Estimating the incidence and the economic burden of third and fourth-degree obstetric tears in the English NHS: an observational study using propensity score matching.

Obstetric care is a high-risk area in healthcare delivery, so it is essential to have up-to-date quantitative evidence in this area to inform policy decisions regarding these services. In light of this, the objective of this study is to investigate the incidence and economic burden of third and fourth-degree lacerations in the English National Health Service (NHS) using recent national data. We used coded inpatient data from Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) for the financial years from 2010/2011 to 2013/2014 for all females that gave birth during that period in the English NHS. Using HES, we used pre-existing safety indicator algorithms to calculate the incidence of third and fourth-degree obstetric tears and employed a propensity score matching method to estimate the excess length of stay and economic burden associated with these events. Observed rates per 1000 inpatient episodes in 2010/2011 and 2013/2014, respectively: Patient Safety Indicator-trauma during vaginal delivery with instrument (PSI 18)=84.16 and 91.24; trauma during vaginal delivery without instrument (PSI 19)=29.78 and 33.43; trauma during caesarean delivery (PSI 20)=3.61 and 4.56. Estimated overall (all PSIs) economic burden for 2010/2011=£10.7 million and for 2013/2014=£14.5 million, expressed in 2013/2014 prices. Despite many initiatives targeting the quality of maternity care in the NHS, the incidence of third and fourth-degree lacerations has increased during the observed period which signals that quality improvement efforts in obstetric care may not be reducing incidence rates. Our conservative estimates of the financial burden of these events appear low relative to total NHS expenditure for these years

The impact of primary health care and specialist physician supply on amenable mortality in Mexico (2000–2015): Panel data analysis using system-Generalized Method of Moments

The study had a three-fold objective: (i) to estimate the amenable mortality rates and trends at a national and state level between 2000 and 2015 in Mexico; (ii) to estimate the contribution and trends of various causes of death to overall amenable mortality; and (iii) to determine the association between health system inputs and amenable mortality for the period 2000–2015. We used a panel dataset for the period 2000–2015. The following health care inputs were used in the analysis: density of general practitioners, specialists and nurses, as well as density of hospital beds. We find that amenable mortality fell from 136 per 100,000 in 2000, to 124.1 per 100,000 in 2015 nationally, with significant heterogeneity in the trends across states. Mortality due to infectious diseases, diseases of childhood, and cardiovascular diseases decreased, while deaths due to other non-communicable diseases, such as diabetes, increased. There was a significant negative association between the density of general practitioners and specialist physicians, and amenable mortality. Our results indicate that reducing the burden of non-communicable diseases must be a health system priority. Improvements in primary health care could lead to improved disease detection and earlier diagnosis which could further reduce amenable mortality in Mexico

Effectiveness of UK provider financial incentives on quality of care: a systematic review

Background: Provider financial incentives are being increasingly adopted to help improve standards of care while promoting efficiency. / Aim: To review the UK evidence on whether provider financial incentives are an effective way of improving the quality of health care. / Design and setting: Systematic review of UK evidence, undertaken in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. / Method: MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched in August 2016. Original articles that assessed the relationship between UK provider financial incentives and a quantitative measure of quality of health care were included. Studies showing improvement for all measures of quality of care were defined as ‘positive’, those that were ‘intermediate’ showed improvement in some measures, and those classified as ‘negative’ showed a worsening of measures. Studies showing no effect were documented as such. Quality was assessed using the Downs and Black quality checklist. / Results: Of the 232 published articles identified by the systematic search, 28 were included. Of these, nine reported positive effects of incentives on quality of care, 16 reported intermediate effects, two reported no effect, and one reported a negative effect. Quality assessment scores for included articles ranged from 15 to 19, out of a maximum of 22 points. / Conclusion: The effects of UK provider financial incentives on healthcare quality are unclear. Owing to this uncertainty and their significant costs, use of them may be counterproductive to their goal of improving healthcare quality and efficiency. UK policymakers should be cautious when implementing these incentives — if used, they should be subject to careful long-term monitoring and evaluation. Further research is needed to assess whether provider financial incentives represent a cost-effective intervention to improve the quality of care delivered in the UK

Systematic review of economic analyses in patient safety: a protocol designed to measure development in the scope and quality of evidence.

Recent avoidable failures in patient care highlight the ongoing need for evidence to support improvements in patient safety. According to the most recent reviews, there is a dearth of economic evidence related to patient safety. These reviews characterise an evidence gap in terms of the scope and quality of evidence available to support resource allocation decisions. This protocol is designed to update and improve on the reviews previously conducted to determine the extent of methodological progress in economic analyses in patient safety. A broad search strategy with two core themes for original research (excluding opinion pieces and systematic reviews) in 'patient safety' and 'economic analyses' has been developed. Medline, Econlit and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database bibliographic databases will be searched from January 2007 using a combination of medical subject headings terms and research-derived search terms (see table 1). The method is informed by previous reviews on this topic, published in 2012. Screening, risk of bias assessment (using the Cochrane collaboration tool) and economic evaluation quality assessment (using the Drummond checklist) will be conducted by two independent reviewers, with arbitration by a third reviewer as needed. Studies with a low risk of bias will be assessed using the Drummond checklist. High-quality economic evaluations are those that score >20/35. A qualitative synthesis of evidence will be performed using a data collection tool to capture the study design(s) employed, population(s), setting(s), disease area(s), intervention(s) and outcome(s) studied. Methodological quality scores will be compared with previous reviews where possible. Effect size(s) and estimate uncertainty will be captured and used in a quantitative synthesis of high-quality evidence, where possible. Formal ethical approval is not required as primary data will not be collected. The results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication, presentations and social media. CRD42017057853

Elective cardiovascular care in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic: managing tragic choices

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to significant morbidity and mortality globally. As health systems grapple with caring for patients affected with COVID-19, cardiovascular procedures that are deemed 'elective' have been postponed. Guidelines concerning which cardiac procedures should be performed during the pandemic vary by specialty and geography in the USA. We propose a clinical heuristic to guide individual physicians and governing bodies in their decision making regarding which cardiac procedures should be performed during the COVID-19 pandemic using the behavioural economics concept of heuristics and ecological rationality

Patient Choice of Health Care Providers in China: Primary Care Facilities versus Hospitals

As China’s health system is faced with challenges of overcrowded hospitals, there is a great need to better understand the recent patterns and determinants of people’s choice between primary care facilities and hospitals for outpatient care. Based on recent individual-level data from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Survey (CHARLS) and official province-level data from China health statistical yearbooks, we examine the patterns of outpatient visits to primary care facilities versus hospitals among middle-aged and older individuals and explore both supply- and demand-side correlates that explain these patterns. We find that 53% of outpatient visits were paid to primary care facilities as opposed to hospitals in 2015, compared to 60% in 2011. Both supply and demand factors were associated with this decline. On the supply side, we find that the density of primary care facilities did not account for this decline, but higher densities of hospitals and licensed doctors were associated with lower use of primary care facilities. On the demand side, we find that individuals with higher socioeconomic status and greater health care needs were less likely to use primary health care facilities. Our findings suggest that a high concentration of health care professionals in hospitals diverts patients away from primary care facilities. Staffing the primary care facilities with a well-trained health care workforce is the key to a well-functioning primary care system. The findings also suggest a need to address demand-side inequality issues