Search

Background: People experiencing homelessness (PEH) are known to be at higher risk of adverse health outcomes and premature mortality when compared to the housed population and often face significant barriers when attempting to access health services. This study aimed to better understand the specific health care needs of PEH and the barriers and facilitators associated with their timely and equitable access to health services in the European context. Methods: We conducted an exploratory cross-national qualitative study involving people with lived experience of homelessness and health and social care professionals in Austria, Greece, Spain, and the UK. A total of 69 semi-structured interviews comprising 15 social care professionals, 19 health care professionals, and 35 PEH were completed, transcribed, and analysed thematically. Results: Findings were organised into three overarching themes relating to the research question: (a) Health care needs of PEH, (b) Barriers to health care access, and (c) Facilitators to health care access. Overall, the general health of PEH was depicted as extremely poor, and mainstream health services were portrayed as ill-equipped to respond to the needs of this population. Adopting tailored approaches to care, especially involving trusted professionals in the delivery of care, was identified as a key strategy for overcoming existing barriers. Conclusions: The results of this study indicate there to be a high degree of consistency in the health care needs of PEH and the barriers and facilitators associated with their access to health care across the various European settings. Homelessness in itself is recognized to represent an essential social determinant of health, with PEH at risk of unequal access to health services. Changes are thus required to facilitate PEH's access to mainstream primary care. This can also be further complemented by investment in 'in-reach' services and other tailored and person-centred forms of health care. Trial registration: This study was registered retrospectively on June 6, 2022, in the registry of ClinicalTrials.gov under the number NCT05406687. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People experiencing homelessness (PEH) are known to be at higher risk of adverse health outcomes and premature mortality when compared to the housed population and often face significant barriers when attempting to access health services. This study aimed to better understand the specific health care needs of PEH and the barriers and facilitators associated with their timely and equitable access to health services in the European context. Methods: We conducted an exploratory cross-national qualitative study involving people with lived experience of homelessness and health and social care professionals in Austria, Greece, Spain, and the UK. A total of 69 semi-structured interviews comprising 15 social care professionals, 19 health care professionals, and 35 PEH were completed, transcribed, and analysed thematically. Results: Findings were organised into three overarching themes relating to the research question: (a) Health care needs of PEH, (b) Barriers to health care access, and (c) Facilitators to health care access. Overall, the general health of PEH was depicted as extremely poor, and mainstream health services were portrayed as ill-equipped to respond to the needs of this population. Adopting tailored approaches to care, especially involving trusted professionals in the delivery of care, was identified as a key strategy for overcoming existing barriers. Conclusions: The results of this study indicate there to be a high degree of consistency in the health care needs of PEH and the barriers and facilitators associated with their access to health care across the various European settings. Homelessness in itself is recognized to represent an essential social determinant of health, with PEH at risk of unequal access to health services. Changes are thus required to facilitate PEH's access to mainstream primary care. This can also be further complemented by investment in 'in-reach' services and other tailored and person-centred forms of health care. Trial registration: This study was registered retrospectively on June 6, 2022, in the registry of ClinicalTrials.gov under the number NCT05406687. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background In Europe, more than 15 million people live with heart failure (HF). It imposes an enormous social, organizational and economic burden. As a reaction to impending impact on healthcare provision, different country-specific structures for HF-care have been established. The aim of this report is to provide an overview and compare the HF-care approaches of Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands and the UK, and to open the possibility of learning from each other's experience. Methods A mixed methods approach was implemented that included a literature analysis, interviews and questionnaires with HF-patients and caregivers, and expert interviews with representatives from healthcare, health service research and medical informatics. Results The models of HF-care in all countries analyzed are based on the European Society of Cardiology guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of HF. Even though the HF-models differed in design and implementation in practice, key challenges were similar: (i) unequal distribution of care between urban and rural areas, (ii) long waiting times, (iii) unequal access to and provision of healthcare services, (iv) information and communication gaps and (v) inadequate implementation and financing of digital applications. Conclusion Although promising approaches exist to structure and improve HF-care, across the four countries, implementation was reluctant to embrace novel methods. A lack of financial resources and insufficient digitalization making it difficult to adopt new concepts. Integration of HF-nurses seems to be an effective way of improving current models of HF-care. Digital solutions offer further opportunities to overcome communication and coordination gaps and to strengthen self-management skills. