"Drop in" gastroscopy outpatient clinic - experience after 9 months

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Logistics handling referrals for gastroscopy may be more time consuming than the examination itself. For the patient, "drop in" gastroscopy may reduce uncertainty, inadequate therapy and time off work.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>After an 8-9 month run-in period we asked patients, hospital staff and GPs to fill in a questionnaire to evaluate their experience with "drop in" gastroscopy and gastroscopy by appointment, respectively. The diagnostic gain was evaluated.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>112 patients had "drop in" gastroscopy and 101 gastroscopy by appointment. The number of "drop in" patients varied between 3 and 12 per day (mean 6.5). Mean time from first GP consultation to gastroscopy was 3.6 weeks in the "drop in" group and 14 weeks in the appointment group. The half-yearly number of outpatient gastroscopies increased from 696 before introducing "drop in" to 1022 after (47% increase) and the proportion of examinations with pathological findings increased from 42% to 58%. Patients and GPs expressed great satisfaction with "drop in". Hospital staff also acclaimed although it caused more unpredictable working days with no additional staff.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>"Drop in" gastroscopy was introduced without increase in staff. The observed increase in gastroscopies was paralleled by a similar increase in pathological findings without any apparent disadvantages for other groups of patients. This should legitimise "drop in" outpatient gastroscopies, but it requires meticulous observation of possible unwanted effects when implemented.</p

Growth and welfare in mixed health system financing with physician dual practice in a developing economy: a case of Indonesia

Based on Indonesia’s hybrid BPJS Kesehatan health system, we analyze for welfare-optimal government financing strategy in an economy with a mixed health system using an endogenous growth framework with physician dual practice. We find the model solution to produce two vastly different regimes in terms of policy implications: a “high” public-sector congestion regime as in the benchmark case of Indonesia, and a “low” public-sector congestion, high capacity regime. In the former, welfare-optimal health financing strategy appears to be promoting private health service. In contrast, in the low-congestion, high capacity regime, a welfare-optimal strategy is to do the opposite of increasing government physician wage at the expense of private health subsidy. These results highlight the importance of developing a benchmarking system that measures the actual degree of congestion faced by the public health service in a developing economy, as it ultimately would influence the optimal health financing strategy to be pursued

Strengthening the evidence-base of integrated care for people with multi-morbidity in Europe using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA).

Background: Evaluation of integrated care programmes for individuals with multi-morbidity requires a broader evaluation framework and a broader definition of added value than is common in cost-utility analysis. This is possible through the use of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA). Methods and results: This paper presents the seven steps of an MCDA to evaluate 17 different integrated care programmes for individuals with multi-morbidity in 8 European countries participating in the 4-year, EU-funded SELFIE project. In step one, qualitative research was undertaken to better understand the decision-context of these programmes. The programmes faced decisions related to their sustainability in terms of reimbursement, continuation, extension, and/or wider implementation. In step two, a uniform set of decision criteria was defined in terms of outcomes measured across the 17 programmes: physical functioning, psychological well-being, social relationships and participation, enjoyment of life, resilience, person-centeredness, continuity of care, and total health and social care costs. These were supplemented by programme-type specific outcomes. Step three presents the quasi-experimental studies designed to measure the performance of the programmes on the decision criteria. Step four gives details of the methods (Discrete Choice Experiment, Swing Weighting) to determine the relative importance of the decision criteria among five stakeholder groups per country. An example in step five illustrates the value-based method of MCDA by which the performance of the programmes on each decision criterion is combined with the weight of the respective criterion to derive an overall value score. Step six describes how we deal with uncertainty and introduces the Conditional Multi-Attribute Acceptability Curve. Step seven addresses the interpretation of results in stakeholder workshops. Discussion: By discussing our solutions to the challenges involved in creating a uniform MCDA approach for the evaluation of different programmes, this paper provides guidance to future evaluations and stimulates debate on how to evaluate integrated care for multi-morbidity

Minimum Wages and Youth Employment: Evidence from the Finnish Retail Trade Sector

Following an agreement between the trade unions and the employer organisations, Finnish employers could pay less than the existing minimum wage for young workers between 1993 and 1995. We examine the effects of these minimum wage exceptions by comparing the changes in wages and employment of the groups whose minimum wages were reduced with simultaneous changes among slightly older workers for whom the minimum wage regulation was still binding. Our analysis is based on the payroll record data and minimum wage agreements from the retail trade sector over the period 1990-2005. We discover that average wages in the eligible group declined only modestly despite the fact that the excess supply of labour during high unemployment should make it relatively easy to attract workers even with low wages. The minimum wage exceptions had no positive effects on employment

REDISTRIBUTIVE OUTCOMES OF SICKNESS INSURANCE ON INCOME: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF SOCIAL INSURANCE INSTITUTIONS

We analyzed the redistributive outcomes of sickness benefits using a typology of social insurance institutions, including four different systems, after adjusting for sickness risk factors. The aim is to empirically observe if the expected redistributive pattern of the typology could be verified whether or not considering the variations in sickness risk across the countries. Data on household earnings and sickness benefits in ten countries and for different years were taken from the Luxembourg Income Study. We also used data on labor force demography and educational attainment. Gini coefficients were used for measuring earnings inequality. Relative changes in earnings inequality for sickness benefits were predicted by social insurance institutional dummies using multiple regression analyses. Among the four different schemes, the encompassing system is found to be most redistributive, followed by basic security and targeting systems. The corporatist system has shown no significant difference from the encompassing system in redistributive outcomes. Copyright 2008 The Authors.