Epidemiology, comorbidity, and use of systemic therapies in patients with paediatric psoriasis in Germany.

INTRODUCTION: Psoriasis is a chronic, inflammatory disorder with a physical and psychosocial burden. Recent epidemiological data on paediatric psoriasis in Germany is lacking. The aim of this study was to examine the prevalence, the incidence and associated epidemiological features of paediatric psoriasis in Germany using health claims data from a national health claims database. METHODS: Continuously insured patients with paediatric psoriasis (2014-2017) from the Institute of Applied Health Research Berlin (InGef) database were included in this analysis. Between 2014 and 2017, we analysed the prevalence and incidence of paediatric psoriasis (aged ≤17 years), relevant comorbidities, the most frequently attended and diagnosing medical specialties, and the number of systemic treatment prescriptions. RESULTS: Overall, psoriasis prevalence (0.15-0.16%) and incidence (0.06-0.07%) remained stable between 2014 and 2017; both prevalence and incidence were higher in female patients. Psoriasis prevalence gradually increased with age between the age groups <6 years and 16-17 years. Obesity (11.5%) and somatoform disorders (7.0%) were the most common comorbidities identified. Overall, 90.4% of the psoriasis cases were diagnosed by either a dermatologist (50.9%), general practitioner (27.8%), or paediatrician (11.7%). Patients most frequently attended general practitioners (74.5%), dermatologists (57.9%) and paediatricians (56.5%). The use of systemic treatment(s) increased from 4.7% to 5.4% between 2014 and 2017. DISCUSSION: The prevalence and incidence of paediatric psoriasis in Germany remained stable between 2014 and 2017, with a higher prevalence and incidence observed in females and older adolescents. Obesity and somatoform disorders were the most common comorbidities. General practitioners, dermatologists, and paediatricians were most often involved in the treatment of patients, highlighting the need for interdisciplinary management of paediatric psoriasis.

Trends in Pediatric Mild Traumatic Brain Injury During COVID-19-Related Lockdown-A Single-Center Study.

BACKGROUND: A relevant number of visits to pediatric emergency departments (pED) are associated with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). On March 16, 2020, the Bavarian government declared a first full lockdown (LD) related to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. AIM: The aim of the study was to investigate the impact of LD on pediatric mTBI. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of presentations to a pED due to mTBI. Study periods covered LD (03/17/2020 through 05/05/2020) and the same time in 2017, 2018, and 2019 as reference period (RP). Comparative analyses were performed by Chi-square or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Numbers of mTBI cases decreased by half. Age distribution did not differ. A significantly higher proportion of mTBI were related to falls at home (p = 0.001). Further, a higher rate of hospital admissions (p = 0.03), a higher proportion of intensive care unit admissions (p = 0.001), a longer duration of hospital stay (p = 0.02), and a higher rate of intracranial pathologies on neuroimaging were observed during LD (p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: The decrease in mTBI presentations is likely due to an absolute decrease in numbers related to the LD measures, combined with a hesitation to present very minor mTBI to the hospital, because of fear of being infected or not to put additional strain on the healthcare system during this healthcare crisis. On the other hand, data of those that presented with mTBI tend to reflect the more severe spectrum of mTBI.

An Innovative System to Facilitate Extension Osteotomy in the Prone Position for Chin-on-Chest Deformity of Ankylosing Spondylitis.

BACKGROUND: In the presence of chin-on-chest deformity of ankylosing spondylitis, positioning for extension osteotomy of the spine is a challenging endeavor. Conventional prone positioning equipment cannot safely accommodate all patients with advanced deformity where the chin brow angle approaches or exceeds 90°. Issues such as inability to accommodate the head and associated equipment while providing operative stability and venous congestion of the head represent significant perioperative risks. The sitting position has been advocated as an alternative but is suboptimal for surgical access and anesthetic care. We present a technical note for a positioning system developed to facilitate extension osteotomy in the prone position. METHODS: A positioning device was designed to accommodate patients with advanced deformity. A series of patients with chin brow angles of up to 89° were positioned using our new system. RESULTS: We were able to facilitate safe extension osteotomy in the prone position, for procedures lasting up to 14 hours. All our patients were discharged home without significant complication. CONCLUSIONS: Our device is simply constructed and may be easily replicated in other institutions engaging in complex spine surgery. We hope our system provides clinicians with greater freedom to provide optimal perioperative care to their patients.

An innovative prone positioning system for advanced deformity and frailty in complex spine surgery.

