Search

Background This study aims to provide greater insight into the current decision-making process on diagnostic testing for dementia by exploring the expectations, needs and experiences of patients with memory complaints, significant others and general practitioners (GPs). Methods We performed semi-structured interviews with patients (>60 years) who consulted their GP on memory complaints, significant others and GPs. Participants were recruited until data saturation was reached in thematic analysis of interview transcripts. Results We performed 51 interviews (patients n  = 20, significant others n  = 15, GPs n  = 16). Thematic analysis revealed four themes: (i) 'drivers to (not) testing', i.e. need to act on symptoms, beliefs on the necessity and expected outcomes of diagnostic testing; (ii) 'patient preferences and context are critical in the actual decision', i.e. in the actual decision-making process interpretation of symptoms, GPs' desire to meet patient preferences, social context and healthcare system dynamics guided the decision; (iii) 'need for individualised communication in the decision-making process', i.e. for patients feeling heard was a prerequisite for decision-making and GPs tailored communication strategies to individual patients and (iv) 'GP practice and barriers to shared decision-making (SDM)', i.e. although GPs value SDM in the decision on diagnostic testing for dementia, patients express limited awareness of the decision and options at stake. Conclusions Decision-making on diagnostic testing for dementia is a multifactorial and preference-guided process for all involved stakeholders, but decisions are often not explicitly jointly made. Development of patient decision aids could facilitate better involvement and more informed choices by patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Standardized risk assessment tools can be used to identify patients at higher risk for postoperative complications and death. In this study, we validate the PreOperative Score to predict Post-Operative Mortality (POSPOM) for in-hospital mortality in a large cohort of non-cardiac surgery patients. In addition, the performance of POSPOM to predict postoperative complications was studied. Methods: Data from the control cohort of the TRACE (routine posTsuRgical Anesthesia visit to improve patient outComE) study was analysed. POSPOM scores for each patient were calculated post-hoc. Observed in-hospital mortality was compared with predicted mortality according to POSPOM. Discrimination was assessed by receiver operating characteristic curves with C-statistics for in-hospital mortality and postoperative complications. To describe the performance of POSPOM sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive values, and positive predictive values were calculated. For in-hospital mortality, calibration was assessed by a calibration plot. Results: In 2490 patients, the observed in-hospital mortality was 0.5%, compared to 1.3% as predicted by POSPOM. 27.1% of patients had at least one postoperative complication of which 22.4% had a major complication. For in-hospital mortality, POSPOM showed strong discrimination with a C-statistic of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.78–0.93). For the prediction of complications, the discrimination was poor to fair depending on the severity of the complication. The calibration plot showed poor calibration of POSPOM with an overestimation of in-hospital mortality. Conclusion: Despite the strong discriminatory performance, POSPOM showed poor calibration with an overestimation of in-hospital mortality. Performance of POSPOM for the prediction of any postoperative complication was poor but improved according to severity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Personalising aftercare for curatively treated breast cancer patients is expected to improve patient satisfaction with care. A patient decision aid can support women in making decisions about their aftercare trajectory, but is currently not available. The aim of this study was to assess the needs of patients and health professionals with regard to an aftercare decision aid to systematically develop such a decision aid. Focus groups with patients and individual interviews with health professionals were digitally recorded and coded using the Framework analysis. Although most patients felt few aftercare options were available to them, health professionals reported to provide various options on the patients' request. Patients reported difficulty in expressing their need for options to their health professional. Although most patients were unfamiliar with decision aids, the majority preferred a paper‐based patient decision aid, while most health professionals preferred an online tool. The practical implications for the intended patient decision aid are: that a digital tool with paper‐based element should be developed, the patient decision aid should facilitate both rational and intuitive processes and should provide insight in patients' preferences concerning aftercare to discuss these explicitly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale, aims, and objectives Sustainability of innovations is a relatively new concept in health care research and has become an issue of growing interest. The current study explored factors related to the sustainability of 2 multidisciplinary hospital-based programs 3 to 6 years after achieving early implementation success. Method An exploratory qualitative study was conducted into 2 implementation cases, an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program for colorectal surgery and a short-stay program for breast cancer surgery. Semistructured interviews were held with key persons involved in the care process in 14 hospitals from both cases minimally 3 years after the implementation, between March 2012 and May 2013. