Hospital specialists' private practice and its impact on the number of NHS patients treated and on the delay for elective surgery.

This paper analyses UK NHS waiting times and waiting lists for elective surgery looking at the hospital specialists' behaviour and the conflict of interest these may face when allowed to practice privately. We look at the relationship between the government as the health care purchaser and principal of a two-tier hierarchy, and two hospital specialists, the agents, that deal with elective and emergency treatement. Specialists are organised in a separated structure, each responsible for only one type of surgery (either elective or emergency). We formalise specialists' preferences when dealing with the two activities. We see how specialists' interest in the income obtained with private practice (and altruism) affects negatively (positively) the optimal NHS numbers treated and increases the waiting time for elective surgery. Asymmetry of information also has a negative impact on the NHS leading to fewer patients treated or higher transfers paid. If remuneration is based on performance, transfers have to take private practice into account. As a result, there may be benefits from extra investment so as to improve information systems as well as seeking out instruments for nurturing more altruistic behaviour on the part of the specialistswaiting times and lists; elective surgery; hospital specialists

Contract theory and the optimal delivery of health care in presence of waiting times and waiting lists

EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo

Export Credit Gurantees, Moral Hazard and Exports Quality

We analyse the role played by Export Credit Guarantees (ECGs) to encourage exports to developing countries. The existence of moral hazard on the side of the firm is introduced. We show that the inability of the exporter's government to verify the actual quality of the product will limit its ability to encourage trade through ECGs, once the coverage provided goes beyond a certain threshold. This result provides a rationale behind the limited coverage on ECGs.export credit guarantees; offsets; moral hazard

Psychometric evaluation of the PROMIS SD-SF-8b instrument in individuals experiencing vasomotor symptoms due to menopause

Abstract Background Women with vasomotor symptoms (VMS) due to menopause frequently experience poor sleep quality. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Sleep Disturbance – Short Form 8b (PROMIS SD-SF-8b) has been developed to assess sleep disturbance. The study objective was to use data from the fezolinetant SKYLIGHT 1 and 2 studies in individuals with VMS to assess the psychometric properties of the PROMIS SD-SF-8b. Methods Individuals (aged ≥ 40–≤65 years) with moderate-to-severe VMS (≥ 7 hot flashes/day) were enrolled. Besides PROMIS SD-SF-8b, eight other patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures were used for the psychometric evaluation. All the PRO assessments were completed at weeks 4 and 12 during the treatment period and most were completed at baseline. Psychometric analyses included factor analysis and reliability, construct validity, and sensitivity to change assessments. The within-patient threshold for a clinically meaningful change in sleep disturbance was derived. Results Overall, 1022 individuals were included from the SKYLIGHT 1 and 2 studies. Mean PROMIS SD-SF-8b total score at baseline was 26.80, which decreased to 22.68 at week 12, reflecting improved sleep disturbance. The confirmatory factor analysis supported the proposed PROMIS SD-SF-8b domain structure. Internal consistency was excellent, with Cronbach’s alpha values of 0.915 and 0.935 and a McDonald’s omega of 0.917. Item-to-item and item-total correlations were sufficient and moderate test-retest reliability was noted. The construct validity assessments showed that moderate Spearman rank correlations (r: 0.608 to 0.651) were observed between PROMIS SD-SF-8b total scores and measures of sleep disturbance and sleep-related impairment, and that significant differences were noted in the total scores across PRO categories. The responsiveness of PROMIS SD-SF-8b total scores was supported by the results from the correlations in change scores and comparisons of mean change scores by PRO categories. Statistically significant differences in mean scores were observed between responder and non-responder PRO groups. A PROMIS SD-SF-8b total score of 8 points was identified as the within-patient threshold to use to confirm a meaningful change in sleep disturbance. Conclusions The psychometric properties of the PROMIS SD-SF-8b support its use to measure sleep disturbance in women with VMS due to menopause. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov numbers: NCT04003155 and NCT04003142

Treating moderate-to-severe menopausal vasomotor symptoms with fezolinetant: analysis of responders using pooled data from two phase 3 studies (SKYLIGHT 1 and 2).