The authors present a technical note for a prone positioning system developed to facilitate cervical extension osteotomy for ankylosing spondylitis in the presence of severe deformity and frailty. Chin-on-chest deformity represents one of the most debilitating changes of ankylosing spondylitis. Where the chin-brow angle approaches or exceeds 90°, prone positioning becomes problematic due to the fixed position of the head. Furthermore, the challenge is compounded where physiological deconditioning leads to frailty, and the side effects of medical therapies decrease muscle mass and skin quality. Conventional prone positioning equipment is not able to cater to all patients. A versatile system was developed using a 3D reconstruction to enable a positioning simulation and verification tool. The tool was used to comprehensively plan the perioperative episode, including spatial orientation and associated equipment. Three-dimensional printing was used to manufacture a bespoke positioning device that precisely matched the contours of the patient, reducing contact pressure and risk of skin injury. The authors were able to safely facilitate surgery for a patient whose deformity and frailty may otherwise have precluded this possibility. The system has potential safety and economic implications that may be of significant utility to other institutions engaging in complex spinal surgery.

Do German public reporting websites provide information that office-based physicians consider before referring patients to hospital? A four-step analysis.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, many different performance frameworks and quality assurance systems have been developed to measure health care quality. In Germany, an external quality assurance system for hospitals was introduced in 2005. The data of these systems are often reported by public reporting websites (PRWs) to inform patients and other stakeholders interested in health care systems about health care providers' quality. However, publication is obligatory (at least in Germany) for most of the existing quality assurance measures; some may be reported voluntarily. An important target group for this information is the group of all office-based physicians as they are crucial for patients' hospital choice. However, public reporting initiatives in Germany and other countries have not increased the use of quality reports for hospital choice. OBJECTIVES: (1) To summarize the criteria that office-based physicians consider to be of high, medium, and low importance for hospital selection when referring patients and (2) to examine whether German public reporting websites (PRWs) provide these hospital-related criteria. METHODS: The analysis comprised four steps: 1) Five databases were systematically searched for peer-reviewed English- and German-language literature. 2) The selection of articles was based on compliance with inclusion criteria, and all the criteria relevant to the referral of patients to hospital were extracted. 3) The criteria were then divided into five main categories: structural quality, process quality, outcome quality, patient experience, and referring physicians' experience. In addition, the criteria were classified into three importance categories (high-, medium-, and low-priority criteria) according to their relevance to the referral decision. 4) We investigated whether German PRWs publicly report high-priority criteria. RESULTS: A total of N=11 articles published in peer-reviewed journals met our inclusion criteria. The studies were published in Germany (n=4), the Netherlands (n=3), Denmark, France, Norway, and the USA (n=1 each). In total, N=86 criteria were identified, most of them relating to structural quality (n=43) and process quality (n=26). We found just n=3 outcome quality criteria, only one of which fell in the high-priority category (breast cancer indicators with clinically relevant differences). In total, n=25 low-, n=40 medium-, and n=34 high-priority criteria could be established, which is due to the fact that some criteria had been investigated in several studies evaluating the importance of some criteria differently. Most of the high-priority criteria were related to process quality. All the high-priority structural quality criteria and high-priority outcome quality criteria were available on German PRWs, whereas just 38.5 % of those relating to process quality could be identified on these portals. We also identified 66.7 % of the high-priority criteria regarding patient experience and 50.0 % concerning the referring physicians' experience. Overall, a larger amount of low- and medium-priority criteria are available on German PRWs than high-priority criteria. DISCUSSION: A substantial amount of hospital information regarding structural quality and outcome quality is available on German PRWs. However, the development of further process quality criteria (which are currently underrepresented) should be considered, for example whether hospital physicians continue the medication initiated by office-based doctors. Also, hospital quality reports should be tailored for specific user groups, for instance for referring gynecologists or referring general practitioners (GPs).

[Do laymen understand information about hospital quality? An empirical verification using risk-adjusted mortality rates as an example]. / Verstehen Laien Informationen über die Krankenhausqualität? Eine empirische Überprüfung am Beispiel der risikoadjustierten Mortalität.