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to direct the development of the interview guide, during data collection and during analysis. A directed content analysis was performed. Results A total of 21 interviews with 26 individuals were held, 18 regarding the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery case and 8 regarding the short-stay program case. Respondents mentioned the following factors associated with sustainability of the programs: modification and adaptability of the program, cost-effectiveness, institutionalization into existing systems, short communication lines within the multidisciplinary team, an innovative culture, benefits for patients, cosmopolitanism, the existence of external policies and incentives, trust and belief in the program, and spread of the program to other settings. Two factors are not covered by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, ie, modification of the program over the years and spread of the program to other contexts. Conclusions The factors associated with sustainability put forward in both cases were largely the same. Leadership and the implementation project were not mentioned as having influenced the long-term sustainability of the benefits achieved. Sustainability of the innovations is influenced by determinants stemming from all ecological levels of the health care system and demands continuous effort in the postimplementation phase. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Large practice variation exists in mode of delivery after cesarean section, suggesting variation in implementation of contemporary guidelines. We aim to evaluate this practice variation and to what extent this can be explained by risk factors at patient level.Material and Methods: This retrospective cohort study was performed among 17 Dutch hospitals in 2010. Women with one prior cesarean section without a contraindication for a trial of labor were included. We used multivariate logistic regression analysis to develop models for risk factor adjustments. One model was derived to adjust the elective repeat cesarean section rates; a second model to adjust vaginal birth after cesarean rates. Standardized rates of elective repeat cesarean section and vaginal birth after cesarean per hospital were compared. Pseudo-R2 measures were calculated to estimate the percentage of practice variation explained by the models. Secondary outcomes were differences in practice variation between hospital types and the correlation between standardized elective repeat cesarean section and vaginal birth after cesarean rates.Results: In all, 1068 women had a history of cesarean section, of whom 71% were eligible for inclusion. A total of 515 women (67%) had a trial of labor, of whom 72% delivered vaginally. The elective repeat cesarean section rate at hospital level ranged from 6 to 54% (mean 29.8, standard deviation 11.8%). Vaginal birth after cesarean rates ranged from 50 to 90% (mean 71.8%, standard deviation 11.1%). More than 85% of this practice variation could not be explained by risk factors at patient level.Conclusion: A large practice variation exists in elective repeat cesarean section and vaginal birth after cesarean rates that can only partially be explained by risk factors at patient level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article analyzes the perceived burden of informal caregivers and how they currently cope with caregiver burden. It explores the ideas of caregivers about potential solutions to diminish their burden. The main sources of burden are cited, including time-consuming and exhaustive nature of caring, becoming totally absorbed by the caregiving situation, and a perceived lack of support.

Background: Low back pain (LBP) is a common health problem and a substantial part of LBP is presumed to be attributable to degeneration of the intervertebral disc. For patients suffering from intractable discogenic LBP, there are few evidence-based effective interventional treatment options available. In 2010, the results of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) were published concerning "intradiscal methylene blue injection" (IMBI), in which this intervention appeared to be very successful in relieving discogenic pain. Therefore, we decided to repeat this study to investigate whether we could replicate the published results. The results of our preliminary feasibility study gave reason to set up an RCT. The aim of this RCT is to evaluate if IMBI is a more effective treatment of discogenic low back pain as an intradiscal placebo intervention, and furthermore, to assess the cost-effectiveness of this intervention.Methods/design: Consecutive discogenic low back pain patients referred to four specialized pain treatment facilities are being screened for eligibility. After a positive standardized provocation discography and informed consent, patients are randomized into two groups. The treatment group receives an intradiscal injection with methylene blue, lidocaine, and contrast, and the control group receives intradiscal isotonic saline with lidocaine and contrast. Main outcome measures are pain at the 6-month follow-up, patient's global impression of change, cost-effectiveness, quality of life, disability, and analgesic intake.Discussion: The importance of this study is emphasized by the fact that for intractable discogenic low back pain patients, evidence-based effective pain treatments are rare. If this study establishes clinical success and cost-effectiveness, IMBI could become the "pain treatment of choice" for a selected group of patients with chronic discogenic low back pain for whom noninvasive treatment options have failed.Trial Registration: National Trial register NTR2547 Registered at 29 September 2010 and 31 March 2014. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Smoking continues to be a driver of mortality. Various forms of evidence-based cessation assistance exist; however, their use is limited. The choice between them may also induce decisional conflict. Offering decision aids (DAs) may be beneficial; however, insights into their effective elements are lacking.Objective: This study tested the added value of an effective element (ie, an "explicit value clarification method" paired with computer-tailored advice indicating the most fitting cessation assistance) of a web-based smoking cessation DA.Methods: A web-based randomized controlled trial was conducted among smokers motivated to stop smoking within 6 months. The intervention group received a DA with the aforementioned elements, and the control group received the same DA without these elements. The primary outcome measure was 7-day point prevalence abstinence 6 months after baseline (time point 3 [t=3]). Secondary outcome measures were 7-day point prevalence of abstinence 1 month after baseline (time point 2 [t=2]), evidence-based cessation assistance use (t=2 and t=3), and decisional conflict (immediately after DA; time point 1). Logistic and linear regression analyses were performed to assess the outcomes. Analyses were conducted following 2 (decisional conflict) and 3 (smoking cessation) outcome scenarios: complete cases, worst-case