Search

Background: NEETs (young people not in employment, education or training) are at higher risk for poorer mental and physical health. In France, the Missions locales (MLs) are the only social structures dedicated to this population. We sought to determine whether the systematic offer of a social and preventive medicine consultation at a ML might increase NEET participants’ access to training in the 12 months following the intervention. Methods: This intervention research was a parallel randomised controlled interventional study conducted at five MLs in mainland France in 2011–2012. It included 976 NEETs aged 18 to 25 years who attended one of the five MLs. At inclusion, participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to three groups: those in the first group were invited to see a social worker (not studied in this paper), those in the second group were invited to see a doctor and a social worker (intervention group), and the third was a control group. The primary outcome was participation in at least one training session during the year following study inclusion. Results: Among the 976 participants, 504 were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 472 to the control group; 704 (72.1%) were included in the analyses. A significantly higher proportion of the participants in the intervention group participated in a training session in the 12 months following the intervention than of those in the control group (63.3% vs 55.6%; p = 0.04). This difference was significantly greater for women, those less than 21 years of age, those unstably housed and those with a lower level of education. Conclusions: Social and preventive medicine consultations that are fully integrated into the social services for NEETs have an impact on their access to training and contribute to changing some of their health-related behaviours. This may improve their access to the labour market. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Out-of-pocket payments might threaten the vertical equity of financing and generate unmet medical needs. The main objective was to assess the vertical equity of outpatient out-of-pocket payments for lymphedema patients in France. Twenty-seven centres, among which 11 secondary care hospitals and 16 primary care practices participated in this prospective national multicenter study. We measured the lymphedema-specific outpatient out-of-pocket payments over 6 months. The vertical equity of out-of-pocket payments was examined using concentration curves, the Gini coefficient for income, the Kakwani index, and the Reynolds-Smolensky index. We included 231 lymphedema patients aged 7 years or more, living in metropolitan France, and being able to use Internet and email. After voluntary health insurance reimbursement, the mean out-of-pocket payment was equal to 101.4 Euros per month, mainly due to transport (32%) and medical devices (26%). Concentration curves indicated regressivity of out-of-pocket payments. Total out-of-pocket payments represented 10.1% of the income by consumption unit for the poorest quintile and 3.5% for the wealthiest (p<0.05). The Kakwani index for out-of-pocket payments was equal to -0.18. Regarding outpatient health care, French lymphedema patients face significant and regressive out-of-pocket payments, associated with an increased risk of unmet medical needs. Such results shed light on significant socioeconomic inequalities and bring into question the current financing arrangements of outpatient health care in France. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Hopkins Symptom Checklist in 25 items (HSCL-25) helps to assess anxiety and depression in Primary Care. Anxiety and depression show considerable overlap in primary care. This self-administrated questionnaire is valid, reliable and ergonomic in the original US version. We have translated it into French. The aim of this study was to estimate the test characteristics of the HSCL-25, in its French version (F-HSCL-25), by comparing it to the Present State Examination-9 French version (F-PSE-9) and by determining its internal validity and dimensions. Method: Outpatients from three French General Practice settings (rural, semi-rural and urban) were recruited: approximately 20,000 outpatients among 17 GPs. Two groups were formed: F-HSCL-25 ≥1.75 and F-HSCL-25 <1.75. A validated cut-off score of > 1.75 was considered to indicate a clinically relevant level of symptoms of depression and anxiety. In order to obtain two balanced groups, a different method of randomization was chosen for each group. The F-PSE-9 was randomly administered to 1 in 2 patients in the F-HSCL-25 ≥1.75 group, and to 1 in 16 in the (much larger) F-HSCL-25 <1.75 group. The diagnostic performance was assessed and the test results obtained from both groups were compared with their F-PSE-9 results. Results: Of the 1126 patients who completed the F-HCL-25, 886 joined the F-HSCL-25 <1.75 group and 240 the F-HSCL-25 ≥1.75 group. The overall prevalence of depression, using the F-HSCL-25, was 21% in these medical practices. The diagnostic performance of the F-HSCL-25 versus the F-PSE-9, the external criteria were as follows: Positive Predictive Value (PPV) 69.8%, Negative Predictive Value (NPV) 87%; Sensitivity 59.1%, and Specificity 91.4%. The Principal Component Analysis showed that F-HSCL-25 is a one-dimensional tool (anxiety and depression dimensions combined) with a Cronbach Alpha of 0.93. Conclusion: The F-HSCL-25 is an appropriate diagnostic tool for anxiety and depression in primary care in France due to its high specificity and high NPV. The HSCL-25 scale has a high eigenvalue. This pilot study will be extended throughout Europe; however, preliminary evidence suggests that the HSCL-25 is a reliable and suitable diagnostic tool for primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]