Search

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]

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, effective contact tracing was recognized as a crucial public health response to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and reduce COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality, particularly before widespread vaccination. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommended implementing active surveillance strategies to trace and quarantine contacts of confirmed or suspected COVID-19 cases. Methods: A detailed review and analysis of the COVID-19 contact tracing responses was conducted in five European countries and territories, between March 2021 and August 2022. The countries and territories were selected to ensure geographical representation across the WHO European Region and applied a mixed-methods approach of in-depth interviews with various stakeholders across different administrative levels to identify good practices in COVID-19 contact tracing. The interviews covered 12 themes, including methods and procedures for COVID-19 contact tracing, information technology, quality assurance and key performance indicators. Results: The findings demonstrate that the policy approach, digitalization capabilities and implementation approach varied in the countries and territories and were dynamic throughout the pandemic. The analysis revealed that some practices were applicable across all countries and territories, while others were context-specific, catering to each country's and territory's unique needs. The study highlighted a need for all countries to institutionalize contact tracing as an essential function of existing health systems, to digitalize contact tracing practices and processes, and to build and retain contact tracing capacities for better pandemic preparedness. Conclusion: The lessons related to COVID-19 contact tracing should be utilized to strengthen future outbreak response operations as part of epidemic and pandemic preparedness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background A pre-existing, well-established European influenza surveillance network known as I-MOVE enabled the rapid implementation of a European multi-country COVID-19 hospital surveillance network for surveillance of hospitalized COVID-19 cases in early 2020. This network included 257 hospitals in 11 surveillance sites across nine countries. We aimed to identify whether the surveillance objectives were relevant to public health actions, whether the surveillance system met its objectives, where and how shortcomings could be improved, and whether the system was sustainable. Methods We identified six key attributes (meeting objectives, usefulness, timeliness, data quality, simplicity and sustainability) to assess, using Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's evaluation framework. We analyzed pooled datasets, held interviews and group discussions with 10 participating and coordinating sites and gathered feedback through web surveys. Results There was overall agreement that the surveillance objectives had been met and being involved in a network of European partners had additional important benefits for stakeholders. While the publication of the outputs was not always sufficiently timely, data submission processes were considered straightforward and the key surveillance variables (age, sex, hospital admission and mortality data) were complete. The main challenges were identified as the collection of the large number of variables, limited available human resources and information governance and data protection laws. Conclusions I-MOVE-COVID-19 delivered relevant and accurate data supporting the development and implementation of COVID-19 surveillance. Recommendations presented here identify learning opportunities to support preparedness and surveillance response for future pandemics. The applied evaluation framework in this study can be adapted for other European surveillance system evaluations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]