Factors affecting the initiation of a shared decision making program in obstetric practices

As healthcare systems progress toward initiatives that increase patient engagement, stake-holder hopes are that shared decision making (SDM) will become routine practice. Yet, there is limited empirical evidence to guide such SDM program implementations, particularly in obstetric practices. The first stage of any project implementation is the “initiation stage”, in which project leaders define a project’s purpose and stakeholders and structures are put in place to support the new initiative. Our study’s objective was to identify factors affecting the initiation stage of an SDM program implementation project for TOLAC, trial of labor after Cesarean. We conducted a multiple-case study of an SDM program implementation in three obstetric settings in Washington State. The research design and analysis were guided by implementation science frameworks and project management literature. Data sources included interviews with key informants from the State, SDM tool vendors, and three project sites, as well as implementation documents. The study results provide insight into how the identified project implementation factors provide an essential foundation for informing project planning, execution, and reflection/evaluation. In this study, the State’s decision aid certification program pressured the project sites to shape the project purpose and engage stakeholders that would meet immediate project requirements (specifically, state require-ments). The study reveals that external demands may not be in perfect alignment with the internal necessities required for an SDM program’s long-term viability and sustainability. Findings may be used by implementers and researchers to model and strategize the early stages of SDM program implementation projects, particularly in the obstetric setting

Outbreak of pandemic influenza A/H1N1 2009 in Nepal

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The 2009 flu pandemic is a global outbreak of a new strain of H1N1 influenza virus. Pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009 has posed a serious public health challenge world-wide. Nepal has started Laboratory diagnosis of Pandemic influenza A/H1N1 from mid June 2009 though active screening of febrile travellers with respiratory symptoms was started from April 27, 2009.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Out of 609 collected samples, 302 (49.6%) were Universal Influenza A positive. Among the influenza A positive samples, 172(28.3%) were positive for Pandemic influenza A/H1N1 and 130 (21.3%) were Seasonal influenza A. Most of the pandemic cases (53%) were found among young people with ≤ 20 years. Case Fatality Ratio for Pandemic influenza A/H1N1 in Nepal was 1.74%. Upon Molecular characterization, all the isolated pandemic influenza A/H1N1 2009 virus found in Nepal were antigenically and genetically related to the novel influenza A/CALIFORNIA/07/2009-LIKE (H1N1)v type.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The Pandemic 2009 influenza virus found in Nepal were antigenically and genetically related to the novel A/CALIFORNIA/07/2009-LIKE (H1N1)v type.</p

Cost-effectiveness of HBV and HCV screening strategies:a systematic review of existing modelling techniques

Introduction: Studies evaluating the cost-effectiveness of screening for Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) and Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) are generally heterogeneous in terms of risk groups, settings, screening intervention, outcomes and the economic modelling framework. It is therefore difficult to compare cost-effectiveness results between studies. This systematic review aims to summarise and critically assess existing economic models for HBV and HCV in order to identify the main methodological differences in modelling approaches. Methods: A structured search strategy was developed and a systematic review carried out. A critical assessment of the decision-analytic models was carried out according to the guidelines and framework developed for assessment of decision-analytic models in Health Technology Assessment of health care interventions. Results: The overall approach to analysing the cost-effectiveness of screening strategies was found to be broadly consistent for HBV and HCV. However, modelling parameters and related structure differed between models, producing different results. More recent publications performed better against a performance matrix, evaluating model components and methodology. Conclusion: When assessing screening strategies for HBV and HCV infection, the focus should be on more recent studies, which applied the latest treatment regimes, test methods and had better and more complete data on which to base their models. In addition to parameter selection and associated assumptions, careful consideration of dynamic versus static modelling is recommended. Future research may want to focus on these methodological issues. In addition, the ability to evaluate screening strategies for multiple infectious diseases, (HCV and HIV at the same time) might prove important for decision makers

Cost Effectiveness of a Potential Vaccine for Human papillomavirus

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, usually a sexually transmitted disease, is a risk factor for cervical cancer. Given the substantial disease and death associated with HPV and cervical cancer, development of a prophylactic HPV vaccine is a public health priority. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of vaccinating adolescent girls for high-risk HPV infections relative to current practice. A vaccine with a 75% probability of immunity against high-risk HPV infection resulted in a life-expectancy gain of 2.8 days or 4.0 quality-adjusted life days at a cost of $246 relative to current practice (incremental cost effectiveness of$22,755/quality-adjusted life year [QALY]). If all 12-year-old girls currently living in the United States were vaccinated, >1,300 deaths from cervical cancer would be averted during their lifetimes. Vaccination of girls against high-risk HPV is relatively cost effective even when vaccine efficacy is low. If the vaccine efficacy rate is 35%, the cost effectiveness increases to $52,398/QALY. Although gains in life expectancy may be modest at the individual level, population benefits are substantial

Impact of H1N1 on Socially Disadvantaged Populations: Systematic Review

The burden of H1N1 among socially disadvantaged populations is unclear. We aimed to synthesize hospitalization, severe illness, and mortality data associated with pandemic A/H1N1/2009 among socially disadvantaged populations.Studies were identified through searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, scanning reference lists, and contacting experts. Studies reporting hospitalization, severe illness, and mortality attributable to laboratory-confirmed 2009 H1N1 pandemic among socially disadvantaged populations (e.g., ethnic minorities, low-income or lower-middle-income economy countries [LIC/LMIC]) were included. Two independent reviewers conducted screening, data abstraction, and quality appraisal (Newcastle Ottawa Scale). Random effects meta-analysis was conducted using SAS and Review Manager.Sixty-two studies including 44,777 patients were included after screening 787 citations and 164 full-text articles. The prevalence of hospitalization for H1N1 ranged from 17-87% in high-income economy countries (HIC) and 11-45% in LIC/LMIC. Of those hospitalized, the prevalence of intensive care unit (ICU) admission and mortality was 6-76% and 1-25% in HIC; and 30% and 8-15%, in LIC/LMIC, respectively. There were significantly more hospitalizations among ethnic minorities versus non-ethnic minorities in two studies conducted in North America (1,313 patients, OR 2.26 [95% CI: 1.53-3.32]). There were no differences in ICU admissions (n = 8 studies, 15,352 patients, OR 0.84 [0.69-1.02]) or deaths (n = 6 studies, 14,757 patients, OR 0.85 [95% CI: 0.73-1.01]) among hospitalized patients in HIC. Sub-group analysis indicated that the meta-analysis results were not likely affected by confounding. Overall, the prevalence of hospitalization, severe illness, and mortality due to H1N1 was high for ethnic minorities in HIC and individuals from LIC/LMIC. However, our results suggest that there were little differences in the proportion of hospitalization, severe illness, and mortality between ethnic minorities and non-ethnic minorities living in HIC