Activity-based funding (ABF) of hospitals is a policy intervention intended to re-shape incentives across health systems through the use of diagnosis-related groups. Many countries are adopting or ...actively promoting ABF. We assessed the effect of ABF on key measures potentially affecting patients and health care systems: mortality (acute and post-acute care); readmission rates; discharge rate to post-acute care following hospitalization; severity of illness; volume of care.
We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of the worldwide evidence produced since 1980. We included all studies reporting original quantitative data comparing the impact of ABF versus alternative funding systems in acute care settings, regardless of language. We searched 9 electronic databases (OVID MEDLINE, EMBASE, OVID Healthstar, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, Health Technology Assessment, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Business Source), hand-searched reference lists, and consulted with experts. Paired reviewers independently screened for eligibility, abstracted data, and assessed study credibility according to a pre-defined scoring system, resolving conflicts by discussion or adjudication.
Of 16,565 unique citations, 50 US studies and 15 studies from 9 other countries proved eligible (i.e. Australia, Austria, England, Germany, Israel, Italy, Scotland, Sweden, Switzerland). We found consistent and robust differences between ABF and no-ABF in discharge to post-acute care, showing a 24% increase with ABF (pooled relative risk = 1.24, 95% CI 1.18-1.31). Results also suggested a possible increase in readmission with ABF, and an apparent increase in severity of illness, perhaps reflecting differences in diagnostic coding. Although we found no consistent, systematic differences in mortality rates and volume of care, results varied widely across studies, some suggesting appreciable benefits from ABF, and others suggesting deleterious consequences.
Transitioning to ABF is associated with important policy- and clinically-relevant changes. Evidence suggests substantial increases in admissions to post-acute care following hospitalization, with implications for system capacity and equitable access to care. High variability in results of other outcomes leaves the impact in particular settings uncertain, and may not allow a jurisdiction to predict if ABF would be harmless. Decision-makers considering ABF should plan for likely increases in post-acute care admissions, and be aware of the large uncertainty around impacts on other critical outcomes.
To examine the association between healthcare-related regrets and sleep difficulties among nurses and physicians, we surveyed 240 nurses and 220 physicians at the University Hospitals of Geneva. ...Regret intensity and regret coping were measured using validated scales. Sleep difficulties were measured using the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), and an additional question assessed the frequency of sleeping pill use. After controlling for sex, profession, years of experience, rate of employment, and depression as well as for all other regret-related variables, the following variables remained significantly associated with self-rated severity of insomnia: regret intensity (slope = 1.32, p = 0.007, 95%CI: 0.36; 2.29, std. coefficient = 0.16) and maladaptive (e.g., rumination) emotion-focused coping (slope = 1.57, p = 0.002, 95%CI: 0.60; 2.55, std. coefficient = 0.17) remained significant predictors of self-rated insomnia severity. If these cross-sectional associations represent causal effects, the development of regret-management programs may represent a promising approach to mitigating sleep difficulties of healthcare professionals.
Tools for shared decision-making (e.g. decision aids) are intended to support health care professionals and patients engaged in clinical encounters involving shared decision-making. However, decision ...aids are hard to produce, and onerous to update. Consequently, they often do not reflect best current evidence, and show limited uptake in practice. In response, we initiated the Sharing Evidence to Inform Treatment decisions (SHARE-IT) project. Our goal was to develop and refine a new generation of decision aids that are generically produced along digitally structured guidelines and evidence summaries.
Applying principles of human-centred design and following the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) and GRADE methods for trustworthy evidence summaries we developed a decision aid prototype in collaboration with the Developing and Evaluating Communication strategies to support Informed Decisions and practice based on Evidence project (DECIDE). We iteratively user-tested the prototype in clinical consultations between clinicians and patients. Semi-structured interviews of participating clinicians and patients were conducted. Qualitative content analysis of both user-testing sessions and interviews was performed and results categorized according to a revised Morville's framework of user-experience. We made it possible to produce, publish and use these decision aids in an electronic guideline authoring and publication platform (MAGICapp).
Direct observations and analysis of user-testing of 28 clinical consultations between physicians and patients informed four major iterations that addressed readability, understandability, usability and ways to cope with information overload. Participants reported that the tool supported natural flow of the conversation and induced a positive shift in consultation habits towards shared decision-making. We integrated the functionality of SHARE-IT decision aids in MAGICapp, which has since generated numerous decision aids.