OBJECTIVES The aims of the study were to further characterize the efficacy of fezolinetant for the treatment of moderate-to-severe vasomotor symptoms (VMS) due to menopause using responder analysis and to investigate whether efficacy, not adjusted for placebo, resulted in clinically meaningful within-patient change. METHODS This prespecified analysis used pooled data from two phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (SKYLIGHT 1 and 2). Responders were those experiencing ≥50%, ≥75%, ≥90%, or 100% reduction in VMS frequency from baseline to weeks 4 and 12. Responder analysis was performed for patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures to evaluate participants achieving a clinically meaningful within-patient change (not placebo adjusted) at week 4 and 12 versus baseline. Single responders were based on outcomes of VMS frequency, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Sleep Disturbance-Short Form 8b Total Score, Menopause-Specific Quality of Life (MENQoL) Total Score, and MENQoL VMS Domain Score. Double and triple responder analyses combined VMS frequency plus one or more of the PRO. Patient Global Impression of Change VMS was deemed a suitable anchor measure for meaningful within-patient change in VMS frequency. RESULTS A greater proportion of fezolinetant-treated versus placebo-treated participants had ≥50%, ≥75%, ≥90%, or 100% reduction in VMS frequency from baseline to weeks 4 and 12. A greater proportion of responders were observed in the fezolinetant groups versus placebo at week 12 in all four single responder analyses. In the double and triple responder analyses, odds ratios were supportive of a beneficial effect for both doses of fezolinetant versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS Fezolinetant was associated with significantly higher within-patient clinically meaningful improvement in important PRO, including VMS frequency, PROMIS SD SF 8b Total Score, MENQoL Total Score, and MENQoL VMS Domain Score

Additional file 1 of Psychometric evaluation of the PROMIS SD-SF-8b instrument in individuals experiencing vasomotor symptoms due to menopause

Additional file 1: Further Methods. The other patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments included in this analysis. Table S1. Categories for change in anchor measure scores at weeks 4 and 12 – mean change. Table S2. Categories for change in anchor measure scores at weeks 4 and 12 – ROC curve. Table S3. Distribution of responses for PROMIS SD-SF-8b items. Table S4. Item-to-item correlation analysis. Table S5. Anchor evaluation: correlations between PROMIS SD-SF-8b total score and anchor change. Table S6. ROC curve analysis of PROMIS SD-SF-8b total score: responder versus non-responder

Fezolinetant impact on health-related quality of life for vasomotor symptoms due to the menopause: Pooled data from SKYLIGHT 1 and SKYLIGHT 2 randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE To assess the effect of fezolinetant treatment on health-related quality of life using pooled data from SKYLIGHT 1 and 2 studies. DESIGN Prespecified pooled analysis. SETTING USA, Canada, Europe; 2019-2021. POPULATION 1022 women aged ≥40 to ≤65 years with moderate-to-severe vasomotor symptoms (VMS; minimum average seven hot flushes/day), seeking treatment for VMS. METHODS Women were randomised to 12-week double-blind treatment with once-daily placebo or fezolinetant 30 or 45 mg. Completers entered a 40-week, active extension (those receiving fezolinetant continued that dose; those receiving placebo re-randomised to fezolinetant received 30 or 45 mg). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Mean changes from baseline to weeks 4 and 12 on Menopause-Specific Quality of Life (MENQoL) total and domain scores, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire specific to VMS (WPAI-VMS) domain scores, Patient Global Impression of Change in VMS (PGI-C VMS); percentages achieving PGI-C VMS of 'much better' (PGI-C VMS responders). Mean reduction was estimated using mixed model repeated measures analysis of covariance. RESULTS Fezolinetant 45 mg mean reduction over placebo in MENQoL total score was -0.57 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.75 to -0.39) at week 4 and -0.47 (95% CI -0.66 to -0.28) at week 12. Reductions were similar for 30 mg. MENQoL domain scores were also reduced and WPAI-VMS scores improved. Twice as many women receiving fezolinetant reported VMS were 'much better' than placebo based on PGI-C VMS assessment. CONCLUSIONS Fezolinetant treatment was associated with improvement in overall QoL, measured by MENQoL, and work productivity, measured by WPAI-VMS. A high proportion receiving fezolinetant felt VMS were 'much better' based on PGI-C VMS responder analysis

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field