Project description:ObjectiveThe eumusc.net project is an initiative founded by the European Community and the European League Against Rheumatism. One aim of the project was to facilitate equal standards for musculoskeletal health across Europe. The aim of this work-package was to develop patient-centred and consensus based standards of care (SOC) for osteoarthritis (OA), which should be available in a professional and a patient version.MethodsA systematic review concerning guidelines dealing with OA was conducted. Furthermore, experts in musculoskeletal diseases were contacted to ensure that 'grey' literature was not excluded. Documents that fulfilled predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria were included and all interventions for OA were extracted and categorised. Based on this list of interventions, a three round Delphi exercise with an international and multidisciplinary expert panel, including patient research partners, was performed to achieve expert consensus.ResultsSix documents were included and used for further analysis. Out of them, 46 interventions have been extracted and 10 consensus based SOC were formulated. In addition, a patient version, written in a lay-understandable wording and in the format of checklist questions was developed. An example is SOC 5: "People with OA should achieve optimal pain control using pharmacological and non-pharmacological means." The matching patient-centred checklist question reads: "Do I know how to control pain associated with OA?"ConclusionsThe SOC for OA will be available in the 23 languages of the European Union to enhance unified information to patients and professionals and to further harmonise the treatment/care of OA within Europe.
Project description:AimWe developed a self-report tool to assess patients' experiences with lifestyle services in team-based primary care and pilot tested the questionnaire as part of a lifestyle intervention study to reverse metabolic syndrome.BackgroundOlder client satisfaction questionnaires have been generally inadequate for quality improvement purposes, as they have been focused mainly on interpersonal skills of providers and/or in the context of one disease. New approaches to assessing the patient experience of lifestyle programs in primary care are needed and could inform quality improvement efforts over time.MethodsThe first phase in developing the questionnaire involved a group-administered questionnaire distributed to 38 healthcare providers in five groups to prioritize variables to include in the survey. Concepts were taken from a previous review of available questionnaires assessing primary care services. The draft questionnaire was reviewed by 11 participants from a lifestyle program using think-aloud cognitive interviewing techniques. The modified self-administered questionnaire (paper and online versions) was then pilot tested with 164 recipients of a nutrition and physical activity intervention program.FindingsProviders ranked the top variables to include in the questionnaire as: 'trust,' 'general communication,' 'first-contact accessibility,' 'whole-person care,' and 'respectfulness.' After cognitive interviewing and revisions, 21 multiple choice and two open-ended questions were used for pilot testing. Pilot testing identified additional minor wording changes that were needed for clarity, a decreased number of questions for redundant concepts, and decreased options for ceiling effects, resulting in 20 multiple choice and one open-ended question.ConclusionsThe modified self-administered patient experience questionnaire to assess lifestyle services in primary care has undergone rigorous development. Further validation is needed. The assessment of patient experience of lifestyle programs can be used to supplement other data to assess the overall effectiveness of such programs.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Although patient time costs are recommended for inclusion in cost-effectiveness analyses, these data are not routinely collected. We used nationally representative data and a medical service-based approach to estimate the annual patient time costs among cancer survivors. METHODS:We identified adult 6699 cancer survivors and 86,412 individuals without a cancer history ages 18 years or more from 2008-2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). Service use was categorized as hospitalizations, emergency room use, provider visits, ambulatory surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy. Service time estimates were applied to frequencies for each service category and the US median wage rate in 2011 was used to value time. We evaluated the association between cancer survivorship and service use frequencies and patient time costs with multivariable regression models, stratified by age group (18-64 and 65+ y). Sensitivity analyses evaluated different approaches for valuing time. RESULTS:Cancer survivors were more likely to have hospitalizations, emergency room visits, ambulatory surgeries, and provider visits in the past year than individuals without a cancer history in adjusted analyses (P<0.05). Annual patient time was higher for cancer survivors than individuals without a cancer history among those aged 18-64 years (30.2 vs. 13.6 h; P<0.001) and 65+ years (55.1 vs. 36.6 h; P<0.001), as were annual patient time costs (18-64 y: $500 vs. $226; P<0.001 and 65+ y: $913 vs. $607; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Cancer survivors had greater annual medical service use and patient time costs than individuals without a cancer history. This medical service-based approach for estimating annual time costs can also be applied to other conditions.
Project description:We assess the potential for medical liability forces to deter medical errors and improve health care treatment quality, identifying liability's influence by drawing on variations in the manner by which states formulate the negligence standard facing physicians. Using hospital discharge records from the National Hospital Discharge Survey and clinically-validated quality metrics inspired by the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality, we find evidence suggesting that treatment quality may improve upon reforms that expect physicians to adhere to higher quality clinical standards. We do not find evidence, however, suggesting that treatment quality may deteriorate following reforms to liability standards that arguably condone the delivery of lower quality care. Similarly, we do not find evidence of deterioration in health care quality following remedy-focused liability reforms such as caps on non-economic damages awards.
