BACKGROUND: Wearables hold potential to improve chronic disease self-management in conditions like cystic fibrosis (CF) through remote monitoring, early detection of illness and motivation. Little is known about the acceptability and sustainability of integrating wearables into routine care from the perspectives of people with CF (pwCF) and their treating clinicians.
METHODS: A cross-sectional qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with adult pwCF and focus groups comprising members of a CF multidisciplinary team (MDT) were conducted at a specialist CF centre in Australia. A phenomenological orientation underpinned the study. Inductive thematic analysis was performed using the Framework method. The study adhered to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) checklist.
RESULTS: Nine pwCF and eight members of a CF MDT, representing six clinical disciplines, participated in the study. Eight themes were inductively generated from the data, of which four were identified from each group. PwCF valued wearables for providing real-time data to motivate healthy behaviours and support shared goal-setting with healthcare providers. Wearables did not influence adherence to CF-specific self-management practices and had some hardware limitations. Members of the CF MDT recognised potential benefits of remote monitoring and shared goal-setting, but advised caution regarding data accuracy, generating patient anxiety in certain personality traits, and lack of evidence supporting use in CF self-management.
CONCLUSIONS: Perspectives on integrating wearables into CF care were cautiously optimistic, with emerging risks related to patient anxiety and lack of evidence moderating acceptance.

The manuscript explores value-based healthcare (VBHC) and its role in assessing healthcare quality beyond clinical metrics. It identifies four value types: personal, technical, allocative, and societal. Emphasizing the integration of diverse stakeholder perspectives, including patients, families, and clinicians, the study highlights the importance of patient- and family-reported measures (PROMs and PREMs) and clinician input. Clinicians\' insights on treatment feasibility and effectiveness are crucial for a holistic understanding of healthcare quality. The manuscript advocates for combining machine learning with participatory approaches to enhance data analysis and continuous quality improvement in VBHC, driving better outcomes for patients and communities.

UNASSIGNED: Demand for stroke services is increasing. To save time and costs, stroke care could be reorganised using a transdisciplinary assessment model embracing overlapping allied health professional skills. The study compares transdisciplinary assessment to discipline-specific allied health assessment on an acute stroke unit, by evaluating assessment time, quality of care, and cost implications.
UNASSIGNED: The pre-/post- clinical study used non-randomised groups and 3-month follow-up after hospital admission. Patients with confirmed/suspected stroke received usual discipline-specific allied health assessment (pre-implementation phase) or the novel transdisciplinary assessment (post-implementation phase). Staff/student assessment times (primary outcome) and medical record data (secondary outcomes) were collected. Time differences were estimated using multivariable linear regression controlling for confounding factors. Cost minimisation and sensitivity analyses estimated change in hospital resource use.
UNASSIGNED: When the transdisciplinary assessment was used (N = 116), compared to usual assessment (N = 63), the average time saving was 37.6 min (95% CI -47.5, -27.7; p < 0.001) for staff and 62.2 min (95% CI -74.1, -50.3; p < 0.001) for students. The median number of allied health occasions of service reduced from 8 (interquartile range 4-23) to 5 (interquartile range 3-10; p = 0.011). There were no statistically significant or clinically important changes in patient safety, outcomes or stroke guideline adherence. Improved efficiency was associated with an estimated cost saving of $379.45 per patient (probabilistic 95% CI -487.15, -271.48).
UNASSIGNED: Transdisciplinary stroke assessment has potential for reorganising allied health services to save assessment time and reduce healthcare costs. The transdisciplinary stroke assessment could be considered for implementation in other stroke services.

BACKGROUND: One of the aims of value-based healthcare (VBHC) is to deliver more patient-centred care. However, little is known about the effect of VBHC interventions on patient experiences. We aim to explore how patients experience VBHC as implemented in an HIV outpatient clinic in an academic hospital in the Netherlands.
METHODS: The HIV outpatient clinic of the Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, an academic tertiary hospital, implemented a VBHC intervention consisting of 1) implementation of a generic quality of life questionnaire, administered before each visit, 2) a change in consultation schedule; from twice a year face-to-face to one face-to-face double consultation and one remote consultation per year, and 3) a change in consultation structure; from a single face-to-face consultation with the infectious diseases (ID) specialist to a double consultation in which the patient visits both the nurse and the ID specialist. Semi-structured interviews were held with Dutch or English-speaking adult patients, that had been a patient within Erasmus MC for more than 5 years, on their experiences with the implemented changes.
RESULTS: Thirty patients were interviewed. Patients had no objections towards completing the questionnaires especially if it could provide the professionals with additional information. Patients were primarily positive about the change in consultation schedule. For the yearly remote consultation they preferred a telephone-consultation above a video-consultation. The change in consultation structure ensured that more topics, including psychosocial and medical aspects could be discussed. Some patients did not see the added value of talking to two professionals on the same day or completing the quality of life questionnaire before their consultation.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients are generally positive towards the VBHC interventions implemented at the HIV outpatient clinic. Our findings may inform further optimization of VBHC interventions and improve patient-centred care in outpatient HIV clinics.

