher levels of acceptance and enduring success for P4P schemes.

Economic Value of Data and Analytics for Health Care Providers: Hermeneutic Systematic Literature Review.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of data and analytics for health care systems and single providers is an increasingly investigated field in digital health literature. Electronic health records (EHR), for example, can improve quality of care. Emerging analytics tools based on artificial intelligence show the potential to assist physicians in day-to-day workflows. Yet, single health care providers also need information regarding the economic impact when deciding on potential adoption of these tools. OBJECTIVE: This paper examines the question of whether data and analytics provide economic advantages or disadvantages for health care providers. The goal is to provide a comprehensive overview including a variety of technologies beyond computer-based patient records. Ultimately, findings are also intended to determine whether economic barriers for adoption by providers could exist. METHODS: A systematic literature search of the PubMed and Google Scholar online databases was conducted, following the hermeneutic methodology that encourages iterative search and interpretation cycles. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria to 165 initially identified studies, 50 were included for qualitative synthesis and topic-based clustering. RESULTS: The review identified 5 major technology categories, namely EHRs (n=30), computerized clinical decision support (n=8), advanced analytics (n=5), business analytics (n=5), and telemedicine (n=2). Overall, 62% (31/50) of the reviewed studies indicated a positive economic impact for providers either via direct cost or revenue effects or via indirect efficiency or productivity improvements. When differentiating between categories, however, an ambiguous picture emerged for EHR, whereas analytics technologies like computerized clinical decision support and advanced analytics predominantly showed economic benefits. CONCLUSIONS: The research question of whether data and analytics create economic benefits for health care providers cannot be answered uniformly. The results indicate ambiguous effects for EHRs, here representing data, and mainly positive effects for the significantly less studied analytics field. The mixed results regarding EHRs can create an economic barrier for adoption by providers. This barrier can translate into a bottleneck to positive economic effects of analytics technologies relying on EHR data. Ultimately, more research on economic effects of technologies other than EHRs is needed to generate a more reliable evidence base.

Understanding Barriers and Facilitators to the Uptake of Best Practices for the Treatment of Co-Occurring Chronic Pain and Opioid Use Disorder.

Objective: Patients with a combination of chronic pain and opioid use disorder have unique needs and may present a challenge for clinicians and health care systems. The objective of the present study was to use qualitative methods to explore factors influencing the uptake of best practices for co-occurring chronic pain and opioid use disorder in order to inform a quantitative survey assessing primary care provider capacity to appropriately treat this dual diagnosis. Methods: Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 11 primary care providers (PCPs) to inform the development of a questionnaire. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Fifteen comments from an open-ended question on the questionnaire were added to the analyses as they described factors that were not elucidated in the interviews. Barriers and facilitators were identified and categorized using the CFIR codebook. Results: The most frequently described barriers were cost and inadequate access to appropriate treatments, external policies, and available resources (e.g., risk assessment tools). The most frequently described facilitators were the presence of a network or team, patient-specific needs, and the learning climate. Knowledge and beliefs were frequently described as both barriers and facilitators. Conclusions: While substantial funding has been allocated to initiatives aimed at increasing PCP capacity to treat this population, numerous barriers to adopting appropriate practices still exist. Future research should focus on developing and testing implementation strategies that leverage the facilitators and overcome the barriers illustrated here to improve the uptake of evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of co-occurring chronic pain and opioid use disorder.