Patient satisfaction with oncological care during the virus pandemic - SARS-CoV-2 taking into account social and demographic factors.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to examine the perception of medical services by oncological patients during the pandemic, identifying the key factors influencing it. The assessment of patient satisfaction with the treatment and care provided by doctors and other hospital staff provides important information on the quality of health services. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study involved 394 patients diagnosed with cancer treated as inpatients in five oncology departments. The diagnostic survey method was used with a proprietary questionnaire and the standardized EORTC IN-PATSAT32 questionnaire. Calculations were carried out using Statistica 10.0 with p≤0.05 s considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Overall patient satisfaction with cancer care was 80.77/100. Higher values were shown for the competences of nurses than for doctors, especially for their interpersonal skills (79.34 - nurses vs. 74.13 - doctors) and availability (80.11 - nurses vs. 75.6 - doctors). It was also shown that the level of satisfaction with cancer care increased with age; women rated cancer care lower than men (p = 0.031), particularly its aspect related to the competences of doctors. A lower degree of satisfaction was observed among rural residents (p=0.042). Other demographic data, such as marital status and education, determined satisfaction with cancer care on the selected scale although it did not affect the overall level of satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: The analysed socio-demographic factors, primarily age, gender and place of residence, determined some of the scales concerning patient satisfaction with cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of this and other studies of a similar profile should be used in the formation of health policy, particularly in implementing programmes to improve the quality of cancer care in Poland.

Influence of Selected Indicators of Healthcare System Functioning Evaluation on the Health Result.

BACKGROUND: According to the World Health Organization's statistics, 7 of the 10 main causes of death in 2019 were noncommunicable diseases. Health indicators are measures used to evaluate public health system effectiveness and functioning. Monitoring mortality rates from leading causes, life expectancy and other health indicators is essential to address their causes and adapt health systems to react adequately. The aim of this study is to present the dependencies of selected health care indicators and health outcomes. METHODS: Based on the literature review conducted, selected health indicators, along with healthcare system data, were analyzed using Pearson's r correlation. The analyses included data from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) presented in statistics and the Health at a Glance 2021 report and data collected as part of the preparation of the Financing Global Health 2020 report by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. RESULTS: Health system resources are linked to health outcomes. The number of medical consultations, the number of nurses per patient or the level of financing of services under general health insurance are related to life expectancy and deaths due to causes that could have been avoided or treated. CONCLUSIONS: Life expectancy is positively correlated with access to general health insurance and public expenditure on healthcare. There is a need for all countries to provide their citizens with broad access to healthcare services.

Comparison of US and EU Prices for Orphan Drugs in the Perspective of the Considered US Orphan Drugs Act Modifications and Discussed Price-Regulation Mechanisms Adjustments in US and European Union.

The 2019 worldwide sales of Orphan Drugs were estimated at $136 billion USD, which constituted 16% of the global pharmaceutical prescription market and is expected to grow by 12% in the next 5 years. A better understanding of Orphan Drug pricing may contribute to on-going discussions on Orphan Drug Act (ODA) corrections in US or modifications of price setting mechanisms in EU. The objective of the study was comparison and analysis of the prices of Orphan Drugs in US and EU. All drugs with Orphan Drug status were compared in the US and EU. For the US prices, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) was sourced. The EU List Prices came from six EU countries: Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Poland, Spain. We found US prices to be higher than the six selected EU countries. The average Price Ratio was 1.64. The prices across EU countries were more homogeneous, while the number of the reimbursed and therefore available to patient medicines varied and was correlated with GDP per capita r = 0.87. Considered implementation of the External Reference Price system in US may generate significant savings in the US but may result in upward pressure on pricing of Orphan Drugs in EU. Centralization of the Orphan Drugs pricing negotiations in EU may prevent such development and offer a win-win opportunity for all involved parties.

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Polish version of the Spine Functional Index.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was a cross-cultural adaptation of the Spine Functional Index to produce a Polish version (SFI-PL). Further, the psychometric properties were evaluated with standardized criteria patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in a symptomatic Polish spine population. METHODS: Linguistic adaptation complied with the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) guidelines to produce the SFI-PL. Subjects with spine conditions, all areas and multi-area, were recruited from a Polish Specialist Hospital (n = 225, age = 45.7 ± 16.0 years, range 18-87, female = 60%, symptoms duration = 13.93 ± 27.56 weeks, range 5-84). Baseline internal consistency, reliability and validity were examined and included the SFI-PL, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Neck Disability Index (NDI), EuroQol 5 Dimensions, 5-level version (EQ-5D-5L) and an 11-point pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) with retest at 3-7 days (= 5 days). Practicality for readability was considered within the face and content validity and completion and scoring time calculated. RESULTS: Statistical analysis showed excellent internal consistency (α = 0.90) and high test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.98). The error score was determined with the SEM = 3.14 (MDC 90% CI = 7.33%). The construct validity analysis demonstrated strong correlations between the SFI-PL, the NDI (r = 0.73) and the ODI (r = 0.82); moderate with the EQ index value (0.70) and EQ-VAS (r = 0.56). Time to complete (229 s) and score (27 s) were determined. CONCLUSIONS: The SFI-PL is a psychometrically sound PROM for Polish-speaking patients with spine conditions. The results support previous findings from the original-English and six other language versions for internal consistency, reliability, measurement error and validity. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.