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health and social care systems face difficulties in managing multimorbidity, disease burden and complex needs in long‐term conditions such as Parkinson's disease. Objective: This study aimed to develop a European understanding of how health and social care professionals can collaborate with stakeholders from different organizations and sectors to enhance the management of Parkinson's disease in a community setting by identifying the existing gaps in this process and how people with Parkinson's disease and their family carers could benefit from these partnerships. Methods: A mixed‐methods sequential study was conducted in Denmark, Norway, Spain and the United Kingdom. The findings from the qualitative phase are presented. Individual semistructured interviews were analysed using Braun's and Clarke's thematic analysis. A meta‐ethnography approach was used to analyse and synthesize cross‐national findings. Results: A total of 41 healthcare professionals and 39 stakeholders from different disciplines and sectors were interviewed in the four countries. The participants acknowledged a lack of awareness of available resources and poor communication between the different support systems in the management of Parkinson's disease. To promote multiagency collaborations, the participants highlighted the need to organize services along the Parkinson's disease journey, patient involvement and strategic involvement of carers in organizing resources and Parkinson's disease care pathways. According to the participants, the benefits from multiagency partnerships could lead to an enhanced continuity of care and specialized knowledge, mobilization of resources in the community, personalized support and improved access to services. Conclusions: Policymakers are called upon to create formal structures that facilitate multisectoral collaborations to promote an integrated system of care for the management of Parkinson's disease in the community. To address this challenge, we propose five strategies showing how organizations can work together to optimize the use of resources and enhance the management of Parkinson's disease throughout the illness trajectory. Patient or Public Contribution: Patient and Public Involvement groups made up of stakeholders, healthcare professionals, patients with Parkinson's disease and family carers participated in the design of the study, the development of the interview guides and the validation of the findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To inform allocation decisions in any healthcare system, robust cost data are indispensable. Nevertheless, recommendations on the most appropriate valuation approaches vary or are nonexistent, and no internationally accepted gold standard exists. This costing analysis exercise aims to assess the impact and implications of different calculation methods and sources based on the unit cost of general practitioner (GP) consultations in Austria.Methods: Six costing methods for unit cost calculation were explored, following 3 Austrian methodological approaches (AT-1, AT-2, AT-3) and 3 approaches applied in 3 other European countries (Germany, The Netherlands, United Kingdom). Drawing on Austrian data, mean unit costs per GP consultation were calculated in euros for 2015.Results: Mean unit costs ranged from €15.6 to €42.6 based on the German top-down costing approach (DE) and the Austrian Physicians' Chamber's price recommendations (AT-3), respectively. The mean unit cost was estimated at €18.9 based on Austrian economic evaluations (AT-1) and €17.9 based on health insurance payment tariffs (AT-2). The Dutch top-down (NL) and the UK bottom-up approaches (UK) yielded higher estimates (NL: €25.3, UK: €29.8). Overall variation reached 173%.Conclusions: Our study is the first to systematically investigate the impact of differing calculation methods on unit cost estimates. It shows large variations with potential impact on the conclusions in an economic evaluation. Although different methodological choices may be justified by the adopted study perspective, different costing approaches introduce variation in cross-study/cross-country cost estimates, leading to decreased confidence in data quality in economic evaluations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. To gain insight into clinical practice regarding referral, early diagnosis and other aspects of the management of patients with dcSSc in Europe and the USA. Methods. