Search

Background: Falls cause 58% of injury-related Emergency Department (ED) attendances. Previous research has highlighted the potential role of cardiovascular risk factors for falls. This study investigated the impact of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk on three-year incident falls, with presentation to the ED, and mortality. Methods: A matched cohort study design was employed using national registry data from 82,292 adults (33% male) aged ≥ 65 years living in Denmark who attended the ED in 2013. We compared age and gender matched ED attendees presenting with a fall versus another reason. The cohort was followed for three-year incident falls, with presentation to the ED, and mortality. The impact of falls-related CVDs was also examined. Results: Three-year incident falls was twofold higher among age and gender matched ED attendees aged ≥ 65 years presenting with a fall versus another reason at baseline. A presentation of falls with hip fracture had the highest percentage of incident falls in the 65–74 age group (22%) and the highest percentage mortality in all age groups (27–62%). CVD was not a significant factor in presenting with a fall at the ED, nor did it contribute significantly to the prediction of three-year incident falls. CVD was strongly associated with mortality risk among the ED fall group (RR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.67–1.97) and showed interactions with both age and fall history. Conclusion: In this large study of adults aged ≥ 65 years attending the ED utilising data from national administrative registers in Denmark, we confirm that older adults attending the ED with a fall, including those with hip fracture, were at greatest risk for future falls. While CVD did not predict incident falls, it increased the risk of mortality in the three-year follow up with advancing age. This may be informative for the provision of care pathways for older adults attending the ED due to a fall. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The aim of the SCIENCE trial was to investigate whether a single treatment with direct intramyocardial injections of adipose tissue‐derived mesenchymal stromal cells (CSCC_ASCs) was safe and improved cardiac function in patients with chronic ischaemic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods and results: The study was a European multicentre, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled phase II trial using allogeneic CSCC_ASCs from healthy donors or placebo (2:1 randomization). Main inclusion criteria were New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II–III, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <45%, and N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide (NT‐proBNP) levels >300 pg/ml. CSCC_ASCs or placebo (isotonic saline) were injected directly into viable myocardium. The primary endpoint was change in left ventricular end‐systolic volume (LVESV) at 6‐month follow‐up measured by echocardiography. A total of 133 symptomatic HFrEF patients were included. The treatment was safe without any drug‐related severe adverse events or difference in cardiac‐related adverse events during a 3‐year follow‐up period. There were no significant differences between groups during follow‐up in LVESV (0.3 ± 5.0 ml, p = 0.945), nor in secondary endpoints of left ventricular end‐diastolic volume (−2.0 ± 6.0 ml, p = 0.736) and LVEF (−1.6 ± 1.0%, p = 0.119). The NYHA class improved slightly within the first year in both groups without any difference between groups. There were no changes in 6‐min walk test, NT‐proBNP, C‐reactive protein or quality of life the first year in any groups. Conclusion: The SCIENCE trial demonstrated safety of intramyocardial allogeneic CSCC_ASC therapy in patients with chronic HFrEF. However, it was not possible to improve the pre‐defined endpoints and induce restoration of cardiac function or clinical symptoms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic diseases are major causes of death and reduction in the quality of life worldwide, and their prevalence is expected to rise due to changing demographics. Disease management programmes (DMPs) have been presented as a policy response to challenges of care coordination for such chronic diseases. This paper investigates the implementation of DMPs in a National Health Care system in the Nordic region using type II diabetes as an example. DMPs are detailed descriptions of the sequence and responsibilities for diagnostic, treatment, rehabilitation and prevention procedures. The paper applies a systemic implementation perspective to provide detailed analysis of implementation progress, issues and concerns. The implementation analysis shows that the framework of DMP has facilitated the development of new practices and attention to the roles that each of the stakeholders are playing within the service delivery. Many new initiatives contribute to improved coordination and overall management of the Type 2 diabetes (T2DB) population. Yet, there are also several cross-cutting challenges that are affecting the implementation process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic diseases are highly important for the future level and distribution of health and well-being in western societies. Consequently, it seems pertinent to assess not only efficiency of chronic care but also its impact on health equity. However, operationalisation of health equity has proven a challenging task. Challenges include identifying a relevant and measurable evaluative space. Various schools of thought in health economics have identified different outcomes of interest for equity assessment, with capabilities as a proposed alternative to more conventional economic conceptualisations. The aim of this paper is to contribute to the conceptualisation of health equity evaluation in the context of chronic disease management. We do this by firstly introducing an equity enquiry framework incorporating the capabilities approach. Secondly, we demonstrate the application and relevance of this framework through a content analysis of equity-related principles and aims in national chronic disease management guidelines and the national diabetes action plan in Denmark. Finally, we discuss how conceptualisations of equity focused on