Our study provides a proof of concept that encounter decision aids can be generically produced from GRADE evidence summaries and clinical guidelines. Online authoring and publication platforms can help scale up production including continuous updating of electronic encounter decision aids, fully integrated with evidence summaries and clinical practice guidelines.
ObjectiveTo establish the prevalence of long-term and serious harms of medical cannabis for chronic pain.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CENTRAL ...from inception to 1 April 2020.Study selectionNon-randomised studies reporting on harms of medical cannabis or cannabinoids in adults or children living with chronic pain with ≥4 weeks of follow-up.Data extraction and synthesisA parallel guideline panel provided input on the design and interpretation of the systematic review, including selection of adverse events for consideration. Two reviewers, working independently and in duplicate, screened the search results, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We used random-effects models for all meta-analyses and the Grades of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to evaluate the certainty of evidence.ResultsWe identified 39 eligible studies that enrolled 12 143 adult patients with chronic pain. Very low certainty evidence suggests that adverse events are common (prevalence: 26.0%; 95% CI 13.2% to 41.2%) among users of medical cannabis for chronic pain, particularly any psychiatric adverse events (prevalence: 13.5%; 95% CI 2.6% to 30.6%). Very low certainty evidence, however, indicates serious adverse events, adverse events leading to discontinuation, cognitive adverse events, accidents and injuries, and dependence and withdrawal syndrome are less common and each typically occur in fewer than 1 in 20 patients. We compared studies with <24 weeks and ≥24 weeks of cannabis use and found more adverse events reported among studies with longer follow-up (test for interaction p<0.01). Palmitoylethanolamide was usually associated with few to no adverse events. We found insufficient evidence addressing the harms of medical cannabis compared with other pain management options, such as opioids.ConclusionsThere is very low certainty evidence that adverse events are common among people living with chronic pain who use medical cannabis or cannabinoids, but that few patients experience serious adverse events.
Encounter decision aids (EDAs) are tools that can support shared decision making (SDM), up to the clinical encounter. However, adoption of these tools has been limited, as they are hard to produce, ...to keep up-to-date, and are not available for many decisions. The MAGIC Evidence Ecosystem Foundation has created a new generation of decision aids that are generically produced along digitally structured guidelines and evidence summaries, in an electronic authoring and publication platform (MAGICapp). We explored general practitioners' (GPs) and patients' experiences with five selected decision aids linked to BMJ Rapid Recommendations in primary care.
We applied a qualitative user testing design to evaluate user experiences for both GPs and patients. We translated five EDAs relevant to primary care, and observed the clinical encounters of 11 GPs when they used the EDA with their patients. We conducted a semi-structured interview with each patient after the consultation and a think-aloud interview with each GPs after multiple consultations. We used the Qualitative Analysis Guide (QUAGOL) for data analysis.
Direct observations and user testing analysis of 31 clinical encounters showed an overall positive experience. The EDAs created better involvement in decision making and resulted in meaningful insights for patients and clinicians. The design and its interactive, multilayered structure made the tool enjoyable and well-organized. Difficult terminology, scales and numbers hindered understanding of certain information, which was sometimes perceived as too specialized or even intimidating. GPs thought the EDA was not suitable for every patient. They perceived a learning curve was required and the need for time investment was a concern. The EDAs were considered trustworthy as they were provided by a credible source.
This study showed that EDAs can be useful tools in primary care by supporting actual shared decision making and enhancing patient involvement. The graphical approach and clear representation help patients better understand their options. To overcome barriers such as health literacy and GPs attitudes, effort is still needed to make the EDAs as accessible, intuitive and inclusive as possible through use of plain language, uniform design, rapid access and training.
The study protocol was approved by the The Research Ethics Committee UZ/KU Leuven (Belgium) on 31-10-2019 with reference number MP011977.