scenario (assuming that dropouts still smoked), and multiple imputations. A priori sample size calculation indicated that 796 participants were needed. The participants were mainly recruited on the web (eg, social media). All the data were self-reported.Results: Overall, 2375 participants were randomized (intervention n=1164, 49.01%), of whom 599 (25.22%; intervention n=275, 45.91%) completed the DAs, and 276 (11.62%; intervention n=143, 51.81%), 97 (4.08%; intervention n=54, 55.67%), and 103 (4.34%; intervention n=56, 54.37%) completed time point 1, t=2, and t=3, respectively. More participants stopped smoking in the intervention group (23/63, 37%) than in the control group (14/52, 27%) after 6 months; however, this was only statistically significant in the worst-case scenario (crude P=.02; adjusted P=.04). Effects on the secondary outcomes were only observed for smoking abstinence after 1 month (15/55, 27%, compared with 7/46, 15%, in the crude and adjusted models, respectively; P=.02) and for cessation assistance uptake after 1 month (26/56, 46% compared with 18/47, 38% only in the crude model; P=.04) and 6 months (38/61, 62% compared with 26/50, 52%; crude P=.01; adjusted P=.02) but only in the worst-case scenario. Nonuse attrition was 34.19% higher in the intervention group than in the control group (P<.001).Conclusions: Currently, we cannot confidently recommend the inclusion of explicit value clarification methods and computer-tailored advice. However, they might result in higher nonuse attrition rates, thereby limiting their potential. As a lack of statistical power may have influenced the outcomes, we recommend replicating this study with some adaptations based on the lessons learned.Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register NL8270; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8270.International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): RR2-10.2196/21772. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To determine the costs associated with the diagnostic work-up and percutaneous revascularization of renal artery stenosis from various perspectives. A prospective multicenter comparative study was conducted between 1998 and 2001. A total of 402 hypertensive patients with suspected renal artery stenosis were included. Costs were assessed of computed tomography angiography (CTA), magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), digital subtraction angiography (DSA), and percutaneous revascularization. From the societal perspective, DSA was the most costly (euro 1,721) and CTA the least costly diagnostic technique (euro 424). CTA was the least costly imaging procedure irrespective of the perspective used. The societal costs associated with percutaneous renal artery revascularization ranged from euro 2,680 to euro 6,172. Overall the radiology department incurred the largest proportion of the total societal costs. For the management of renal artery stenosis, performing the analysis from different perspectives leads to the same conclusion concerning the least costly diagnostic imaging and revascularization procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Obstetric health care relies on an adequate antepartum risk selection. Most guidelines used for risk stratification, however, do not assess absolute risks. In 2017, a prediction tool was implemented in a Dutch region. This tool combines first trimester prediction models with obstetric care paths tailored to the individual risk profile, enabling risk-based care.Objective: To assess impact and cost-effectiveness of risk-based care compared to care-as-usual in a general population.Methods: A before-after study was conducted using 2 multicenter prospective cohorts. The first cohort (2013-2015) received care-as-usual; the second cohort (2017-2018) received risk-based care. Health outcomes were (1) a composite of adverse perinatal outcomes and (2) maternal quality-adjusted life-years. Costs were estimated using a health care perspective from conception to 6 weeks after the due date. Mean costs per woman, cost differences between the 2 groups, and incremental cost effectiveness ratios were calculated. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of the findings.Results: In total 3425 women were included. In nulliparous women there was a significant reduction of perinatal adverse outcomes among the risk-based care group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.94), but not in multiparous women. Mean costs per pregnant woman were significantly lower for risk-based care (mean difference, -€2766; 95% confidence interval, -€3700 to -€1825). No differences in maternal quality of life, adjusted for baseline health, were observed.Conclusion: In the Netherlands, risk-based care in nulliparous women was associated with improved perinatal outcomes as compared to care-as-usual. Furthermore, risk-based care was cost-effective compared to care-as-usual and resulted in lower health care costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Effective healthcare innovations are often not adopted and implemented. An implementation strategy based on facilitators and barriers for use as perceived by healthcare professionals could increase adoption rates. This study therefore aimed to identify the most relevant facilitators and barriers for use of an innovative breast cancer aftercare decision aid (PtDA) in healthcare practice.Methods: Facilitators and barriers (related to the PtDA, adopter and healthcare organisation) were assessed among breast cancer aftercare health professionals (n = 81), using the MIDI questionnaire. For each category, a backward regression analysis was performed (dependent = intention to adopt). All significant factors were then added to a final regression analysis to identify to most relevant determinants of PtDA adoption.Results: Expecting higher compatibility with daily practice and clinical guidelines, more positive outcomes of use, higher perceived relevance for the patient and increased self-efficacy were significantly associated with a higher intention to adopt. Self-efficacy and perceived patient relevance remained significant in the final model.Conclusions: Low perceived self-efficacy and patient relevance are the most important barriers for health professions to adopt a breast cancer aftercare PtDA.Practice Implications: To target self-efficacy and perceived patient relevance, the implementation strategy could apply health professional peer champions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]