Healthcare payment reforms across western countries on three continents: Lessons from stakeholder preferences when asked to rate the supportiveness for fulfilling patients’ needs

International audienceTo test the hypothesis that care typology-being complex and highly unpredictable versus being clear-cut and highly predictable-guides healthcare payment preferences of physicians, policy makers, healthcare executives, and researchers. We collected survey data from 942 stakeholders across Canada, Europe, Oceania, and the United States. A total of 48 international societies invited their members to participate in our study. Study design Cross-sectional analysis of stakeholder survey data linked to four scenarios of care typology: primary prevention, trial-and-error care, standard care and network care. Principal findings We identified two “extremes”: (1) dominant preferences of physicians, who embraced fee for service (FFS), even when this precludes the advantages of other payment systems associated with a minimal risk of harm (OR 1.85 for primary prevention; OR 1.89 for standard care, compared to non-physicians); and (2) the dominant preferences of healthcare executives and researchers, who supported quality bonus or adjustment (OR 1.92) and capitation (OR 2.05), respectively, even when these could cause harm. Conclusions Based on exploratory findings, we can cautiously state that payment reform will prove to be difficult as long as physicians, healthcare executives, and researchers misalign payment systems with the nature of care. Replication studies are needed to (dis)confirm our findings within representative subsamples per area and stakeholder grou

Analysis of Factors and Medical Errors Involved in Patient Complaints in a European Emergency Department

Introduction: Patients’ complaints from Emergency Departments (ED) are frequent and can be used as a quality assurance indicator. Objective: Factors contributing to patients’ complaints (PCs) in the emergency department were analyzed.  Methods: It was a retrospective cohort study, the qualitative variables of patients’ complaints visiting ED of a university hospital were compared with Chi-Square and t test tests. Results: Eighty-five PC were analyzed. The factors contributing to PC were: communication (n=26), length of stay (LOS) (n=24), diagnostic errors (n=21), comfort and privacy issues (n=7), pain management (n=6), inappropriate treatment (n=6), delay of care and billing issues (n=3). PCs were more frequent when patients were managed by residents, during night shifts, weekends, Saturdays, Mondays, January and June. Moreover, the factors contributing to diagnostic errors were due to poor communication, non-adherence to guidelines and lack of systematic proofreading of X-rays. In 98% of cases, disputes were resolved by apology and explanation and three cases resulted in financial compensation. Conclusion: Poor communication, LOS and medical errors are factors contributing to PCs. Improving communication, resolving issues leading to slow health care provision, adequate staffing and supervision of trainees may reduce PCs

Analysis of Factors and Medical Errors Involved in Patient Complaints in a European Emergency Department

Introduction: Patients’ complaints from Emergency Departments (ED) are frequent and can be used as a quality assurance indicator. Objective: Factors contributing to patients’ complaints (PCs) in the emergency department were analyzed.  Methods: It was a retrospective cohort study, the qualitative variables of patients’ complaints visiting ED of a university hospital were compared with Chi-Square and t test tests. Results: Eighty-five PC were analyzed. The factors contributing to PC were: communication (n=26), length of stay (LOS) (n=24), diagnostic errors (n=21), comfort and privacy issues (n=7), pain management (n=6), inappropriate treatment (n=6), delay of care and billing issues (n=3). PCs were more frequent when patients were managed by residents, during night shifts, weekends, Saturdays, Mondays, January and June. Moreover, the factors contributing to diagnostic errors were due to poor communication, non-adherence to guidelines and lack of systematic proofreading of X-rays. In 98% of cases, disputes were resolved by apology and explanation and three cases resulted in financial compensation. Conclusion: Poor communication, LOS and medical errors are factors contributing to PCs. Improving communication, resolving issues leading to slow health care provision, adequate staffing and supervision of trainees may reduce PCs

