Search

Introduction: Mental well-being is a global public health priority with increasing mental health conditions having substantial burden on individuals, health systems and society. 'Stepped care', where services are provided at an intensity to meet the changing needs of the consumer, is the chosen approach to mental health service delivery in primary healthcare in Australia for its efficiencies and patient outcomes; yet limited evidence exists on how the programme is being rolled out and its impact in practice. This protocol outlines a data linkage project to characterise and quantify healthcare service utilisation and impacts among a cohort of consumers of a national mental health stepped care programme in one region of Australia., Methods and Analysis: Data linkage will be used to establish a retrospective cohort of consumers of mental health stepped care services between 1 July 2020 and 31 December 2021 in one primary healthcare region in Australia (n=approx. 12 710). These data will be linked with records from other healthcare service data sets (eg, hospitalisations, emergency department presentations, community-based state government-delivered mental healthcare, hospital costs). Four areas for analysis will include: (1) characterising the nature of mental health stepped care service use; (2) describing the cohort's sociodemographic and health characteristics; (3) quantifying broader service utilisation and associated economic costs; and (4) assessing the impact of mental health stepped care service utilisation on health and service outcomes., Ethics and Dissemination: Approval from the Darling Downs Health Human Research Ethics Committee (HREA/2020/QTDD/65518) has been granted. All data will be non-identifiable, and research findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations and industry meetings., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To compare health service cost and length of stay between a traditional and an accelerated diagnostic approach to assess acute coronary syndromes (ACS) among patients who presented to the emergency department (ED) of a large tertiary hospital in Australia., Design, Setting and Participants: This historically controlled study analysed data collected from two independent patient cohorts presenting to the ED with potential ACS. The first cohort of 938 patients was recruited in 2008-2010, and these patients were assessed using the traditional diagnostic approach detailed in the national guideline. The second cohort of 921 patients was recruited in 2011-2013 and was assessed with the accelerated diagnostic approach named the Brisbane protocol. The Brisbane protocol applied early serial troponin testing for patients at 0 and 2 h after presentation to ED, in comparison with 0 and 6 h testing in traditional assessment process. The Brisbane protocol also defined a low-risk group of patients in whom no objective testing was performed. A decision tree model was used to compare the expected cost and length of stay in hospital between two approaches. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to account for model uncertainty., Results: Compared with the traditional diagnostic approach, the Brisbane protocol was associated with reduced expected cost of $1229 (95% CI -$1266 to $5122) and reduced expected length of stay of 26 h (95% CI -14 to 136 h). The Brisbane protocol allowed physicians to discharge a higher proportion of low-risk and intermediate-risk patients from ED within 4 h (72% vs 51%). Results from sensitivity analysis suggested the Brisbane protocol had a high chance of being cost-saving and time-saving., Conclusions: This study provides some evidence of cost savings from a decision to adopt the Brisbane protocol. Benefits would arise for the hospital and for patients and their families., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)

Objective: To synthesise the available evidence and estimate the comparative efficacy of control strategies to prevent total hip replacement (THR)-related surgical site infections (SSIs) using a mixed treatment comparison., Design: Systematic review and mixed treatment comparison., Setting: Hospital and other healthcare settings., Participants: Patients undergoing THR., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: The number of THR-related SSIs occurring following the surgical operation., Results: 12 studies involving 123 788 THRs and 9 infection control strategies were identified. The strategy of 'systemic antibiotics+antibiotic-impregnated cement+conventional ventilation' significantly reduced the risk of THR-related SSI compared with the referent strategy (no systemic antibiotics+plain cement+conventional ventilation), OR 0.13 (95% credible interval (CrI) 0.03-0.35), and had the highest probability (47-64%) and highest median rank of being the most effective strategy. There was some evidence to suggest that 'systemic antibiotics+antibiotic-impregnated cement+laminar airflow' could potentially increase infection risk compared with 'systemic antibiotics+antibiotic-impregnated cement+conventional ventilation', 1.96 (95% CrI 0.52-5.37). There was no high-quality evidence that antibiotic-impregnated cement without systemic antibiotic prophylaxis was effective in reducing infection compared with plain cement with systemic antibiotics, 1.28 (95% CrI 0.38-3.38)., Conclusions: We found no convincing evidence in favour of the use of laminar airflow over conventional ventilation for prevention of THR-related SSIs, yet laminar airflow is costly and widely used. Antibiotic-impregnated cement without systemic antibiotics may not be effective in reducing THR-related SSIs. The combination with the highest confidence for reducing SSIs was 'systemic antibiotics+antibiotic-impregnated cement+conventional ventilation'. Our evidence synthesis underscores the need to review current guidelines based on the available evidence, and to conduct further high-quality double-blind randomised controlled trials to better inform the current clinical guidelines and practice for prevention of THR-related SSIs.

Objective: To summarise how costs and health benefits will change with the adoption of total laparoscopic hysterectomy compared to total abdominal hysterectomy for the treatment of early stage endometrial cancer., Design: Cost-effectiveness modelling using the information from a randomised controlled trial., Participants: Two hypothetical modelled cohorts of 1000 individuals undergoing total laparoscopic hysterectomy and total abdominal hysterectomy., Outcome Measures: Surgery costs; hospital bed days used; total healthcare costs; quality-adjusted life years; and net monetary benefits., Results: For 1000 individuals receiving total laparoscopic hysterectomy surgery, the costs were $509 575 higher, 3548 hospital fewer bed days were used and total health services costs were reduced by $3 746 221. There were 39.13 more quality-adjusted life years for a 5 year period following surgery., Conclusions: The adoption of total laparoscopic hysterectomy is almost certainly a good decision for health services policy makers. There is 100% probability that it will be cost saving to health services, a 86.8% probability that it will increase health benefits and a 99.5% chance that it returns net monetary benefits greater than zero.