Search

As the COVID-19 outbreak traveled through various Italian regions, all national and local administrations issued measures to counter the spread of the contagion and organize healthcare. The Italian healthcare system is, indeed, a decentralized system with 21 regional health systems (RHSs), with different models of healthcare service delivery and organization. This study investigates whether a different organization of RHSs would have led to different management of the COVID-19 epidemic, and evaluates the effect of different approaches in epidemic management on the COVID-19 epidemiological trend. A set of indicators is identified by conducting an online synchronous Focus Group, involving an experts panel. A Pearson's correlation test was performed on the values assumed by the historical series of indicators investigate correlations among the trends represented by the indicators or between them and external factors. The comparison between the experiences of the different Italian regions, regarding the management of the epidemic, has helped to confirm and emphasize the importance of a community-based approach in health care—integrated with the hospital’s functions for the care of complex conditions and the need for specialized assistance.

As the COVID-19 outbreak traveled through various Italian regions, all national and local administrations issued measures to counter the spread of the contagion and organize healthcare. The Italian healthcare system is, indeed, a decentralized system with 21 regional health systems (RHSs), with different models of healthcare service delivery and organization. This study investigates whether a different organization of RHSs would have led to different management of the COVID-19 epidemic, and evaluates the effect of different approaches in epidemic management on the COVID-19 epidemiological trend. A set of indicators is identified by conducting an online synchronous Focus Group, involving an experts panel. A Pearson's correlation test was performed on the values assumed by the historical series of indicators investigate correlations among the trends represented by the indicators or between them and external factors. The comparison between the experiences of the different Italian regions, regarding the management of the epidemic, has helped to confirm and emphasize the importance of a community-based approach in health care—integrated with the hospital’s functions for the care of complex conditions and the need for specialized assistance.

Background: Patients’ increasing needs and expectations require an overall assessment of hospital performance. Several international agencies have defined performance indicators sets but there exists no unanimous classification. The Impact HTA Horizon2020 Project wants to address this aspect, developing a toolkit of key indicators to measure hospital performance. The aim of this review is to identify and classify the dimensions of hospital performance indicators in order to develop a common language and identify a shared evidence-based way to frame and address performance assessment. Methods: Following the PRISMA statement, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were queried to perform an umbrella review. Reviews focusing on hospital settings, published January 2000–June 2019 were considered. The quality of the studies selected was assessed using the AMSTAR2 tool. Results: Six reviews ranging 2002–2014 were included. The following dimensions were described in at least half of the studies: 6 studies classified efficiency (55 indicators analyzed); 5 studies classified effectiveness (13 indicators), patient centeredness (10 indicators) and safety (8 indicators); 3 studies responsive governance (2 indicators), staff orientation (10 indicators) and timeliness (4 indicators). Three reviews did not specify the indicators related to the dimensions listed, and one article gave a complete definition of the meaning of each dimension and of the related indicators. Conclusions: The research shows emphasis of the importance of patient centeredness, effectiveness, efficiency, and safety dimensions. Especially, greater attention is given to the dimensions of effectiveness and efficiency. Assessing the overall quality of clinical pathways is key in guaranteeing a truly effective and efficient system but, to date, there still exists a lack of awareness and proactivity in terms of measuring performance of nodes within networks. The effort of classifying and systematizin

Background: Patients’ increasing needs and expectations require an overall assessment of hospital performance. Several international agencies have defined performance indicators sets but there exists no unanimous classification. The Impact HTA Horizon2020 Project wants to address this aspect, developing a toolkit of key indicators to measure hospital performance. The aim of this review is to identify and classify the dimensions of hospital performance indicators in order to develop a common language and identify a shared evidence-based way to frame and address performance assessment. Methods: Following the PRISMA statement, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were queried to perform an umbrella review. Reviews focusing on hospital settings, published January 2000–June 2019 were considered. The quality of the studies selected was assessed using the AMSTAR2 tool. Results: Six reviews ranging 2002–2014 were included. The following dimensions were described in at least half of the studies: 6 studies classified efficiency (55 indicators analyzed); 5 studies classified effectiveness (13 indicators), patient centeredness (10 indicators) and safety (8 indicators); 3 studies responsive governance (2 indicators), staff orientation (10 indicators) and timeliness (4 indicators). Three reviews did not specify the indicators related to the dimensions listed, and one article gave a complete definition of the meaning of each dimension and of the related indicators. Conclusions: The research shows emphasis of the importance of patient centeredness, effectiveness, efficiency, and safety dimensions. Especially, greater attention is given to the dimensions of effectiveness and efficiency. Assessing the overall quality of clinical pathways is key in guaranteeing a truly effective and efficient system but, to date, there still exists a lack of awareness and proactivity in terms of measuring performance of nodes within networks. The effort of classifying and systematizin

