Towards evidence-based, quality-controlled health promotion: the Dutch recognition system for health promotion interventions.

Registration or recognition systems for best-practice health promotion interventions may contribute to better quality assurance and control in health promotion practice. In the Netherlands, such a system has been developed and is being implemented aiming to provide policy makers and professionals with more information on the quality and effectiveness of available health promotion interventions and to promote use of good-practice and evidence-based interventions by health promotion organizations. The quality assessments are supervised by the Netherlands Organization for Public Health and the Environment and the Netherlands Youth Institute and conducted by two committees, one for interventions aimed at youth and one for adults. These committees consist of experts in the fields of research, policy and practice. Four levels of recognition are distinguished inspired by the UK Medical Research Council's evaluation framework for complex interventions to improve health: (i) theoretically sound, (ii) probable effectiveness, (iii) established effectiveness, and (iv) established cost effectiveness. Specific criteria have been set for each level of recognition, except for Level 4 which will be included from 2011. This point of view article describes and discusses the rationale, organization and criteria of this Dutch recognition system and the first experiences with the system.

Ethnic differences in internal medicine referrals and diagnosis in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: As in other Western countries, the number of immigrants in the Netherlands is growing rapidly. In 1980 non-western immigrants constituted about 3% of the population, in 1990 it was 6% and currently it is more than 10%. Nearly half of the migrant population lives in the four major cities. In the municipality of Rotterdam 34% of the inhabitants are migrants. Health policy is based on the ideal that all inhabitants should have equal access to health care and this requires an efficient planning of health care resources, like staff and required time per patient. The aim of this study is to examine ethnic differences in the use of internal medicine outpatient care, specifically to examine ethnic differences in the reason for referral and diagnosis. METHODS: We conducted a study with an open cohort design. We registered the ethnicity, sex, age, referral reasons, diagnosis and living area of all new patients that visited the internal medicine outpatient clinic of the Erasmus Medical Centre in Rotterdam (Erasmus MC) for one year (March 2002-2003). Additionally, we coded referrals according to the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC) and categorised diagnosis according to the Diagnosis Treatment Combination (DTC). We analysed data by using Poisson regression and logistic regression. RESULTS: All ethnic minority groups (Surinam, Turkish, Moroccan, Antillean/Aruban and Cape Verdean immigrants) living in Rotterdam municipality, make significantly more use of the outpatient clinic than native Dutch people (relative risk versus native Dutch people was 1.83, 1.97, 1.79, 1.65 and 1.88, respectively). Immigrant patients are more likely to be referred for analysis and treatment of 'gastro-intestinal signs & symptoms' and were less often referred for 'indefinite, general signs'. Ethnic minorities were more frequently diagnosed with 'Liver diseases', and less often with 'Analysis without diagnosis'. The increased use of the outpatient facilities seems to be restricted to first-generation immigrants, and is mainly based on a higher risk of being referred with 'gastro-intestinal signs & symptoms'. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate substantial ethnic differences in the use of the outpatient care facilities. Ethnic differences may decrease in the future when the proportion of first-generation immigrants decreases. The increased use of outpatient health care seems to be related to ethnic background and the generation of the immigrants rather than to socio-economic status. Further study is needed to establish this.

Ethnic differences in mortality, end-stage complications, and quality of care among diabetic patients: a review.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the influence of ethnic differences in diabetes care on inequalities in mortality and prevalence of end-stage complications among diabetic patients. The following questions were examined: 1) Are there ethnic differences among diabetic patients in mortality and end-stage complications and 2) are there ethnic differences among diabetic patients in quality of care? RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A review of the literature on ethnic differences in the prevalence of complications and mortality among diabetic patients and in the quality of diabetes care was performed by systematically searching articles on Medline published from 1987 through October 2004. RESULTS: A total of 51 studies were included, mainly conducted in the U.S. and the U.K. In general, after adjusting for confounders, diabetic patients from ethnic minorities had higher mortality rates and higher risk of diabetes complications. After additional adjustment for risk factors such as smoking, socioeconomic status, income, years of education, and BMI, in most instances ethnic differences disappear. Nevertheless, blacks and Hispanics in the U.S. and Asians in the U.K. have an increased risk of end-stage renal disease, and blacks and Hispanics in the U.S. have an increased risk of retinopathy. Intermediate outcomes of care were worse in blacks, and they were inclined to be worse in Hispanics. Likewise, ethnic differences in quality of care in the U.S. exist: process of care was worse in blacks. CONCLUSIONS: Given the fact that there are ethnic differences in diabetes care and that ethnic differences in some diabetes complications persist after adjustment for risk factors other than diabetes care, it seems the case that ethnic differences in diabetes care contribute to the more adverse disease outcomes of diabetic patients from some ethnic minority groups. Although no generalizations can be made for all ethnic groups in all regions for all kinds of complications, the results do implicate the importance of quality of care in striving for equal health outcomes among ethnic minorities.