Household catastrophic healthcare expenditure and impoverishment due to rotavirus gastroenteritis requiring hospitalization in Malaysia.

BACKGROUND: While healthcare costs for rotavirus gastroenteritis requiring hospitalization may be burdensome on households in Malaysia, exploration on the distribution and catastrophic impact of these expenses on households are lacking. OBJECTIVES: We assessed the economic burden, levels and distribution of catastrophic healthcare expenditure, the poverty impact on households and inequities related to healthcare payments for acute gastroenteritis requiring hospitalization in Malaysia. METHODS: A two-year prospective, hospital-based study was conducted from 2008 to 2010 in an urban (Kuala Lumpur) and rural (Kuala Terengganu) setting in Malaysia. All children under the age of 5 years admitted for acute gastroenteritis were included. Patients were screened for rotavirus and information on healthcare expenditure was obtained. RESULTS: Of the 658 stool samples collected at both centers, 248 (38%) were positive for rotavirus. Direct and indirect costs incurred were significantly higher in Kuala Lumpur compared with Kuala Terengganu (US$222 Vs. US$45; p<0.001). The mean direct and indirect costs for rotavirus gastroenteritis consisted 20% of monthly household income in Kuala Lumpur, as compared with only 5% in Kuala Terengganu. Direct medical costs paid out-of-pocket caused 141 (33%) households in Kuala Lumpur to experience catastrophic expenditure and 11 (3%) households to incur poverty. However in Kuala Terengganu, only one household (0.5%) experienced catastrophic healthcare expenditure and none were impoverished. The lowest income quintile in Kuala Lumpur was more likely to experience catastrophic payments compared to the highest quintile (87% vs 8%). The concentration index for out-of-pocket healthcare payments was closer to zero at Kuala Lumpur (0.03) than at Kuala Terengganu (0.24). CONCLUSIONS: While urban households were wealthier, healthcare expenditure due to gastroenteritis had more catastrophic and poverty impact on the urban poor. Universal rotavirus vaccination would reduce both disease burden and health inequities in Malaysia

Are health care professionals able to judge cancer patients' health care preferences correctly? A cross-sectional study

Background: Health care for cancer patients is primarily shaped by health care professionals. This raises the question to what extent health care professionals are aware of patients' preferences, needs and values. The aim of this study was to explore to what extent there is concordance between patients' preferences in cancer care and patients' preferences as estimated by health care professionals. We also examined whether there were gender differences between health care professionals with regard to the degree in which they can estimate patients' preferences correctly. Methods: To obtain unbiased insight into the specific preferences of cancer patients, we developed the 'Cancer patients' health care preferences' questionnaire'. With this questionnaire we assessed a large sample of cancer patients (n = 386). Next, we asked health care professionals (medical oncologists, nurses and policymakers, n = 60) to fill out this questionnaire and to indicate preferences they thought cancer patients would have. Mean scores between groups were compared using Mann-Whitney tests. Effect sizes (ESs) were calculated for statistically significant differences. Results: We found significant differences (ESs 0.31 to 0.90) between patients and professionals for eight out of twenty-one scales and two out of eight single items. Patients valued care aspects related to expertise and attitude of health care providers and accessibility of services as more important than the professionals thought they would do. Health care professionals overestimated the value that patients set on particularly organisational and environmental aspects. We found significant gender-related differences between the professionals (ESs 0.69 to 1.39) for eight out of twenty-one scales and two out of eight single items. When there were significant differences between male and female healthcare professionals in their estimation of patients health care preferences, female health care professionals invariably had higher scores. Generally, female health care professionals did not estimate patients' preferences and needs better than their male colleagues. Conclusions: Health care professionals are reasonably well able to make a correct estimation of patients preferences, but they should be aware of their own bias and use additional resources to gain a better understanding of patients' specific preferences for each patient is different and ultimately the care needs and preferences will also be unique to the person

Faecal immunochemical tests (FIT) can help to rule out colorectal cancer in patients presenting in primary care with lower abdominal symptoms:a systematic review conducted to inform new NICE DG30 diagnostic guidance

__Background:__ This study has attempted to assess the effectiveness of quantitative faecal immunochemical tests (FIT) for triage of people presenting with lower abdominal symptoms, where a referral to secondary care for investigation of suspected colorectal cancer (CRC) is being considered, particularly when the 2-week criteria are not met. __Methods:__ We conducted a systematic review following published guidelines for systematic reviews of diagnostic tests. Twenty-one resources were searched up until March 2016. Summary estimates were calculated using a bivariate model or a random-effects logistic regression model. __Results:__ Nine studies are included in this review. One additional study, included in our systematic review, was provided as 'academic in confidence' and cannot be described herein. When FIT was based on a single faecal sample and a cut-off of 10 μg Hb/g faeces, sensitivity estimates indicated that a negative result using either the OC-Sensor or HM-JACKarc may be adequate to rule out nearly all CRC; the summary estimate of sensitivity for the OC-Sensor was 92.1%, based on four studies, and the only study of HM-JACKarc to assess the 10 μg Hb/g faeces cut-off reported a sensitivity of 100%. The corresponding specificity estimates were 85.8% (95% CI 78.3-91.0%) and 76.6%, respectively. When the diagnostic criterion was changed to include lower grades of neoplasia, i.e. the target condition included higher risk adenoma (HRA) as well as CRC, the rule-out performance of both FIT assays was reduced. __Conclusions:__ There is evidence to suggest that triage using FIT at a cut-off around 10 μg Hb/g faeces has the potential to correctly rule out CRC and avoid colonoscopy in 75-80% of symptomatic patients. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO 4201603772

WSES Guidelines for the management of acute left sided colonic diverticulitis in the emergency setting

Acute left sided colonic diverticulitis is one of the most common clinical conditions encountered by surgeons in acute setting. A World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) Consensus Conference on acute diverticulitis was held during the 3rd World Congress of the WSES in Jerusalem, Israel, on July 7th, 2015. During this consensus conference the guidelines for the management of acute left sided colonic diverticulitis in the emergency setting were presented and discussed. This document represents the executive summary of the final guidelines approved by the consensus conference.Peer reviewe