Search

Background The value equation of value-based healthcare (VBHC) as a single figure remains ambiguous, closer to a theoretical framework than a useful tool for decision making. The challenge lies in the way patient-centred outcomes (PCOs) might be combined to produce a single value of the numerator. This paper aims to estimate the weights of PCOs to provide a single figure in the numerator, which ultimately will allow a VBHC figure to be reached. Methods A cohort of patients diagnosed with breast cancer (n  = 690) with a 6-month follow-up recruited in 2019–20 across six European hospitals was used. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), clinical-related outcomes (CROs), and clinical and socio-demographic variables were collected. The numerator was defined as a composite indicator of the PCOs (CI-PCO), and regression analysis was applied to estimate their weights and consequently arrive at a single figure. Results Pain showed as the highest weight followed by physical functioning , emotional functioning , and ability to work , and then by a symptom, either arm or breast. PCOs weights were robust to sensitivity analysis. The CI-PCO value was found to be more informative than the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) value. Conclusions To the best of our knowledge, this is the first research to combine the PCOs proposed by ICHOM to provide a single figure in the numerator of the value equation. This figure shows a step forward in VBHC to reach a holistic benchmarking across healthcare centres and a value-based payment. This research might also be applied in other medical conditions as a methodological pathway. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The implementation science literature acknowledges a need for engagement of key stakeholders when designing, delivering and evaluating implementation work. To date, the literature reports minimal or focused stakeholder engagement, where stakeholders are engaged in either barrier identification and/or barrier prioritisation. This paper begins to answer calls from the literature for the development of tools and guidance to support comprehensive stakeholder engagement in implementation research and practice. The paper describes the systematic development of the Implementation‐STakeholder Engagement Model (I‐STEM) in the context of an international, large‐scale empirical implementation study (ImpleMentAll) aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of a tailored implementation toolkit. The I‐STEM is a sensitising tool that defines key considerations and activities for undertaking stakeholder engagement activities across an implementation process. Methods: In‐depth, semistructured interviews and observations were conducted with implementers who were tailoring implementation strategies to integrate and embed internet‐based cognitive behavioural therapy (iCBT) services in 12 routine mental health care organisations in nine countries in Europe and Australia. The analytical process was informed by principles of first‐ and third‐generation Grounded Theory, including constant comparative method. Results: We conducted 55 interviews and observed 19 implementation‐related activities (e.g., team meetings and technical support calls). The final outcome of our analysis is expressed in an initial version of the I‐STEM, consisting of five interrelated concepts: engagement objectives, stakeholder mapping, engagement approaches, engagement qualities and engagement outcomes. Engagement objectives are goals that implementers plan to achieve by working with stakeholders in the implementation process. Stakeholder mapping involves identifying a range of organisations, groups or people who may be instrumental in achieving the engagement objectives. Engagement approaches define the type of work that is undertaken with stakeholders to achieve the engagement objectives. Engagement qualities define the logistics of the engagement approach. Lastly, every engagement activity may result in a range of engagement outcomes. Conclusion: The I‐STEM represents potential avenues for substantial stakeholder engagement activity across key phases of an implementation process. It provides a conceptual model for the planning, delivery, evaluation and reporting of stakeholder engagement activities. The I‐STEM is nonprescriptive and highlights the importance of a flexible, iterative approach to stakeholder engagement. It is developmental and will require application and validation across a range of implementation activities. Patient or Public Contribution: Patient contribution to ImpleMentAll trial was facilitated by GAMIAN‐Europe at all stages—from grant development to dissemination. GAMIAN‐Europe brings together a wide variety of patient representation organisations (local, regional and national) from almost all European countries. GAMIAN‐Europe was involved in pilot testing the ItFits‐toolkit and provided their views on the various aspects, including stakeholder engagement. Patients were also represented in the external advisory board providing support and advice on the design, conduct and interpretation of the wider project, including the development of the ItFits‐toolkit. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03652883. Retrospectively registered on 29 August 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Value-based healthcare (VBHC) is a conceptual framework to improve the value of healthcare by health, care-process and economic outcomes. Benchmarking should provide useful information to identify best practices and therefore a good instrument to improve quality across healthcare organizations. This paper aims to provide a proof-of-concept of the feasibility of an international VBHC benchmarking in breast cancer, with the ultimate aim of being used to share best practices with a data-driven approach among healthcare organizations from different health systems. Methods In the VOICE community—a European healthcare centre cluster intending to address VBHC from theory to practice—information on patient-reported, clinical-related, care-process-related and economic-related outcomes were collected. Patient archetypes were identified using clustering techniques and an indicator set following a modified Delphi was defined. Benchmarking was performed using regression models controlling for patient archetypes and socio-demographic characteristics. Results Six hundred and ninety patients from six healthcare centres were included. A set of 50 health, care-process and economic indicators was distilled for benchmarking. Statistically significant differences across sites have been found in most health outcomes, half of the care-process indicators, and all economic indicators, allowing for identifying the best and worst performers. Conclusions To the best of our knowledge, this is the first international experience providing evidence to be used with VBHC benchmarking intention. Differences in indicators across healthcare centres should be used to identify best practices and improve healthcare quality following