Search

We present a case study on the design and implementation of a value-based bundled package of care for patients with early-stage breast cancer treated in the private health sector in Australia. Value-based healthcare is an essential change to how we deliver healthcare, shifting the focus from paying for individual services provided to a focus on the health outcomes gained over a full cycle of care. The Australian health system has unintentionally created barriers to value-based cancer care through fragmented care pathways and complex funding arrangements where patients can unexpectedly encounter high out-of-pocket costs. A team of clinicians, service providers, health systems and funding experts, private health insurers and consumers have collaborated to design and pilot a complete bundled package of care for breast cancer patients which aims to address these challenges. With 40 patients recruited to date, early evaluation results show positive patient experience of 'joined-up' care and financial transparency. This case study provides a high-level overview of the approach taken to design and implement the Breast Cancer Bundle and the lessons learned for its expansion in both public and private settings. What is known about this topic? Enabling value-based healthcare is essential to improve healthcare, focusing on outcomes gained over a full cycle of care. Patients diagnosed with cancer frequently report care to be disjointed and the cause of financial stress, thus can particularly benefit from value-based care models. What does this paper add? This case study describes the design and implementation of a bundled package of care for patients with early-stage breast cancer treated in the private health sector in Australia. What are the implications for practitioners? Lessons learned through this process provide considerations for expansion of this model of care. This article belongs to the Special Issue: Value-based Healthcare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Flexible ureterorenoscopy (FUR) and laser lithotripsy (LL) are techniques used in the management of upper urinary tract disorders. These techniques, so far established in adults, are now being used in children as well. We report our experience with 26 cases of pediatric upper urinary tract disorders treated using these techniques. Methods: In the period from 1997 to 2006, FUR was performed in 26 children (14 males and 12 females) in the age group of three months to 15 years with a mean age of 8.2 years. Twenty five were stented prior to undergoing FUR and 24 presented with suspected upper tract stones (17 pelvicalyceal and seven midureteric). Two cases showed JJ stent migration post-pyeloplasty. Results: Eight cases involved diagnostic procedures. Six excluded the presence of renal calculi, one had focal medullary sponge kidney, and one had calcified papillae. There were 15 cases of therapeutic FUR. Of these, 12 had LL with only one had incomplete stone fragmentation which subsequently passed spontaneously. Other therapeutic procedures included removal of migrated JJ stents and FUR with the basket removal of a midureteric calculus. Three cases failed ureterorenoscopy due to technical difficulties. The overall success rate was 88.5% for FUR. Conclusion: FUR and LL are valuable minimally invasive techniques for the examination and treatment of pediatric upper urinary tract conditions. Preoperative stenting improves passage of the ureteroscope and with progressive miniaturization of instruments, the lower weight limit will decrease.