Work like a Doc: A comparison of regulations on residents' working hours in 14 high-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Medical residents work long, continuous hours. Working in conditions of extreme fatigue has adverse effects on the quality and safety of care, and on residents' quality of life. Many countries have attempted to regulate residents' work hours. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to review residents' work hours regulations in different countries with an emphasis on night shifts. METHODS: Standardized qualitative data on residents' working hours were collected with the assistance of experts from 14 high-income countries through a questionnaire. An international comparative analysis was performed. RESULTS: All countries reviewed limit the weekly working hours; North-American countries limit to 60-80 h, European countries limit to 48 h. In most countries, residents work 24 or 26 consecutive hours, but the number of long overnight shifts varies, ranging from two to ten. Many European countries face difficulties in complying with the weekly hour limit and allow opt-out contracts to exceed it. CONCLUSIONS: In the countries analyzed, residents still work long hours. Attempts to limit the shift length or the weekly working hours resulted in modest improvements in residents' quality of life with mixed effects on quality of care and residents' education.

Revisiting systematic geographical variations in tonsils surgery in children in the Spanish National Health System: spatiotemporal ecological study on hospital administrative data.

OBJECTIVE: To provide new evidence on how tonsils surgery in children has geographically varied over time in the context of the Spanish National Health System. DESIGN: Observational ecological spatiotemporal study on geographical variations in medical practice, using linked administrative datasets, including virtually all surgeries performed from 2003 to 2015. SETTING: The Spanish National Health System, a quasi-federal structure with 17 autonomous communities (ACs), and 203 healthcare areas (HCAs). PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 19 and younger residing in the HCAs and ACs. INTERVENTIONS: Tonsillectomy with adenoidectomy (T&A); and tonsillectomies alone (T). MAIN ENDPOINTS: (1) Evolution of T&A and T rates; (2) spatiotemporal variation in the risk of receiving T&A or T surgery at regional level (ACs) and HCAs; and (3) the fraction of the variation (FV) attributed to each of the components of variation-ACs, HCAs, year and interaction ACs year. RESULTS: T&A age-sex standardised rates increased over the period of analysis from 15.2 to 20.9 (5.7 points per 10 000 inhabitants). T alone remained relatively lower than T&A rates, evolving from 3.6 in 2003 to 3.9 in 2015 (0.3 points per 10 000 inhabitants). Most of the risk variation was captured at the HCAs level in both procedures (FV: 55.3% in T&A and 72.5% in T). The ACs level explained 27.6% of the FV in the risk in T&A versus 8% in T. The interaction ACs year was similar in both procedures (FV: 15.5% in T&A and 17.5% in T). The average trend hardly explained 1.46% and 1.83% of the variation, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our study showed wide persistent variations with a steady increase in rates and risk of T&A and a stagnation of T alone, where most of the variation risk was explained at HCA level.

Early health system responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in Mediterranean countries: A tale of successes and challenges.

This paper conducts a comparative review of the (curative) health systems' response taken by Cyprus, Greece, Israel, Italy, Malta, Portugal, and Spain during the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, these Mediterranean countries shared similarities in terms of health system resources, which were low compared to the EU/OECD average. We distill key policy insights regarding the governance tools adopted to manage the pandemic, the means to secure sufficient physical infrastructure and workforce capacity and some financing and coverage aspects. We performed a qualitative analysis of the evidence reported to the 'Health System Response Monitor' platform of the European Observatory by country experts. We found that governance in the early stages of the pandemic was undertaken centrally in all the Mediterranean countries, even in Italy and Spain where regional authorities usually have autonomy over health matters. Stretched public resources prompted countries to deploy "flexible" intensive care unit capacity and health workforce resources as agile solutions. The private sector was also utilized to expand resources and health workforce capacity, through special public-private partnerships. Countries ensured universal coverage for COVID-19-related services, even for groups not usually entitled to free publicly financed health care, such as undocumented migrants. We conclude that flexibility, speed and adaptive management in health policy responses were key to responding to immediate needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Financial barriers to accessing care as well as potentially higher mortality rates were avoided in most of the countries during the first wave. Yet it is still early to assess to what extent countries were able to maintain essential services without undermining equitable access to high quality care.