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 84 rheumatologists (or internal medicine physicians) and 40 dermatologists in different countries (the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the USA). Physicians were asked to identify key steps in the patient pathway relating to patient presentation, diagnosis and referral, in addition to other treatment and follow-up processes. Results. The interviewed physicians reported that late presentation with dcSSc was common, with some patients presenting to primary care physicians after symptoms had persisted for up to 1 year. Awareness of dcSSc is reported to vary widely among primary care physicians. Final diagnosis, generally following guideline-based recommendations, was by rheumatologists in most cases (or internal medicine physicians in France) and they remained responsible for global patient management, with lesser involvement in diagnosis and management by dermatologists. Specialist centres were not well defined and did not exist in all countries. Conclusion. Patients and primary healthcare providers can be unaware of the symptoms of dcSSc, therefore presentation and referral to specialist care are often late. Thus, improved awareness among patients and primary care physicians is necessary to facilitate earlier referral and diagnosis. Once referred, more consistent use of the modified Rodnan skin score at diagnosis and follow-up may help to monitor disease progression. Furthermore, establishing specialist centres may help to promote such changes and improve patient care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The evidence that inspires and fosters communication skills, teaching programmes and clinical recommendations are often based on national studies which assume, implicitly, that patients' preferences towards doctors' communication style are not significantly affected by their cultural background. The cross-cultural validity of national results has been recognized as a potential limitation on how generally applicable they are in a wider context. Using 35 country-specific focus group discussions from four European countries, the aim of the present study is to test whether or not national cultures influence lay people's preferences towards doctors' style of communication.Methods: Lay people preferences on doctor's communication style have been collected in Belgium, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Italy. Each centre organized between eight and nine focus groups, where participants (n = 259) were asked to comment on a video of a simulated medical interview. The discussions were audiotaped, transcribed and coded using a common framework (Guliver Coding System) that allowed for the identification of different themes.Results: The frequency distribution of the topics discussed highlights lay people's generally positive views towards most part of doctors interventions. The regression model applied to the Guliver categories highlighted slight national differences and the existence of a cross-cultural appreciation, in particular, of five types of intervention: Doctors attitudes (both Task-Oriented and Affective/Emotional), Summarizing, Structuring and Providing solution.Conclusion: Lay panels valued doctors' communication style in a similar manner in the countries selected. This highlights the existence of a common background, which in the process of internationalization of heath care, might foster the implementation of cross-national teaching programmes and clinical guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To measure changes in prevalence and predictors of home smoking bans (HSBs) among smokers in four European countries after the implementation of national smoke-free legislation. Design Two waves of the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project Europe Surveys, which is a prospective panel study. Pre- and post-legislation data were used from Ireland, France, Germany and the Netherlands. Two pre-legislation waves from the UK were used as control. Participants 4634 respondents from the intervention countries and 1080 from the control country completed both baseline and follow-up and were included in the present analyses. Methods Multiple logistic regression models to identify predictors of having or of adopting a total HSB, and Generalised Estimating Equation models to compare patterns of change after implementation of smoke-free legislation to a control country without such legislation. Results Most smokers had at least partial smoking restrictions in their home, but the proportions varied significantly between countries. After implementation of national smoke-free legislation, the proportion of smokers with a total HSB increased significantly in all four countries. Among continuing smokers, the number of cigarettes smoked per day either remained stable or decreased significantly. Multiple logistic regression models indicated that having a young child in the household and supporting smoking bans in bars were important correlates of having a pre-legislation HSB. Prospective predictors of imposing a HSB between survey waves were planning to quit smoking, supporting a total smoking ban in bars and the birth of a child. Generalised Estimating Equation models indicated that the change in total HSB in the intervention countries was greater than that in the control country. Conclusions The findings suggest that smoke-free legislation does not lead to more smoking in smokers' homes. On the contrary, our findings demonstrate that smoke-free legislation may stimulate smokers to establish total smoking bans in their homes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Little is known about the relationship between physical functional health and long-term risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) independently of known risk factors in a general population.Methods: Men and women aged 40-79 years at baseline who completed a health and lifestyle questionnaire and attended a health examination during 1993-97 participating in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer-Norfolk