BACKGROUND: Organizational aspects in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) reports play a significant role in managing policies and strategies to implement new health technologies. The organizational domain, however, is often under-represented in HTA reports. This study explored how organizational assessment is carried out in HTA reports and designed a new perspective through an empirical approach after the comparison with EUnetHTA's Core Model 3.0. METHODS: Full HTA reports were extracted from the websites of members of International Network of Agencies for HTA and the aspects relating to the organizational assessment were analysed. HTA reports were classified into 4 typologies of technologies (device, diagnosis/screening, intervention and organizational procedures) and organizational aspects described were explored through a framework of 5 domains and 15 subdomains from Core Model. Specific Multiple Correspondence Analyses were carried out to identify technology-related domains for organizational assessment in reports. RESULTS: The analysis showed that domains and subdomains of Core Model were not covered homogeneously by the organizational assessments in the HTA reports. Through Multiple Correspondence Analyses, four new technology-related dimensions were identified and named according to the Core Model's subdomains in the four new clusters. CONCLUSIONS: This study analyzed the significance of organizational assessments in current literature and the challenges of improving this domain in HTA reports. Through an empirical analysis, we proposed a new methodology to cover the most relevant aspects of organizational appraisal according to new domains to promote support to the assessment of organizational issues in reports and fulfil the needs of future HTA research.

The availability of several effective and safe vaccines enables health systems to counteract annual influenza epidemics. However, the criteria of appropriateness and sustainability require that each citizen should receive the right vaccine. The value of each vaccine can be assessed within well-known frameworks, such as the Health Technology Assessment (HTA), a step that is fundamental to the process of allocating resources to vaccination strategies. The paper describes how HTA has been incorporated as an evidence-based tool to support the definition of Italian vaccination strategies, reports the results of the HTA report on the most recently available influenza vaccine in Italy (cell-based quadrivalent vaccine (QIVc)—Flucelvax® Tetra) and elaborates on current and future recommendations in the field of influenza vaccination. Recommendations issued by the Italian Ministry of Health foster the appropriate use of influenza vaccines from 2018–2019 onwards. Evidence of the value of newly available vaccines will hopefully support future decisions and promote the appropriate use of these vaccines on the basis of the characteristics of the target population. However, the success of influenza vaccination will also depend on citizens’ empowerment and engagement in the decision-making process.

The WHO declared the novel coronavirus disease a pandemic, with severe consequences for health and global economic activity and Italy is one of the hardest hit countries. This study aims to assess the socio-economic burden of COVID-19 pandemic in Italy through the estimation of Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) and productivity loss. The observational study was based on data from official governmental sources collected since the inception of epidemic until 28 April 2020. DALYs for a disease combines the years of life lost due to premature mortality in the population and the years lost due to disability of the disease. In addition to DALYs, temporary productivity loss due to absenteeism from work and permanent productivity loss due to premature mortality were estimated using the Human Capital Approach. The total DALYs amount to 2.01 per 1000 persons. The total permanent productivity loss was around EUR 300 million while the temporary productivity loss was around EUR 100 million. This evaluation does not consider other economic aspects related to lockdown, quarantine of contacts, healthcare direct costs etc. The burden of disease methodology is functional metric for steering choices of health policy and allowing the government to be accountable for the utilization of resources.

Background Community-based mental healthcare (CBMH) aims at supplying psychiatric patients with rehabilitative care outside the hospital. The aim of this study was to compare the organization of CBMH in a cross-border region of Germany and the Netherlands. Method Semi-structured interviews gave insight into characteristics of CBMH approaches applied in the German region of Aachen (IHP) and the Dutch Province of Limburg (FACT). We applied a Delphi technique to select a performance indicator (PI) set for CBMH, which served as a conceptual model to allow comparison. Results Both approaches are flexible, patient-centred and include the evaluation of quality. Both provide financial and administrative support for the access. Conclusion CBMH approaches appear to be equally valid from several perspectives even if they revealed, at the same time, important differences related to scope, integration with non-CBMH care resources and geographic coverage. Secondarily, the study provides a contribution to the development of a PI set to compare and evaluate CBMH approaches.