Balancing financial incentives during COVID-19: A comparison of provider payment adjustments across 20 countries.

Provider payment mechanisms were adjusted in many countries in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Our objective was to review adjustments for hospitals and healthcare professionals across 20 countries. We developed an analytical framework distinguishing between payment adjustments compensating income loss and those covering extra costs related to COVID-19. Information was extracted from the Covid-19 Health System Response Monitor (HSRM) and classified according to the framework. We found that income loss was not a problem in countries where professionals were paid by salary or capitation and hospitals received global budgets. In countries where payment was based on activity, income loss was compensated through budgets and higher fees. New FFS payments were introduced to incentivize remote services. Payments for COVID-19 related costs included new fees for out- and inpatient services but also new PD and DRG tariffs for hospitals. Budgets covered the costs of adjusting wards, creating new (ICU) beds, and hiring staff. We conclude that public payers assumed most of the COVID-19-related financial risk. In view of future pandemics policymakers should work to increase resilience of payment systems by: (1) having systems in place to rapidly adjust payment systems; (2) being aware of the economic incentives created by these adjustments such as cost-containment or increasing the number of patients or services, that can result in unintended consequences such as risk selection or overprovision of care; and (3) periodically evaluating the effects of payment adjustments on access and quality of care.

Factors associated with hospitalisations in chronic conditions deemed avoidable: ecological study in the Spanish healthcare system.

OBJECTIVES: Potentially avoidable hospitalisations have been used as a proxy for primary care quality. We aimed to analyse the ecological association between contextual and systemic factors featured in the Spanish healthcare system and the variation in potentially avoidable hospitalisations for a number of chronic conditions. METHODS: A cross-section ecological study based on the linkage of administrative data sources from virtually all healthcare areas (n=202) and autonomous communities (n=16) composing the Spanish National Health System was performed. Potentially avoidable hospitalisations in chronic conditions were defined using the Spanish validation of the Agency for Health Research and Quality (AHRQ) preventable quality indicators. Using 2012 data, the ecological association between potentially avoidable hospitalisations and factors featuring healthcare areas and autonomous communities was tested using multilevel negative binomial regression. RESULTS: In 2012, 151 468 admissions were flagged as potentially avoidable in Spain. After adjusting for differences in age, sex and burden of disease, the only variable associated with the outcome was hospitalisation intensity for any cause in previous years (incidence risk ratio 1.19 (95% CI 1.13 to 1.26)). The autonomous community of residence explained a negligible part of the residual unexplained variation (variance 0.01 (SE 0.008)). Primary care supply and activity did not show any association. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that the variation in potentially avoidable hospitalisations in chronic conditions at the healthcare area level is a reflection of how intensively hospitals are used in a healthcare area for any cause, rather than of primary care characteristics. Whether other non-studied features at the healthcare area level or primary care level could explain the observed variation remains uncertain.

Evolución de las hospitalizaciones potencialmente evitables por condiciones crónicas en España / Trend in potentially avoidable hospitalisations for chronic conditions in Spain

Objetivos: Analizar la evolución de las tasas de hospitalizaciones potencialmente evitables (HPE) que afectan a pacientes crónicos o frágiles en España durante el periodo 2002-2013. Métodos: Estudio observacional, ecológico, sobre la evolución de las tasas estandarizadas de hospitalizaciones por seis condiciones clínicas, y su variación, en las 203 áreas sanitarias del Sistema Nacional de Salud. Resultados: En el periodo estudiado hubo un descenso relativo del 35% en las tasas de HPE, pero la variación sistemática se mantuvo en cifras moderadas, alrededor de un 13% sobre lo esperado por azar. Las admisiones por angina experimentaron la mayor reducción, seguidas de las de asma y enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica. Por el contrario, las hospitalizaciones por deshidratación doblaron su frecuencia. Conclusiones: A pesar del descenso observado en las tasas de HPE, sigue existiendo una variación sistemática entre áreas, que apuntaría a un manejo diferencial de las condiciones crónicas que conduciría a resultados sanitarios distintos (AU)