further research. Applied methods might help to move forward with VBHC benchmarking in other medical conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) Exon 20 insertion mutations (Exon20ins) used to have poor outcomes after the failure of platinum-based therapies. Amivantamab, a drug that targets two proteins involved in NSCLC (EGFR/MET), was developed and studied in the CHRYSALIS clinical trial. This paper summarizes an analysis comparing outcomes for amivantamab from CHRYSALIS to the outcomes for a mix of treatments that were used in real-world clinical practice (real-world physician's choice [RWPC]). RWPC data were collected from hospitals across Europe in the CATERPILLAR real-world evidence (RWE) study. The outcomes of 114 patients from CHRYSALIS were compared to 55 lines of treatment (LOTs) from CATERPILLAR-RWE, accounting for differences in patient characteristics between the two populations. Overall, the results show that amivantamab was at least twice as good as RWPC for platinum pre-treated patients in terms of tumor response and survival rates. Patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) Exon 20 insertions (Exon20ins) at the second line and beyond (2L+) have an unmet need for new treatment. Amivantamab, a bispecific EGFR- and MET-targeted antibody, demonstrated efficacy in this setting in the phase 1b, open-label CHRYSALIS trial (NCT02609776). The primary objective was to compare the efficacy of amivantamab to the choices made by real-world physicians (RWPC) using an external control cohort from the real-world evidence (RWE) chart review study, CATERPILLAR-RWE. Adjustment was conducted to address differences in prognostic variables between cohorts using inverse probability weighting (IPW) and covariate adjustments based on multivariable regression. In total, 114 patients from CHRYSALIS were compared for 55 lines of therapy from CATERPILLAR-RWE. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the amivantamab and IPW-weighted RWPC cohorts. For amivantamab versus RWPC using IPW adjustment, the response rate ratio for the overall response was 2.14 (p = 0.0181), and the progression-free survival (PFS), time-to-next-treatment (TTNT) and overall survival (OS) hazard ratios (HRs) were 0.42 (p < 0.0001), 0.47 (p = 0.0063) and 0.48 (p = 0.0207), respectively. These analyses provide evidence of clinical and statistical benefits across multiple outcomes and adjustment methods, of amivantamab in platinum pre-treated patients with advanced NSCLC harboring EGFR Exon20ins. These results confirm earlier comparisons versus pooled national registry data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. To review the prevalence of loneliness (during/after COVID-19) in older people. Design. Scoping review using Medline and PsycInfo for worldwide prevalence estimates (white published literature search) and Google for prevalence data inside the Euregio Meuse-Rhine (grey literature). Setting. Worldwide prevalence estimates and a focus on the Euregio Meuse-Rhine. Participants. Papers published between 2016 and 2022 and a mean age of minimum of 65 years. Measurements. Prevalence estimates for older people. Results. The white literature search yielded 37 articles. Before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, loneliness estimates were the highest in Nigeria (46%) and the lowest in Australia (5%) (mean prevalence was 25.6%). Loneliness was reported to be higher in specific populations, for example, people living in specific communities such as senior housing communities or with impairments, than in the general population, with a mean prevalence estimate of 47.8%. During COVID-19, the prevalence of loneliness was higher than that before the pandemic: we observed a mean prevalence of 39.4%, in comparison to 25.6 before COVID-19. The grey literature search showed that, compared to Belgium and the Netherlands (13.5% and 36.5%, respectively), loneliness estimates were the lowest in Germany, with a mean prevalence of 7.7%. Conclusion. Large international differences in the prevalence of loneliness were observed between countries and populations studied. Several hypotheses could explain such differences, including sociocultural or historical-political characteristics. Without surprise, the pandemic and associated measures were linked to a higher level of loneliness. Furthermore, recommendations for addressing loneliness, including interventions, are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: International and migrant students face specific challenges which may impact their mental health, well-being and academic outcomes, and these may be gendered experiences. The purpose of this scoping review was to map the literature on the challenges, coping responses and supportive interventions for international and migrant students in academic nursing programs in major host countries, with a gender lens. Methods: We searched 10 databases to identify literature reporting on the challenges, coping responses and/or supportive interventions for international and migrant nursing students in college or university programs in Canada, the United-States, Australia, New Zealand or a European country. We included peer-reviewed research (any design), discussion papers and literature reviews. English, French and Spanish publications were considered and no time restrictions were applied. Drawing from existing frameworks, we critically assessed each paper and extracted information with a gender lens. Results: One hundred fourteen publications were included. Overall the literature mostly focused on international students, and among migrants, migration history/status and length of time in country were not considered with regards to challenges, coping or interventions. Females and males, respectively, were included in 69 and 59% of studies with student participants, while those students who identify as other genders/sexual orientations were not named or identified in any of the research. Several papers suggest that foreign-born nursing students face challenges associated with different cultural roles, norms and expectations for men and women. Other challenges included perceived discrimination due to wearing a hijab and being a 'foreign-born male nurse', and in general nursing being viewed as a feminine, low-status profession. Only two strategies, accessing support from family and other student mothers, used by women to cope with challenges, were identified. Supportive interventions considering gender were limited; these included matching students with support services' personnel by sex, involving male family members in admission and orientation processes, and using patient simulation as a method to prepare students for care-provision of patients of the opposite-sex. Conclusion: Future work in nursing higher education, especially regarding supportive interventions, needs to address the intersections of gender, gender identity/sexual orientation and foreign-born status, and also consider the complexity of migrant students' contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]