OBJECTIVE: As part of a quality improvement initiative in the context of value-based health care we aimed to optimize the shared decision-making (SDM) process in the care pathway for Multiple Myeloma as part of a digital care pathway (DCP). For this, more insight was needed in health care professionals\' (HCPs\') perspectives on SDM, and how SDM elements could be addressed in a DCP for MM to facilitate HCPs\' performance of SDM.
METHODS: HCPs were interviewed as per the theory of planned behaviour and the model of organizational context and SDM (phase 1). Multidisciplinary development sessions were organized to discuss concepts of the solution with HCPs (phase 2). The solution was evaluated with two patients from the quality improvement team.
RESULTS: In phase 1, ten interviews were held. HCPs\' attitudes and the subjective norm towards SDM were positive, and the intention to perform SDM was high. The clinical environment (physical context, disease characteristics, assumptions about patient characteristics, and workflows) for MM posed challenges on the actual SDM behavior. Education and use of the DCP to create awareness of SDM were seen as possible facilitators for SDM. A prepared and active patient would facilitate the SDM process. In phase 2, three concept solutions were developed before arriving at the final solution. The final solution consisted of three elements to incorporate SDM steps in the DCP: 1) creating patient awareness and activation with two questions about their preferences prior to a consultation, 2) visualisation of preferences centrally in the DCP to trigger HCP to discuss them, 3) monitoring and improving SDM with patient-questionnaires after decision-making. Patients and HCPs were willing to implement it.
CONCLUSIONS: HCPs intention to engage in SDM was high, but their actual behaviour was challenged by the clinical environment. A 3-element DCP-based intervention was developed to increase SDM.
UNASSIGNED: Input on the solution was obtained from end-users including two patients and ten healthcare professionals.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) are becoming more widely implemented across health care for important reasons. However, with thousands of PROMs available and the science of psychometrics becoming more widely applied in health measurement, choosing the right ones to implement can be puzzling. This article provides a framework of the different types of PROMs by organizing them into 4 categories based upon \"what\" is being measured and \"from whom\" the questions are asked: (1) condition-specific and domain-specific, (2) condition-specific and global, (3) universal and global, and (4) universal and domain-specific. We delve deeper into each category with clinical examples. This framework can empower health care leaders and policymakers to make more informed decisions when selecting the best PROMs to implement, ensuring PROMs deliver on their potential to promote high quality, patient-centered care.

OBJECTIVE: The objective is to develop a pragmatic framework, based on value-based healthcare principles, to monitor health outcomes per unit costs on an institutional level. Subsequently, we investigated the association between health outcomes and healthcare utilisation costs.
METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study.
METHODS: A teaching hospital in Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
METHODS: The study was performed in two use cases. The bariatric population contained 856 patients of which 639 were diagnosed with morbid obesity body mass index (BMI) <45 and 217 were diagnosed with morbid obesity BMI ≥45. The breast cancer population contained 663 patients of which 455 received a lumpectomy and 208 a mastectomy.
METHODS: The quality cost indicator (QCI) was the primary measures and was defined asQCI = (resulting outcome * 100)/average total costs (per thousand Euros)where average total costs entail all healthcare utilisation costs with regard to the treatment of the primary diagnosis and follow-up care. Resulting outcome is the number of patients achieving textbook outcome (passing all health outcome indicators) divided by the total number of patients included in the care path.
RESULTS: The breast cancer and bariatric population had the highest resulting outcome values in 2020 Q4, 0.93 and 0.73, respectively. The average total costs of the bariatric population remained stable (avg, €8833.55, min €8494.32, max €9164.26). The breast cancer population showed higher variance in costs (avg, €12 735.31 min €12 188.83, max €13 695.58). QCI values of both populations showed similar variance (0.3 and 0.8). Failing health outcome indicators was significantly related to higher hospital-based costs of care in both populations (p <0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: The QCI framework is effective for monitoring changes in average total costs and relevant health outcomes on an institutional level. Health outcomes are associated with hospital-based costs of care.