Objective: To analyse the trend in potentially avoidable hospitalisations (PAH) in frail patients or those with chronic conditions in Spain during the period 2002-2013. Methods: An observational, ecological study was conducted to analyse the trend in age-sex standardised rates of PAH affecting six clinical conditions, and their variation, in the 203 health care areas composing the publicly-funded health system in Spain. Results: During the period 2002-2013, overall PAH standardised rates decreased by 35%, but systematic variation remained moderately high, around 13% above that expected by chance. Angina admissions showed the largest reduction, followed by those for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In contrast, the prevalence of admissions for dehydration doubled. Conclusions: Despite the decrease in PAH rates, systematic variation among areas remains, indicating differences in chronic care management that lead to distinct healthcare outcomes (AU)

[Trend in potentially avoidable hospitalisations for chronic conditions in Spain]. / Evolución de las hospitalizaciones potencialmente evitables por condiciones crónicas en España.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the trend in potentially avoidable hospitalisations (PAH) in frail patients or those with chronic conditions in Spain during the period 2002-2013. METHODS: An observational, ecological study was conducted to analyse the trend in age-sex standardised rates of PAH affecting six clinical conditions, and their variation, in the 203 health care areas composing the publicly-funded health system in Spain. RESULTS: During the period 2002-2013, overall PAH standardised rates decreased by 35%, but systematic variation remained moderately high, around 13% above that expected by chance. Angina admissions showed the largest reduction, followed by those for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In contrast, the prevalence of admissions for dehydration doubled. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the decrease in PAH rates, systematic variation among areas remains, indicating differences in chronic care management that lead to distinct healthcare outcomes.

Socioeconomic inequality in hip replacement in four European countries from 2002 to 2009--area-level analysis of hospital data.

BACKGROUND: Cross-country comparisons of socioeconomic equity in health care typically use sample survey data on general services such as physician visits. This study uses comprehensive administrative data on a specific service: hip replacement. METHODS: We analyse 651 652 publicly funded hip replacements, excluding fractures and accidents, in adults over 35 in Denmark, England, Portugal and Spain from 2002 to 2009. Sub-national administrative areas are split into socioeconomic quintile groups comprising approximately one-fifth of the national population. Area-level Poisson regression with Huber-White standard errors is used to calculate age-sex standardised hip replacement rates by quintile group, together with gaps and ratios between richest and poorest groups (Q5 and Q1) and the middle group (Q3). RESULTS: We find pro-rich-area inequality in England (2009 Q5/Q1 ratio 1.35 [CI 1.25-1.45]) and Spain (2009 Q5/Q1 ratio 1.43 [CI 1.17-1.70]), pro-poor-area inequality in Portugal (2009 Q5/Q1 ratio 0.67 [CI 0.50-0.83]) and no significant inequality in Denmark. Pro-rich-area inequality increased over time in England and Spain but not significantly. Within-country differences between socioeconomic quintile groups are smaller than between-country differences in general population averages: hip replacement rates are substantially lower in Portugal and Spain (8.6 and 7.4 per 10 000 in 2009) than England and Denmark (20.2 and 27.8 per 10 000 in 2009). CONCLUSION: Despite limitations regarding individual-level inequality and area heterogeneity, analysis of area-level data on publicly funded hospital activity can provide useful cross-country comparisons and longitudinal monitoring of socioeconomic inequality in specific health services. Although this kind of analysis cannot provide definitive answers, it can raise important questions for decision makers.

Potentially avoidable hospitalizations in five European countries in 2009 and time trends from 2002 to 2009 based on administrative data.