Abstract: Validation of a 15-item Care-related Regret Coping Scale for Health-care Professionals (RCS-HCP): Delphine Sophie COURVOISIER, et al. Department of Psychology, Harvard University, USA - ...Objectives: Coping with difficult care-related situations is a common challenge for health-care professionals. How these professionals deal with the regrets they may experience following one of the many decisions and interventions they must make every day can have an impact on their own health and quality of life, and also on their patient care practices. To identify professionals most at need for extra support, development and validation of a tool measuring coping style are needed. Methods: We performed a survey of physicians and nurses of a French-speaking University hospital; 469 health-care professionals responded to the survey, and 175 responded to the same survey one-month later. Regret was assessed with the regret coping scale developed for this study, self-report questions on the frequency of regretted situations and the intensity of regret. Construct validity was assessed using measures of health-care professionals' quality of life (including job and life satisfaction, and self-reported health) as well as sleep problems and depression. Results: Based on factor analysis and item response analysis, the initial 31-item scale was shortened to 15 items, which measured three types of strategies: problem-focused strategies (i.e., trying to find solutions, talking to colleagues) and two types of emotion-focused strategies, A (i.e., self-blame, rumination) and B (e.g., acceptance, emotional distance). All subscales showed high internal consistency (α>0.85). Overall, as expected, problem-focused and emotion-focused B strategies correlated with higher quality of life, fewer sleep problems and less depression, and emotion-focused A strategies showed the opposite pattern. Conclusions: The regret coping scale (RCS-HCP) is a valid and reliable measure of coping abilities of hospital-based health-care professionals.
ObjectivesInfographics have the potential to enhance knowledge translation and implementation of clinical practice guidelines at the point of care. They can provide a synoptic view of ...recommendations, their rationale and supporting evidence. They should be understandable and easy to use. Little evaluation of these infographics regarding user experience has taken place. We explored general practitioners’ experiences with five selected BMJ Rapid Recommendation infographics suited for primary care.MethodsAn iterative, qualitative user testing design was applied on two consecutive groups of 10 general practitioners for five selected infographics. The physicians used the infographics before clinical encounters and we performed hybrid think-aloud interviews afterwards. 20 interviews were analysed using the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven.ResultsMany clinicians reported that the infographics were simple and rewarding to use, time-efficient and easy to understand. They were perceived as innovative and their knowledge basis as trustworthy and supportive for decision-making. The interactive, expandable format was preferred over a static version as general practitioners focused mainly on the core message. Rapid access through the electronic health record was highly desirable. The main issues were about the use of complex scales and terminology. Understanding terminology related to evidence appraisal as well as the interpretation of statistics and unfamiliar scales remained difficult, despite the infographics.ConclusionsGeneral practitioners perceive infographics as useful tools for guideline translation and implementation in primary care. They offer information in an enjoyable and user friendly format and are used mainly for rapid, tailored and just in time information retrieval. We recommend future infographic producers to provide information as concise as possible, carefully define the core message and explore ways to enhance the understandability of statistics and difficult concepts related to evidence appraisal.Trial registration numberMP011977.
Moral distress - such as feeling strong regret over difficult patient situations - is common among nurses and physicians. Regret intensity, as well as the coping strategies used to manage regrets, ...may also influence the health and sickness absence of healthcare professionals. The objective of this study was to determine if the experience of regret related to difficult care-related situations is associated with poor health and sick leave and if coping strategies mediate these associations. Two cross-sectional surveys were conducted in Switzerland (Geneva, 2011 and Zurich, 2014). Outcomes were self-rated health (SRH) and sick leave in the last 6 months. We examined the associations of regret intensity with the most important care-related regret, number of recent care-related regrets, and coping strategies, using regressions models. Among 775 respondents, most reported very good SRH and 9.7% indicated absence from work during four working days or more. Intensity of the most important regret was associated with poor SRH among nurses and physicians, and with higher sick leave among nurses. Maladaptive emotion-focused strategies were associated with poor SRH among nurses, whereas adaptive emotion-focused strategies were positively associated with higher SRH and lower sick leave among physicians. Because care-related regret is an integral part of clinical practice in acute care hospitals, helping physicians and, especially, nurses to learn how to deal with negative events may yield beneficial consequences at the individual, patient care, and institutional level.
High-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) is a type of non-invasive advanced respiratory support that allows the delivery of high-flow and humidified air through a nasal cannula. It can deliver a higher inspired ...oxygen fraction than conventional oxygen therapy (COT), improves secretion clearance, has a small positive end-expiratory pressure, and exhibits a washout effect on the upper air space that diminishes dead space ventilation. HFNO has been shown to reduce the work of breathing in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) and has become an interesting option for non-invasive respiratory support. Evidence published before the COVID-19 pandemic suggested a possible reduction of the need for invasive mechanical ventilation compared to COT. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a substantial increase in AHRF worldwide, overwhelming both acute and intensive care unit capacity in most countries. This triggered new trials, adding to the body of evidence on HFNO in AHRF and its possible benefits compared to COT or non-invasive ventilation. We have summarized and discussed this recent evidence to inform the best supportive strategy in AHRF both related and unrelated to COVID-19.
PDF
