Search

BackgroundEvidence suggests that health care data sharing may strengthen care coordination, improve quality and safety, and reduce costs. However, to achieve efficient and meaningful adoption of health care data-sharing initiatives, it is necessary to engage all stakeholders, from health care professionals to patients. Although previous work has assessed health care professionals’ perceptions of data sharing, perspectives of the general public and particularly of seldom heard groups have yet to be fully assessed. ObjectiveThis study aims to explore the views of the public, particularly their hopes and concerns, around health care data sharing. MethodsAn original, immersive public engagement interactive experience was developed—The Can of Worms installation—in which participants were prompted to reflect about data sharing through listening to individual stories around health care data sharing. A multidisciplinary team with expertise in research, public involvement, and human-centered design developed this concept. The installation took place in three separate events between November 2018 and November 2019. A combination of convenience and snowball sampling was used in this study. Participants were asked to fill self-administered feedback cards and to describe their hopes and fears about the meaningful use of data in health care. The transcripts were compiled verbatim and systematically reviewed by four independent reviewers using the thematic analysis method to identify emerging themes. ResultsOur approach exemplifies the potential of using interdisciplinary expertise in research, public involvement, and human-centered design to tell stories, collect perspectives, and spark conversations around complex topics in participatory digital medicine. A total of 352 qualitative feedback cards were collected, each reflecting participants’ hopes and fears for health care data sharing. Thematic analyses identified six themes under hopes: enablement of personal access and ownership, increased interoperability and collaboration, generation of evidence for better and safer care, improved timeliness and efficiency, delivery of more personalized care, and equality. The five main fears identified included inadequate security and exploitation, data inaccuracy, distrust, discrimination and inequality, and less patient-centered care. ConclusionsThis study sheds new light on the main hopes and fears of the public regarding health care data sharing. Importantly, our results highlight novel concerns from the public, particularly in terms of the impact on health disparities, both at international and local levels, and on delivering patient-centered care. Incorporating the knowledge generated and focusing on co-designing solutions to tackle these concerns is critical to engage the public as active contributors and to fully leverage the potential of health care data use.

The resources necessary to improve anesthesia quality and meet reimbursement and regulatory thresholds are scarce, particularly for smaller practices. We examined how small practice integration into a firm with greater resources can facilitate improvements. A mixed-methods analysis was conducted using the data from the US Anesthesia Partners data warehouse, Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), commercial insurers' surgery length of stay (LOS) databases, anesthesia-specific patient satisfaction surveys, and interviews with practice leadership before and after integration. All integrated practices improved their quality improvement infrastructure and achieved higher MIPS scores, with increased clinician and leadership satisfaction. Patient satisfaction exceeded national benchmarks in all groups, based on 398 392 returned surveys in 2021. Hospital LOS for common operations was shorter, based on a statewide database. This case study demonstrates that partnership with an organization with greater resources can advance anesthesia quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Heightened inflammatory state, as measured by circulating C‐reactive protein (CRP) levels, can promote inflammation‐mediated disease risk. It is important to account for population fluctuation and sex variation in serum CRP concentrations on overall time trends. Methods: Using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data, we specify linear and algebraic decomposition models separately by sex to identify the drivers of the changing trends in the distribution of CRP values in the population. Results: We found a nonsignificant overall increase in CRP, but a significant decrease among women and increase among men, over a 10‐year period. We then used linear and algebraic decomposition techniques to identify the sources of change in CRP over time, separately for women and men. CRP increased among men mainly because lifestyle/health characteristics worsened over time, and because the size of socioeconomic/demographic groups with higher CRP increased and the size of groups with lower CRP decreased. The downward shift in CRP among women occurred because the typical woman across all cohorts had lower CRP levels. Conclusions: We identified two fundamentally different processes of change driving the decline and rise in CRP values among women and men, respectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Competing Interests: The authors disclose no conflict of interest.