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: Value-based healthcare (VBHC) involves the use of standardised outcome measures, including patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). This study aimed to assess to what extent discussion of PROMs is associated with patient- and person-centredness.
METHODS: This study used a separate sample pre-/post-test design and multiple methods (observations, questionnaires, and interviews) in a VBHC care pathway for patients with a vestibular schwannoma, to assess to what extent the implementation of PROMs is associated with a difference in patient- and person-centredness.
RESULTS: A total of 139 patients with a vestibular schwannoma and their four treating physicians were included in the study. No significant differences were found in observed patient-centredness (Mpre=6.71 ± 2.42 vs. Mpost=6.93 ± 2.01; P = 0.60) or patient-reported patient-centredness (Mpre=1.73 vs. Mpost=1.68; P = 0.63) and person-centredness after PROM implementation (Mpre=11.81 vs. Mpost=13.42; P = 0.34). We observed more discussion of patient-reported outcomes. However, a majority of patients did not expect PRO discussion in consultations.
CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of standardised PROMs in a VBHC care pathway was associated with more discussion on patient-reported outcomes in clinical consultations. Overall, the implementation of PROMs was not observed or perceived as leading to more patient-centred consultations.
CONCLUSIONS: Physicians should assess whether the discussion of PROMs add value collaboratively with patients.

BACKGROUND: As value-based health care arrangements gain traction in spine care, understanding the true cost of care becomes critical. Historically, inaccurate cost proxies have been used, including negotiated reimbursement rates or list prices. However, time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) allows for a more accurate cost assessment, including a better understanding of the primary drivers of cost in 1-level lumbar fusion.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the variation of total hospital cost, differences in characteristics between high-cost and non-high-cost patients, and to identify the primary drivers of total hospital cost in a sample of patients undergoing 1-level lumbar fusion.
METHODS: Retrospective, multicenter (one academic medical center, one community-based hospital), observational study.
METHODS: A total of 383 patients undergoing elective 1-level lumbar fusion for degenerative spine conditions between November 2, 2021 and December 2, 2022.
METHODS: Total hospital cost of care (normalized); preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative cost of care (normalized); ratio of most to least expensive 1-level lumbar fusion.
METHODS: Patients undergoing a 1-level lumbar fusion between November 2, 2021 and December 2, 2022 were identified at two hospitals (one quaternary referral academic medical center and one community-based hospital) within our health system. TDABC was used to calculate total hospital cost, which was also broken up into: pre-, intra-, and postoperative timeframes. Operating surgeon and patient characteristics were also collected and compared between high- and non-high-cost patients. The correlation of surgical time and cost was determined. Multivariable linear regression was used to determine factors associated with total hospital cost.
RESULTS: The most expensive 1-level lumbar fusion was 6.8x more expensive than the least expensive 1-level lumbar fusion, with the intraoperative period accounting for 88% of total cost. On average. the implant cost accounted for 30% of the total, but across the patient sample, the implant cost accounted for a range of 6% to 44% of the total cost. High-cost patients were younger (55 years [SD: 13 years] vs.63 years [SD: 13 years], p=.0002), more likely to have commercial health insurance (24 out of 38 (63%) vs. 181 out of 345 (52%), p=.003). There was a poor correlation between time of surgery (i.e., incision to close) and total overall cost (ρ: .26, p<.0001). Increase age (RC: -0.003 [95% CI: -0.006 to -0.000007], p=.049) was associated with decreased cost. Surgery by certain surgeons was associated with decreased total cost when accounting for other factors (p<.05).
CONCLUSIONS: A large variation exists in the total hospital cost for patients undergoing 1-level lumbar fusion, which is primarily driven by surgeon-level decisions and preferences (e.g., implant and technology use). Also, being a \"fast\" surgeon intraoperatively does not mean your total cost is meaningfully lower. As efforts continue to optimize patient value through ensuring appropriate clinical outcomes while also reducing cost, spine surgeons must use this knowledge to lead, or at least be active participants in, any discussions that could impact patient care.