who were free of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke and cancer were included. Eighteen months later, physical functional health was assessed using physical component summary (PCS) scores of Short-Form 36-item questionnaire (SF-36). The incidence of CHD was ascertained by death certification and hospital record linkage up to March 2008.Results: A total of 14,222 men and women were included in the study. There were 389 incident CHD (total person-years = 126,896 years). People who reported better physical functional health had significantly lower risk of CHD. Using Cox proportional hazard models adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, cholesterol, systolic blood pressure, smoking, alcohol consumption, physical activity, diabetes, family history of MI, social class and aspirin usage, it was found that men and women who were in the top quartile of SF-36 PCS had half the risk of CHD [relative risk (RR) = 0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.32-0.65] compared with the people in the bottom quartile. The relationships remained essentially unchanged after excluding incident CHD within the first 2 years of follow-up (RR = 0.48; 95% CI = 0.33-0.70).Conclusions: Physical functional health predicts subsequent CHD risk independently of known risk factors in a general population. People with poor physical functional health may benefit from targeted preventive interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It has been suggested that the known poorer survival from cancer in the United Kingdom, compared with other European countries, can be attributed to more advanced cancer stage at presentation. There is, therefore, a need to understand the diagnostic process, and to ascertain the risk factors for increased time to presentation.Methods: We report the results from two worldwide systematic reviews of the literature on patient-mediated and practitioner-mediated delays, identifying the factors that may influence these.Results: Across cancer sites, non-recognition of symptom seriousness is the main patient-mediated factor resulting in increased time to presentation. There is strong evidence of an association between older age and patient delay for breast cancer, between lower socio-economic status and delay for upper gastrointestinal and urological cancers and between lower education level and delay for breast and colorectal cancers. Fear of cancer is a contributor to delayed presentation, while sanctioning of help seeking by others can be a powerful mediator of reduced time to presentation. For practitioner delay, 'misdiagnosis' occurring either through treating patients symptomatically or relating symptoms to a health problem other than cancer, was an important theme across cancer sites. For some cancers, this could also be linked to inadequate patient examination, use of inappropriate tests or failing to follow-up negative or inconclusive test results.Conclusion: Having sought help for potential cancer symptoms, it is therefore important that practitioners recognise these symptoms, and examine, investigate and refer appropriately. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Family carers manage a wide range of responsibilities in the lives and care of patients receiving palliative care. They fulfil multiple roles and perform activities within different settings. This has immediate consequences on family carers’ every-day lives. According to literature, family carers in palliative care are both part of the formal and informal care network, but also persons in need of support. This article aims to investigate 1) burdens and rewards associated with family caregiving and 2) what family carers find helpful in their contact with professionals from integrated palliative care initiatives (IPC-i) and other services. Methods: Family carers looking after patients with cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or chronic heart failure were purposefully recruited at 22 IPC-i in Belgium, Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom in the course of the project “Patient-centred palliative care pathways in advanced cancer and chronic disease” (InSup-C). Semi-structured interviews (n = 156) and 87 quantitative questionnaires (CRA, POS, CANHELP Lite) were conducted with family carers. Interviews were analysed with transnationally agreed thematic codes (MAXQDA or NVivo). Statistical tests (SPSS) were carried out in accordance with the characteristic value of the items and distributions. Results: On average, quantitative data showed moderate burden, but the qualitative findings indicated that this burden might be underrated. There is some evidence that IPC-i with well-developed professional care networks and communication systems relieved family carers’ burden by direct and indirect interventions; e.g. provision of night shift nurses or psychological support. Needs of family carers were similar in all participating countries. However, in all countries IPC-i mostly offered one-off events for family carers, lacking systematic or institutionalised support structures. Conclusions: Data suggest that, most IPC-i did not pay enough attention to the needs of most family carers, and did not offer proactive care and access to supportive resources to them (e.g. training, respite care, access to resources). We recommend recognizing family carers as part of the ‘unit of care’ and partner in caregiving, to improve their knowledge about, and access to, and the support available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]