INTRODUCTION: Potentially avoidable hospitalizations in chronic conditions are used to evaluate health-care performance. However, evidence comparing different countries at small geographical areas is still scarce. The aim of the present study is to describe and discuss differences in rates and time-trends across health-care areas from five European countries. METHODS: Observational, ecological study, on virtually all discharges produced in five European countries between 2002 and 2009. Potentially avoidable hospitalizations were operationally defined as a joint indicator composed of six chronic conditions. Episodes flagged as potentially avoidable were allocated to 913 geographical health-care areas. Age-sex standardized rates and standardized hospitalization ratios, as well as several statistics of variation, were estimated. RESULTS: Four hundred sixty-two thousand seven hundred and ninety-two episodes were flagged as potentially avoidable. Variation in rates across countries was notable, from 93.7 cases per 10,000 inhabitants in Denmark to 34.8 cases per 10,000 inhabitants in Portugal. Within-country variation was also noteworthy, from 3.12 times among extreme areas in Spain to a 1.46-fold difference in Denmark. The highest systematic variation was found in Denmark (empirical Bayes 0.45) and the lowest in England (empirical Bayes 0.08). Rates and systematic variation remained fairly stable over time, with Denmark and England experiencing a statistically significant decrease (20% and 10%, respectively). Income and educational level, hospital utilization propensity, and region of residence were found to be associated with avoidable admissions. CONCLUSION: The dramatic variation across countries, beyond age and sex differences, and its consistency over time, implies systemic, although differential, behaviour of the five health-care systems with regard to chronic care.

Potential of geographical variation analysis for realigning providers to value-based care. ECHO case study on lower-value indications of C-section in five European countries.

BACKGROUND: Although C-section is a highly effective procedure, literature abounds with evidence of overuse and particularly misuse, in lower-value indications such as low-risk deliveries. This study aims to quantify utilization of C-section in low-risk cases, mapping out areas showing excess-usage in each country and to estimate excess-expenditure as a proxy of the opportunity cost borne by healthcare systems. METHODS: Observational, ecologic study on deliveries in 913 sub-national administrative areas of five European countries (Denmark, England, Portugal, Slovenia and Spain) from 2002 to 2009. The study includes a cross-section analysis with 2009 data and a time-trend analysis for the whole period. Main endpoints: age-standardized utilization rates of C-section in low-risk pregnancies and deliveries per 100 deliveries. Secondary endpoints: Estimated excess-cases per geographical unit of analysis in two scenarios of minimized utilization. RESULTS: C-section is widely used in all examined countries (ranging from 19% of Slovenian deliveries to 33% of deliveries in Portugal). With the exception of Portugal, there are no systematic variations in intensity of use across areas in the same country. Cross-country comparison of lower-value C-section leaves Denmark with 10% and Portugal with 2%, the highest and lowest. Such behaviour was stable over the period of analysis. Within each country, the scattered geographical patterns of use intensity speak for local drivers playing a major role within the national trend. CONCLUSION: The analysis conducted suggests plenty of room for enhancing value in obstetric care and equity in women's access to such within the countries studied. The analysis of geographical variations in lower-value care can constitute a powerful screening tool.

Variabilidad y coste de oportunidad de las alternativas quirúrgicas en cáncer de mama / Variability and opportunity costs among the surgical alternatives for breast cancer