INTRODUCTION: The effect of public reporting to improve quality in healthcare is reduced by the limited intelligibility of information about the quality of healthcare providers. This may result in worse health-related choices especially for older people and those with lower levels of education. There is, as yet, little information as to whether laymen understand the concepts behind quality comparisons and if this comprehension is correlated with hospital choices. METHODS: An instrument with 20 items was developed to analyze the intelligibility of five technical terms which were used in German hospital report cards to explain risk-adjusted death rates. Two online presentations of risk-adjusted death rates for five hospitals in the style of hospital report cards were developed. An online survey of 353 volunteers tested the comprehension of the risk-adjusted mortality rates and included an experimental hospital choice. RESULTS: The intelligibility of five technical terms was tested: risk-adjusted, actual and expected death rate, reference range and national average. The percentages of correct answers for the five technical terms were in the range of 75.0-60.2%. Between 23.8% and 5.1% of the respondents were not able to answer the question about the technical term itself. The least comprehensible technical terms were "risk-adjusted death rate" and "reference range". The intelligibility of the 20 items that were used to test the comprehension of the risk-adjusted mortality was between 89.5% and 14.2%. The two items that proved to be least comprehensible were related to the technical terms "risk-adjusted death rate" and "reference range". For all five technical terms it was found that a better comprehension correlated significantly with better hospital choices. DISCUSSION: We found a better than average intelligibility for the technical terms "actual and expected death rate" and for "national average". The least understandable were "risk-adjusted death rate" and "reference range". Since the self-explanatory technical terms "actual and expected death rate" and "national average" are easy to understand and the comprehension is correlated with hospitals choices, we recommend using them for the presentation of measures which contain risk-adjusted mortality. The technical terms "risk-adjusted death rate" and "reference range" should stay in the background, since comprehension problems can be expected and explanations would have to be provided.

Public reporting of hospital quality shows inconsistent ranking results.

BACKGROUND: Evidence from the US has demonstrated that hospital report cards might generate confusion for consumers who are searching for a hospital. So far, little is known regarding hospital ranking agreement on German report cards as well as underlying factors creating disagreement. OBJECTIVE: This study examined the consistency of hospital recommendations on German hospital report cards and discussed underlying reasons for differences. METHODS: We compared hospital recommendations for three procedures on four German hospital report cards. The agreement between two report cards was determined by Cohen's-Kappa. Fleiss' kappa was applied to evaluate the overlap across all four report cards. RESULTS: Overall, 43.40% of all hospitals were labeled equally as low, middle, or top performers on two report cards (hip replacement: 43.2%; knee replacement: 42.8%; percutaneous coronary intervention: 44.3%). In contrast, 8.5% of all hospitals were rated a top performer on one report card and a low performer on another report card. The inter-report card agreement was slight at best between two report cards (κmax=0.148) and poor between all four report cards (κmax=0.111). CONCLUSIONS: To increase the benefit of public reporting, increasing the transparency about the concept of - medical - "quality" that is represented on each report card seems to be important. This would help patients and other consumers use the report cards that most represent one's individual preferences.

Information presentation features and comprehensibility of hospital report cards: design analysis and online survey among users.

BACKGROUND: Improving the transparency of information about the quality of health care providers is one way to improve health care quality. It is assumed that Internet information steers patients toward better-performing health care providers and will motivate providers to improve quality. However, the effect of public reporting on hospital quality is still small. One of the reasons is that users find it difficult to understand the formats in which information is presented. OBJECTIVE: We analyzed the presentation of risk-adjusted mortality rate (RAMR) for coronary angiography in the 10 most commonly used German public report cards to analyze the impact of information presentation features on their comprehensibility. We wanted to determine which information presentation features were utilized, were preferred by users, led to better comprehension, and had similar effects to those reported in evidence-based recommendations described in the literature. METHODS: The study consisted of 5 steps: (1) identification of best-practice evidence about the presentation of information on hospital report cards; (2) selection of a single risk-adjusted quality indicator; (3) selection of a sample of designs adopted by German public report cards; (4) identification of the information presentation elements used in public reporting initiatives in Germany; and (5) an online panel completed an online questionnaire that was conducted to determine if respondents were able to identify the hospital with the lowest RAMR and if respondents' hospital choices were associated with particular information design elements. RESULTS: Evidence-based recommendations were made relating to the following information presentation features relevant to report cards: evaluative table with symbols, tables without symbols, bar charts, bar charts without symbols, bar charts with symbols, symbols, evaluative word labels, highlighting, order of providers, high values to indicate good performance, explicit statements of whether high or low values indicate good performance, and incomplete data ("N/A" as a value). When investigating the RAMR in a sample of 10 hospitals' report cards, 7 of these information presentation features were identified. Of these, 5 information presentation features improved comprehensibility in a manner reported previously in literature. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first study to systematically analyze the most commonly used public reporting card designs used in Germany. Best-practice evidence identified in international literature was in agreement with 5 findings about German report card designs: (1) avoid tables without symbols, (2) include bar charts with symbols, (3) state explicitly whether high or low values indicate good performance or provide a "good quality" range, (4) avoid incomplete data (N/A given as a value), and (5) rank hospitals by performance. However, these findings are preliminary and should be subject of further evaluation. The implementation of 4 of these recommendations should not present insurmountable obstacles. However, ranking hospitals by performance may present substantial difficulties.