Project description:Although clozapine has demonstrated superior efficacy in patients with schizophrenia and other serious mental health illness, drug utilization rates are significantly low due to safety concerns and administration challenges. Previous research indicates that current barriers to clozapine use include lack of confidence and knowledge by prescriber, therapeutic monitoring requirements, lack of support and infrastructure to for adequate monitoring and patient adherence, and inadequate understanding of clozapine's benefit-risk profile by policy makers and payers. One potential solution to optimizing clozapine therapy and improving clinical outcomes is the use of point-of-care testing (POCT) devices. Although the drug development process for currently used therapeutics is widely acknowledged, little is known regarding the development of POCT devices by the clinical community. The aim of this review is to provide a summary of the regulatory approval process and current availability of POCT devices for monitoring clozapine therapeutics. The potential role of POCT devices in clinical trials to inform personalized dosing strategies and improve patient outcomes will also be discussed.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Several studies have demonstrated the usefulness of medical checklists to improve quality of care in surgery and the ICU. The feasibility, effectiveness, and sustainability of a checklist was explored. METHODS:Literature on checklists and adherence to quality indicators in general medicine was reviewed to develop evidence-based measures for the IBCD checklist: (I) pneumococcal immunization, (B) pressure ulcers (bedsores), (C) catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs), and (D) deep venous thrombosis (DVT) were considered conditions highly relevant to the quality of care in general medicine inpatients. The checklist was used by attending physicians during rounds to remind residents to perform four actions related to these measures. Charts were audited to document actions prompted by the checklist. RESULTS:The IBCD checklist was associated with significantly increased documentation of and adherence to care processes associated with these four quality indicators. Seventy percent (46/66) of general medicine teams during the intervention period of July 2010-March 2011 voluntarily used the IBCD checklist for 1,168 (54%) of 2,161 patients. During the intervention period, average adherence for all four checklist items increased from 68% on admission to 82% after checklist use (p < .001). Average adherence after checklist use was also higher when compared to a historical control group from one year before implementation (82% versus 50%, p < .0001). In the six weeks after the checklist was transitioned to the electronic medical record, IBCD was noted in documentation of 133 (59%) of 226 patients admitted to general medicine. CONCLUSION:A checklist is a useful and sustainable tool to improve adherence to, and documentation of, care processes specific to quality indicators in general medicine.
Project description:This study aimed to explore factors associated with patient satisfaction of outpatient medical care in Malaysia. A cross-sectional exit survey was conducted among 340 outpatients aged between 13 and 80 years after successful clinical consultations and treatment acquirements using convenience sampling at the outpatient medical care of Tengku Ampuan Rahimah Hospital (HTAR), Malaysia, being the country's busiest medical outpatient facility. A survey that consisted of sociodemography, socioeconomic, and health characteristics and the validated Short-Form Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSQ-18) scale were used. Patient satisfaction was the highest in terms of service factors or tangible priorities, particularly "technical quality" and "accessibility and convenience," but satisfaction was low in terms of service orientation of doctors, particularly the "time spent with doctor," "interpersonal manners," and "communication" during consultations. Gender, income level, and purpose of visit to the clinic were important correlates of patient satisfaction. Effort to improve service orientation among doctors through periodical professional development programs at hospital and national level is essential to boost the country's health service satisfaction.
Project description:BackgroundKnee osteoarthritis is a common problem, but often underdiagnosed and undertreated in primary care as compared to evidence-based guidelines. Educational outreach visits are an effective strategy to improve guideline adherence, but its contribution to knee osteoarthritis management is largely unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the overall effectiveness of educational outreach visits on process quality indicators for knee osteoarthritis management, more specifically on the referral for physical therapy.MethodsAn educational intervention study, non-randomized and controlled, was designed for general practitioners (GPs) in Belgium. During four months, 426 GPs were visited by academic detailers and allocated to the intervention group. The control group was selected from GPs not visited by academic detailers during the study period. Six months post-intervention, both groups received a questionnaire with two case-vignettes to measure the effectiveness of the educational outreach. Outcomes were assessed with a Belgian set of quality indicators for knee osteoarthritis management and focused on the number of prescriptions for appropriate physical therapy (i.e. muscle strengthening, aerobic, functional or range of motion exercises) and the adherence to eight additional quality indicators related to knee osteoarthritis management. For the analysis, multivariable logistic regression models were used and Generalized Estimating Equations to handle the correlation between the multiple results per GP.ResultsThe intervention group showed a tendency to prescribe more frequently at least one appropriate physical therapy for a case (43.8%), compared to the control group (31.3%, p = 0.057). Muscle strengthening exercises were the most frequently prescribed therapy with 37.0% in the intervention versus 26.9% in the control group. The adherence to the other quality indicators showed no significant difference between the intervention and control group and varied between 8.9 and 100% in the intervention group.ConclusionsThis intervention did not alter significantly the adherence to quality indicators and in particular the probability of prescribing physical therapy. To change general practitioners' prescription behavior, more extensive or combined interventional approaches seem warranted.