International strategies, experiences, and payment models to incentivise day surgery.

The importance of day surgery as a less costly alternative compared to conventional inpatient hospital stays is growing internationally. The rate of day surgery activities has increased across Europe. However, this trend has been heterogeneous across countries, and might still be below its potential. Since payment systems affect how providers offer care, they represent a policy instrument to further increase the rate of day surgeries. In this paper, we review international strategies to promote day surgery with a particular focus on payment models for 13 OECD countries (Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, England, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland). We conduct a cross-country comparison based on an email survey of health policy experts and a comprehensive literature review of peer-reviewed papers and grey literature. Our research shows that all countries aim to strengthen day surgery activity to increase health system efficiency. Several countries used financial and non-financial policy measures to overcome misaligned incentive structures and promote day surgery activity. Financial incentives for day surgery can serve as a policy instrument to promote change. We recommend embedding these incentives in a comprehensive approach of restructuring health systems. In addition, we encourage countries to monitor and evaluate the effect of changes to payment systems on day surgeries to allow for more informed decision-making.

[Black box: Attenders with psychosocial needs in the emergency department]. / Blackbox: Psychosoziale Fälle in der Notaufnahme.

OBJECTIVES: The aims are (a) assessment of the prevalence of psychosocial emergencies in the emergency department (ED), (b) determination of the proportion of cases not coded as diagnosis (unreported cases), and (c) characterization of identified patients. METHODS: In a retrospective study, psychosocial emergencies in one week were identified from routine documentation of the central ED of the Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charité Campus Mitte (CCM). After exclusion of planned admitted cases, 862 patients were included in the study. The identified psychosocial emergencies were descriptively analyzed with regard to their sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and compared with other emergencies. RESULTS: The prevalence of psychosocial emergencies in the reported period was 11.9% (n = 103). A large proportion of psychosocial emergencies were not coded (35.9%) or not fully coded (20.4%) as an ICD diagnosis (unreported cases). There was a statistically relevant difference in gender distribution with a significantly higher proportion of males among psychosocial emergencies (70.9%) compared to other emergencies (50.7%; p < 0.0001). The two most common treatment causes among psychosocial emergencies were substance abuse (66.0%) and homelessness (20.4%). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows a relevant proportion of psychosocial emergencies among all treatments in ED routine data and a high proportion of cases not captured in the coded diagnoses. EDs thus represent an important point of contact for vulnerable patient groups but standardized screening and identification are still lacking.

Improving access to services for psychotic patients: does implementing a waiting time target make a difference.

OBJECTIVE: In April 2015, the English National Health Service started implementing the first waiting time targets in mental health care. This study aims to investigate the effect of the 14-day waiting time target for early intervention in psychosis (EIP) services after the first six months of its implementation. STUDY DESIGN: We analyse a cohort of first-episode psychosis patients from the English administrative Mental Health and Learning Disabilities Dataset 2011 to 2015. We compare patients being treated by EIP services (treatment) with those receiving care from standard community mental health services (control). We combine non-parametric matching with a difference-in-difference approach to account for observed and unobserved group differences. We analyse the probability of waiting below target and look at different percentiles of the waiting time distribution. RESULTS: EIP patients had an 11.6-18.4 percentage point higher chance of waiting below target post-policy compared to standard care patients. However, post-policy trends at different percentiles of the waiting time distribution were not different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Mental health providers seem to respond to waiting time targets in a similar way as physical health providers. The increased proportion waiting below target did not, however, result in an overall improvement across the waiting time distribution.