Should Severity Assessments in Healthcare Priority Setting be Risk- and Time-Sensitive?

Background: Severity plays an essential role in healthcare priority setting. Still, severity is an under-theorised concept. One controversy concerns whether severity should be risk- and/or time-sensitive. The aim of this article is to provide a normative analysis of this question. Methods: A reflective equilibrium approach is used, where judgements and arguments concerning severity in preventive situations are related to overall normative judgements and background theories in priority-setting, aiming for consistency. Analysis, discussion, and conclusions: There is an argument for taking the risk of developing a condition into account, and we do this when we consider the risk of dying in the severity assessment. If severity is discounted according to risk, this will dilute severity, depending on how well we are able to delineate the population, which is dependent on the current level of knowledge. This will potentially have a more far-reaching effect when considering primary prevention, potentially the de-prioritisation of effective preventive treatments in relation to acute, less-effective treatments. The risk arguments are dependent on which population is being assessed. If we focus on the whole population at risk, with T-0 as the relevant population, this supports the risk argument. If we instead focus on the population of as-yet (at T-0) unidentified individuals who will develop the condition at T-1, risk will become irrelevant, and severity will not be risk sensitive. The strongest argument for time-sensitive severity (or for discounting future severity) is the future development of technology. On a short timescale, this will differ between different diagnoses, supporting individualised discounting. On a large timescale, a more general discounting might be acceptable. However, we need to also consider the systemic effects of allowing severity to be risk- and time-sensitive

Pharmacokinetics of cytosine arabinoside in cerebrospinal fluid and of its metabolite in leukemic cells

Concentrations of ara-CTP in leukemic cells isolated from CSF and of ara-C in lumbar CSF were measured following intraventricular ara-C administration in two girls with refractory meningeal leukemia. CSF samples were collected with a permanent intrathecal-lumbar catheter. In contrast to the comparatively short retention of ara-C in the CSF (t1/2 1.8 to 2.9 hours), there was a high accumulation and an extremely long retention of ara-CTP in the leukemic cells (t1/2 8.1 to 36 hours). The patients included in this study had an ara-C-resistant disease. No obvious relationship was seen between concentrations of ara-C in the CSF and of ara-CTP in the leukemic cells. Similar studies were performed after simultaneous intraventricular administration of hydrocortison and ara-C. Hydrocortison did not increase ara-CTP retention in the leukemic cells, nor did it effect CSF pleocytosis

Outcomes associated with higher relational continuity in the treatment of persons with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease : A systematic review

Background Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are chronic conditions where relational continuity of care, as in regularly meeting the same health care provider, creates opportunities for monitoring and adjustment of treatment based on an individual's changing needs, potentially affecting quality of delivered care. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the effects of relational continuity in the treatment of persons with asthma or COPD. Methods Eleven databases (CINAHL, Medline, PsycINFO, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, Database of Systematic Review of Effects, DARE, Epistemonikos, NICE Evidence Search, KSR Evidence and AHRQ) were searched between January 1, 2000, and February 1 - 4, 2021, for controlled and observational studies about relational continuity and health outcomes for persons with asthma and/or COPD. Inclusion criteria were studies investigating an index or aspect relevant to relational continuity between a health professional/team of health professionals and patients. After screening, and assessment of study relevance and quality by at least two independent reviewers, studies with acceptable risk of bias were included and summary data was extracted from the publications. Main outcomes were mortality, morbidity (including health care utilization) and cost measures. Syntheses without metanalyses were performed due to considerable study heterogeneity. The certainty of the summarized result was assessed using GRADE (the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). PROSPERO study registration number: CRD42020196518. Findings We identified 2824 unique references and included 15 studies (14 observational and 1 randomized controlled trial) in the review, from which results were derived for six outcomes. For persons with asthma or COPD we found that higher compared to lower relational continuity of care prevents premature mortality (low certainty; 2 studies, 111 545 participants), lowers risk of emergency department visits (low certainty, 5 studies, 362 305 participates) and risk of hospitalization (moderate certainty, 9 studies, 525 716 participants), and lowers health care costs (low certainty; 4 studies, 390 682 participants). Results regarding treatment adherence (1 study, 971 participants) and patient perceptions (3 studies, 2026 participants) were assessed as having very low certainty. Interpretation Low to moderate certainty evidence suggests that higher versus lower relational continuity of care for persons with asthma or COPD prevents premature mortality, lowers risks of unplanned health care utilization and reduces health care costs. The results may be of value when planning care for individuals and for policymakers in organizing health care and developing guidelines for treatment and follow-up routines

Relational continuity may give better clinical outcomes in patients with serious mental illness – a systematic review

Abstract Background Continuity of care is considered important for results of treatment of serious mental illness (SMI). Yet, evidence of associations between relational continuity and different medical and social outcomes is sparse. Research approaches differ considerably regarding how to best assess continuity as well as which outcome to study. It has hitherto been difficult to evaluate the importance of relational continuity of care. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate treatment outcomes, including effects on resource use and costs associated with receiving higher relational continuity of care for patients with SMI. Methods Eleven databases were searched between January 2000 and February 2021 for studies investigating associations between some measure of relational continuity and health outcomes and costs. All eligible studies were assessed for study relevance and risk of bias by at least two independent reviewers. Only studies with acceptable risk of bias were included. Due to study heterogeneity the synthesis was made narratively, without meta-analysis. The certainty of the summarized result was assessed using GRADE. Study registration number in PROSPERO: CRD42020196518. Results We identified 8 916 unique references and included 17 studies comprising around 300 000 patients in the review. The results were described with regard to seven outcomes. The results indicated that higher relational continuity of care for patients with serious mental illness may prevent premature deaths and suicide, may lower the number of emergency department (ED) visits and may contribute to a better quality of life compared to patients receiving lower levels of relational continuity of care. The certainty of the evidence was assessed as low or very low for all outcomes. The certainty of results for the outcomes hospitalization, costs, symptoms and functioning, and adherence to drug treatment was very low with the result that no reliable conclusions could be drawn in these areas. Conclusions The results of this systematic review indicate that having higher relational continuity of care may have beneficial effects for patients with severe mental illness, and no results have indicated the opposite relationship. There is a need for better studies using clear and distinctive measures of exposure for relational continuity of care