Objetivos Analizar la variabilidad poblacional del tratamiento quirúrgico del cáncer de mama, tanto en régimen de ingreso como ambulatorio, mediante cirugía conservadora más radioterapia y cirugía no conservadora, y estimar el coste de oportunidad asociado a la utilización de una u otra. Métodos Estudio observacional de las variaciones geográficas en las tasas estandarizadas de cirugía conservadora y no conservadora realizadas en 199 áreas de salud españolas durante 2008-2009. Los costes se calcularon de manera indirecta, mediante All-Patients Diagnosis Related Groups (AP-DRG) y de manera directa a partir de costes registrados por la Red Española de Costes Hospitalarios (RECH). Resultados Las tasas estandarizadas de cirugía conservadora y no conservadora por cada 10.000 mujeres fueron 6,84 y 4,35, respectivamente, con un rango de variación entre áreas de 2,95 y 3,11. En el año 2009, el 9% de la cirugía conservadora se realizó mediante cirugía mayor ambulatoria, pero más de un tercio de las áreas no registraron ninguna intervención de este tipo. Según RECH, el coste medio de la cirugía conservadora fue de 7078 Euros, y el de la cirugía no conservadora fue de 6161Euros. Utilizando AP-DRG, estos costes fueron de 9036 Euros y 8526 Euros, respectivamente. Sin embargo, el coste de oportunidad de la cirugía conservadora resultó inferior al coste de la cirugía no conservadora, a partir de un 46% de utilización de cirugía mayor ambulatoria según RECH o un 23% según AP-DRG. Conclusiones La cirugía conservadora realizada mediante cirugía mayor ambulatoria se perfila como la opción con menor coste de oportunidad en el tratamiento quirúrgico del cáncer de mama, a partir de cierto umbral, cuando ambas, conservadora y no conservadora, son de elección (AU)

Objective To analyze medical practice variation in breast cancer surgery (either inpatient-based or day-case surgery), by comparing conservative surgery (CS) plus radiotherapy vs. non-conservative surgery (NCS). We also analyzed the opportunity costs associated with CS and NCS. Methods We performed an observational study of age- and sex-standardized rates of CS and NCS, performed in 199 Spanish healthcare areas in 2008-2009. Costs were calculated by using two techniques: indirectly, by using All-Patients Diagnosis Related Groups (AP-DRG) based on hospital admissions, and directly by using full costing from the Spanish Network of Hospital Costs (SNHC) data. Results Standardized surgery rates for CS and NCS were 6.84 and 4.35 per 10,000 women, with variation across areas ranging from 2.95 to 3.11 per 10,000 inhabitants. In 2009, 9% of CS was performed as day-case surgery, although a third of the health care areas did not perform this type of surgery. Taking the SNHC as a reference, the cost of CS was estimated at 7,078 Euros and that of NCS was 6,161 Euros. Using AP-DRG, costs amounted to 9,036 Euros and 8,526 Euros, respectively. However, CS had lower opportunity costs than NCS when day-case surgery was performed frequently-more than 46% of cases (following SNHC estimates) or 23% of cases (following AP-DRG estimates). Conclusions Day-case CS for breast cancer was found to be the best option in terms of opportunity-costs beyond a specific threshold, when both CS and NCS are elective (AU)

[Variability and opportunity costs among the surgical alternatives for breast cancer]. / Variabilidad y coste de oportunidad de las alternativas quirúrgicas en cáncer de mama.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze medical practice variation in breast cancer surgery (either inpatient-based or day-case surgery), by comparing conservative surgery (CS) plus radiotherapy vs. non-conservative surgery (NCS). We also analyzed the opportunity costs associated with CS and NCS. METHODS: We performed an observational study of age- and sex-standardized rates of CS and NCS, performed in 199 Spanish healthcare areas in 2008-2009. Costs were calculated by using two techniques: indirectly, by using All-Patients Diagnosis Related Groups (AP-DRG) based on hospital admissions, and directly by using full costing from the Spanish Network of Hospital Costs (SNHC) data. RESULTS: Standardized surgery rates for CS and NCS were 6.84 and 4.35 per 10,000 women, with variation across areas ranging from 2.95 to 3.11 per 10,000 inhabitants. In 2009, 9% of CS was performed as day-case surgery, although a third of the health care areas did not perform this type of surgery. Taking the SNHC as a reference, the cost of CS was estimated at 7,078 € and that of NCS was 6,161 €. Using AP-DRG, costs amounted to 9,036 € and 8,526 €, respectively. However, CS had lower opportunity costs than NCS when day-case surgery was performed frequently-more than 46% of cases (following SNHC estimates) or 23% of cases (following AP-DRG estimates). CONCLUSIONS: Day-case CS for breast cancer was found to be the best option in terms of opportunity-costs beyond a specific threshold, when both CS and NCS are elective.