Search

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia / Journal Canadien d'Anesthésie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Abstract: Background: Globally, health‐care systems and organizations are looking to improve health system performance through the implementation of a person‐centred care (PCC) model. While numerous conceptual frameworks for PCC exist, a gap remains in practical guidance on PCC implementation. Methods: Based on a narrative review of the PCC literature, a generic conceptual framework was developed in collaboration with a patient partner, which synthesizes evidence, recommendations and best practice from existing frameworks and implementation case studies. The Donabedian model for health‐care improvement was used to classify PCC domains into the categories of “Structure,” “Process” and “Outcome” for health‐care quality improvement. Discussion: The framework emphasizes the structural domain, which relates to the health‐care system or context in which care is delivered, providing the foundation for PCC, and influencing the processes and outcomes of care. Structural domains identified include: the creation of a PCC culture across the continuum of care; co‐designing educational programs, as well as health promotion and prevention programs with patients; providing a supportive and accommodating environment; and developing and integrating structures to support health information technology and to measure and monitor PCC performance. Process domains describe the importance of cultivating communication and respectful and compassionate care; engaging patients in managing their care; and integration of care. Outcome domains identified include: access to care and Patient‐Reported Outcomes. Conclusion: This conceptual framework provides a step‐wise roadmap to guide health‐care systems and organizations in the provision PCC across various health‐care sectors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Risk adjustment is essential for valid comparison of patients' health outcomes or performances of health care providers. Several risk adjustment methods for liver diseases are commonly used but the optimal approach is unknown. This study aimed to compare the common risk adjustment methods for predicting in-hospital mortality in cirrhosis patients using electronic medical record (EMR) data.Methods: The sample was derived from Beijing YouAn hospital between 2010 and 2014. Previously validated EMR extraction methods were applied to define liver disease conditions, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), Elixhauser comorbidity index (ECI), Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP), model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), MELD sodium (MELDNa), and five-variable MELD (5vMELD). The performance of the common risk adjustment models as well as models combining disease severity and comorbidity indexes for predicting in-hospital mortality was compared using c-statistic.Results: Of 11,121 cirrhotic patients, 69.9% were males and 15.8% age 65 or older. The c-statistics across compared models ranged from 0.785 to 0.887. All models significantly outperformed the baseline model with age, sex, and admission status (c-statistic: 0.628). The c-statistics for the CCI, ECI, MELDNa, and CTP were 0.808, 0.825, 0.849, and 0.851, respectively. The c-statistic was 0.887 for combination of CTP and ECI, and 0.882 for combination of MELDNa score and ECI.Conclusions: The liver disease severity indexes (i.e., CTP and MELDNa score) outperformed the CCI and ECI for predicting in-hospital mortality among cirrhosis patients using Chinese EMRs. Combining liver disease severity and comorbidities indexes could improve the discrimination power of predicting in-hospital mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health insurance and provider payment reforms all over the world beg a key empirical question: what are the potential impacts of patient cost-sharing on health care utilization, cost and outcomes? The unique health insurance system and rich electronic medical record (EMR) data in China provides us a unique opportunity to study this topic., Methods: Four years (2010 to 2014) of EMR data from one medical center in China were utilized, including 10,858 adult patients with liver diseases. We measured patient cost-sharing using actual reimbursement ratio (RR) which is allowed us to better capture financial incentive than using type of health insurance. A rigorous risk adjustment method was employed with both comorbidities and disease severity measures acting as risk adjustors. Associations between RR and health use, costs and outcome were analyzed by multivariate analyses., Results: After risk adjustment, patients with more generous health insurance coverage (higher RR) were found to have longer hospital stay, higher total cost, higher medication cost, and higher ratio of medication to total cost, as well as higher number and likelihood that specific procedures were performed., Conclusion: Our study implied that patient cost-sharing affects health care services use and cost. This reflects how patients and physicians respond to financial incentives in the current healthcare system in China, and the responses could be a joint effect of both demand and supply side moral hazard. In order to contain cost and improve efficiency in the system, reforming provide payment and insurance scheme is urgently needed.