Generalizability of randomized controlled trials in primary health care: Applying the PRECIS-2 tool on published protocols.

RATIONALE: Pragmatic design may facilitate the generalizability of effectiveness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in primary health care (PHC). AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate whether published protocols in PHC were designed pragmatically and to explore whether specific trial characteristics may be related to a pragmatic design. METHODS: Using the Pragmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2 (PRECIS-2), we assessed pragmatism for 123 published RCT protocols. For each domain, we calculated the mean score with the 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Interrater reliability was assessed by weighted κ-coefficient with 95% CI. We examined potential associations of published protocol characteristics with overall pragmatism by performing univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: We observed the highest score for primary analysis (4.66, 95% CI: 4.51, 4.82). The eligibility score was intermediate (3.16, 95% CI: 3.01, 3.32). Domains with scores towards the explanatory side included organization (2.50, 95% CI: 2.36, 2.63), flexibility of delivery (2.74, 95% CI: 2.60, 2.88) and flexibility of adherence (3.00, 95% CI: 2.83, 3.17). Interrater agreement was good (κ = 0.61; 95% CI: 0.34, 0.80; p < 0.001). Higher sample sizes were correlated to a pragmatic design (odds ratio: 6.86, 95% CI: 1.64, 28.75; p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Most RCT protocols were rated as intermediate in the pragmatic-explanatory continuum. Future research may guide all stakeholders on how best to incorporate the level of pragmatism in the interpretation of the results so that the trials are more likely to be applicable in real-world settings.

Meeting the health needs of displaced people fleeing Ukraine: Drawing on existing technical guidance and evidence.

The invasion of Ukraine has unleashed a humanitarian crisis and the impact is devastating for millions displaced in Ukraine and for those fleeing the country. Receiving countries in Europe are reeling with shock and disbelief and trying at the same time to grapple with the reality of providing for a large, unplanned, unprecedented number of refugees mainly women and children on the move. Several calls for actions, comments and statements express outrage, the risks, and the impending consequences to life and health. There is a need to constantly assess the situation on the ground, identify priorities for health and provide guidance regarding how these needs could be addressed. Therefore, the Lancet Migration European Regional Hub conducted rapid interviews with key informants to identify these needs, and in collaboration with the World Health Organization Health and Migration Programme, summarized how these could be addressed. This viewpoint provides a summary of the situation in receiving countries and the technical guidance required that could be useful for providing assistance in the current refugee crisis.

Informing primary care reform in Greece: patient expectations and experiences (the QUALICOPC study).

BACKGROUND: Primary health care is the cornerstone of a high quality health care system. Greece has been actively attempting to reform health care services in order to improve heath outcomes and reduce health care spending. Patient-centered approaches to health care delivery have been increasingly acknowledged for their value informing quality improvement activities. This paper reports the quality of primary health care services in Greece as perceived by patients and aspects of health care delivery that are valued by patients. METHODS: This study was conducted as part of the Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe (QUALICOPC) study. A cross-sectional sample of patients were recruited from general practitioner's offices in Greece and surveyed. Patients rated five features of person-focused primary care: accessibility; continuity and coordination; comprehensiveness; patient activation; and doctor-patient communication. One tenth of the patients ranked the importance of each feature on a scale of one to four, and nine tenths of patients scored their experiences of care received. Comparisons were made between patients with and without chronic disease. RESULTS: The sample included 220 general practitioners from both public and private sector. A total of 1964 patients that completed the experience questionnaire and 219 patients that completed the patient values questionnaire were analyzed. Patients overall report a positive experiences with the general practice they visited. Several gaps were identified in particular in terms of wait times for appointments, general practitioner access to patient medical history, delivery of preventative services, patient involvement in decision-making. Patients with chronic disease report better experience than respondents without a chronic condition, however these patient groups report the same values in terms of qualities of the primary care system that are important to them. CONCLUSIONS: Data gathered may be used to improve the quality of primary health care services in Greece through an increased focus on patient-centered approaches. Our study has identified several gaps as well as factors within the primary care health system that patient's perceive as most important which can be used to prioritize quality improvement activities, especially within the austerity period. Study findings may also have application to other countries with similar context and infrastructure.