Search

Background: The aim was to compare resource utilization across the four health trusts within the Western Norway Regional Health Authority since the establishment of positron emission tomography (PET) at Haukeland University Hospital in Bergen in 2009., Methods: Metadata from all PET examinations from 2009 to 2014 were automatically imported from the PET centre's central production database into a custom-developed database system, MDCake. A PET examination was defined as a procedure based on a single injection of radioactive tracer. The patients' place of residence and tentative diagnosis were coded based on the available clinical information., Results: The total number of PET examinations increased from 293 in 2009 to 1616 in 2014. The number of PET examinations per year increased across all diagnostic groups, but plateaued for lung cancer, gastrointestinal cancer and malignant melanoma since 2013. The number of examinations per capita was evenly distributed between the three northern health trusts with an average of 1260 PET studies per million inhabitants in 2014. However, patients residing in the most southerly health trust received between 44% (2010) and 27% (2014; P<0·001, repeated measures ANOVA) fewer examinations per capita per year., Conclusion: Centralized PET in the Western Norwegian health region meets the current clinical demand for patients residing in the three northern health trusts while patients from the most southern health trust receive approximately 30% fewer PET examinations. Access to specialized health care should be monitored routinely in order to identify inequalities in referral patterns and resource utilization., (© 2015 The Authors. Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Scandinavian Society of Clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine.)

Background: In order to monitor quality and efficiency in the use of health resources for highly specialised medicine, a National Professional Council has since 1990 advised the Norwegian health authorities on the establishing and localisation of such services., Materials and Method: A comprehensive review of both the quality, economy and the geographical distribution of patients in each specialised service has been carried out., Results: 33 defined national programmes were centralised to one hospital only and distributed among seven university hospitals. Eight multiregional programmes were centralised to two hospitals only and included four university hospitals. In 2001, a total of 2711 new patients were treated in these programmes. The system seems to have secured a sufficient patient flow to each programme so as to maintain quality. However, a geographically skewed distribution of patients was noted, particularly in some of the national programmes., Interpretation: In a small country like Norway, with 4.5 million inhabitants, a centralised monitoring of highly specialised medicine seems both rational and successful. By the same logic, however, international cooperation should probably be sought for the smallest patient groups.