Diagnosing, managing and preventing anaphylaxis:Systematic review

Background This systematic review used the GRADE approach to compile evidence to inform the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology's (EAACI) anaphylaxis guideline. Methods We searched five bibliographic databases from 1946 to 20 April 2020 for studies about the diagnosis, management and prevention of anaphylaxis. We included 50 studies with 18 449 participants: 29 randomized controlled trials, seven controlled clinical trials, seven consecutive case series and seven case-control studies. Findings were summarized narratively because studies were too heterogeneous to conduct meta-analysis. Results It is unclear whether the NIAID/FAAN criteria or Brighton case definition are valid for immediately diagnosing anaphylaxis due to the very low certainty of evidence. There was also insufficient evidence about the impact of most anaphylaxis management and prevention strategies. Adrenaline is regularly used for first-line emergency management of anaphylaxis but little robust research has assessed its effectiveness. Newer models of adrenaline autoinjectors may slightly increase the proportion of people correctly using the devices and reduce time to administration. Face-to-face training for laypeople may slightly improve anaphylaxis knowledge and competence in using autoinjectors. We searched for but found little or no comparative effectiveness evidence about strategies such as fluid replacement, oxygen, glucocorticosteroids, methylxanthines, bronchodilators, management plans, food labels, drug labels and similar. Conclusions Anaphylaxis is a potentially life-threatening condition but, due to practical and ethical challenges, there is a paucity of robust evidence about how to diagnose and manage it

Critical care service delivery across healthcare systems in low-income and low-middle-income countries: protocol for a systematic review

Introduction- Critical care in low-income and low-middle income countries (LLMICs) is an underdeveloped component of the healthcare system. Given the increasing growth in demand for critical care services in LLMICs, understanding the current capacity to provide critical care is imperative to inform policy on service expansion. Thus, our aim is to describe the provision of critical care in LLMICs with respect to patients, providers, location of care and services and interventions delivered. Methods and analysis- We will search PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science and EMBASE for full-text original research articles available in English describing critical care services that specify the location of service delivery and describe patients and interventions. We will restrict our review to populations from LLMICs (using 2016 World Bank classifications) and published from 1 January 2008 to 1 January 2020. Two-reviewer agreement will be required for both title/abstract and full text review stages, and rate of agreement will be calculated for each stage. We will extract data regarding the location of critical care service delivery, the training of the healthcare professionals providing services, and the illnesses treated according to classification by the WHO Universal Health Coverage Compendium. Ethics and dissemination- Reviewed and exempted by the Stanford University Office for Human Subjects Research and IRB on 20 May 2020. The results of this review will be disseminated through scholarly publication and presentation at regional and international conferences. This review is designed to inform broader WHO, International Federation for Emergency Medicine and partner efforts to strengthen critical care globally

Etude de la population prise en charge en consultation médicale avancée au Service d'Accueil des Urgences du CHU de Nancy au moyen d'un questionnaire téléphonique de satisfaction

Depuis juillet 2004, au Service d'Accueil des Urgences (SAU) de l'Hôpital Central à Nancy, une filière de Consultation Médicale Avancée a été mise en place pour tenter de réguler le flux de patients au niveau des filières de médecine et de chirurgie. Les indicateurs de mesure de l'impact de la création de la CMA dans le cadre de la Démarche Qualité du SAU sont l'étude des délais de prise en charge et la mesure du degré de satisfaction des patients. Un questionnaire téléphonique a été conçu afin de définir le profil de la population relevant de la CMA, de mieux connaître ses attentes à travers une étude de satisfaction, et d'étudier les délais de prise en charge. Le profil révèle un(e) adulte jeune, consultant pour des contusions, bénéficiant de radiographies, n'ayant pas consulté son médecin traitant avant de se présenter aux urgences, qui rentre à son domicile à l'issue de la prise en charge. La satisfaction globale est notée 7/10. Les mécontentements concernent principalement les délais de prise en charge et la prise en charge de la douleur (rapidité et efficacité). La moyenne d'attente avant prise en charge est de moins de 2h, inférieure à trente minutes dans 46% des cas, et la durée de prise en charge moyenne est comprise entre une et deux heures.NANCY1-SCD Medecine (545472101) / SudocPARIS-BIUM (751062103) / SudocSudocFranceF