capabilities may be used in evaluation by scoping relevant operationalisations. A promising way forward in the context of chronic care evaluation may emerge from a combination of concepts of capabilities developed in economics, health sciences and psychology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Gestational diabetes (GDM) impacts 8-18% of pregnancies and greatly increases both maternal and child risk of developing non-communicable diseases such as type 2 diabetes and obesity. Whilst lifestyle interventions in pregnancy and postpartum reduce this risk, a research translation gap remains around delivering implementable interventions with adequate population penetration and participation. Impact Diabetes Bump2Baby is an implementation project of an evidence-based system of care for the prevention of overweight and obesity. Bump2Baby and Me is the multicentre randomised controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of a mHealth coaching programme in pregnancy and postpartum for women at high risk of developing GDM.Methods: Eight hundred women will be recruited in early pregnancy from 4 clinical sites within Ireland, the UK, Spain, and Australia. Women will be screened for eligibility using the validated Monash GDM screening tool. Participants will be enrolled from 12 to 24 weeks' gestation and randomised on a 1:1 basis into the intervention or control arm. Alongside usual care, the intervention involves mHealth coaching via a smartphone application, which uses a combination of synchronous and asynchronous video and text messaging, and allows for personalised support and goal setting with a trained health coach. The control arm receives usual care. All women and their children will be followed from early pregnancy until 12 months postpartum. The primary outcome will be a difference in maternal body mass index (BMI) of 0.8 kg/m2 at 12 months postpartum. Secondary maternal and infant outcomes include the development of GDM, gestational weight gain, pregnancy outcomes, improvements in diet, physical activity, sleep, and neonatal weight and infant growth patterns. The 5-year project is funded by the EU Commission Horizon 2020 and the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. Ethical approval has been received.Discussion: Previous interventions have not moved beyond tightly controlled efficacy trials into routine service delivery. This project aims to provide evidence-based, sustainable support that could be incorporated into usual care for women during pregnancy and postpartum. This study will contribute evidence to inform the early prevention of non-communicable diseases like obesity and diabetes in mothers and the next generation.Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12620001240932 . Registered on 19 November 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most research on health care equity focuses on accessing services, with less attention given to how revenue is collected to pay for a country's health care bill. This article examines the progressivity of revenue collection among publicly funded sources: income taxes, social insurance (often in the form of payroll) taxes, and consumption taxes (e.g., value-added taxes). We develop methodology to derive a qualitative index that rates each of 29 high-income countries as to its progressivity or regressivity for each of the three sources of revenue. A variety of data sources are employed, some from secondary data sources and other from country representatives of the Health Systems and Policy Monitor of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. We found that countries with more progressive income tax systems used more income-based tax brackets and had larger differences in marginal tax rates between the brackets. The more progressive social insurance revenue collection systems did not have an upper income cap and exempted poorer persons or reduced their contributions. The only pattern regarding consumption taxes was that countries that exhibited the fewest overall income inequalities tended to have least regressive consumption tax policies. The article also provides several examples from the sample of countries on ways to make public revenue financing of health care more progressive., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

This analysis of the Danish health system reviews recent developments in organization and governance, health financing, health care provision, health reforms and health system performance. Population health in Denmark is good and improving, with life expectancy above the European Union (EU) average but is, however, lagging behind the other Nordic countries. Denmark has a universal and tax-financed health system, providing coverage for a comprehensive package of health services. Notable exclusions to the benefits package include outpatient prescription drugs and adult dental care, which require co-payment and are the main causes of out-of-pocket spending. The hospital sector has been transformed during the past 15 years through a process of consolidating hospitals and the centralization of medical specialties. However, in recent years, there has been a move towards decentralization to increase the volume and quality of care provided outside hospitals in primary and local care settings. The Danish health care system is, to a very high degree, based on digital solutions that health care providers, citizens and institutions all use. Ensuring the availability of health care in all parts of Denmark is increasingly seen as a priority issue. Ensuring sufficient health workers, especially nurses, poses a significant challenge to the Danish health system's sustainability and resilience. While a comprehensive package of policies has been put in place to increase the number of nurses being trained and retain those already working in the system, such measures need time to work. Addressing staffing shortages requires long-term action. Profound changes in working practices and working environments will be required to ensure the sustainability of the health workforce and, by extension, the health system into the future., (World Health Organization 2024 (acting as the host organization for, and secretariat of, the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies).)