Suchergebnisse

This study aims to develop and validate a prediction model of societal costs during a period of 6-months in older community care-recipients across multiple European countries. Participants were older community care-recipients from 5 European countries. The outcome measure was mean 6-months total societal costs of resource utilisation (healthcare and informal care). Potential predictors included sociodemographic characteristics, functional limitations, clinical conditions, and diseases/disorders. The model was developed by performing Linear Mixed Models with a random intercept for the effect of country and validated by an internal-external validation procedure. Living alone, caregiver distress, (I)ADL impairment, required level of care support, health instability, presence of pain, behavioural problems, urinary incontinence and multimorbidity significantly predicted societal costs during 6 months. The model explained 32% of the variation within societal costs and showed good calibration in Iceland, Finland and Germany. Minor model adaptations improved model performance in The Netherland and Italy. The results can provide a valuable orientation for policymakers to better understand cost development among older community care-recipients. Despite substantial differences of countries' care systems, a validated cross-national set of key predictors could be identified.

This study aims to benchmark mean societal costs per client in different home care models and to describe characteristics of home care models with the lowest societal costs. In this prospective longitudinal study in 6 European countries, 6-month societal costs of resource utilization of 2060 older home care clients were estimated. Three care models were identified and compared based on level of patient-centered care (PCC), availability of specialized professionals (ASP) and level of monitoring of care performance (MCP). Differences in costs between care models were analyzed using linear regression while adjusting for case mix differences. Societal costs incurred in care model 2 (low ASP; high PCC & MCP) were significantly higher than in care model 1 (high ASP, PCC & MCP, mean difference €2230 (10%)) and in care model 3 (low ASP & PCC; high MCP, mean difference €2552 (12%)). Organizations within both models with the lowest societal costs, systematically monitor their care performance. However, organizations within one model arranged their care with a low focus on patient-centered care, and employed mainly generalist care professionals, while organizations in the other model arranged their care delivery with a strong focus on patient-centered care combined with a high availability of specialized care professionals.

Most countries aim to allocate home health care to those in need in a fair and equal way. Equal allocation implies that the amount of home care a person receives would reflect the level of health impairment and the need for resources. It is not clear whether countries succeed in attaining this. Our objective was to explore signs of (un)equal home health care provisioning across care organizations and across European health countries. We used data of the IBenC study collected from 2718 older community care recipients from 33 organizations in 6 Western European countries ( www.ibenc.eu ). We benchmarked differences of provided and expected formal care time across organizations and countries. Expected formal care hours were estimated by multiplying the overall sample's mean formal hours with recipients' case mix weights from interRAI's resources utilization group profiles. We found substantial variations in provided formal care time among organizations both within and across countries that could not be explained by the case mix differences of recipients. This implied presence of inequality of home care provisioning. These findings may alert professionals and policy makers striving for equal home health care provisioning for dependent older persons.

Objectives: Differences between country-specific guidelines for economic evaluations complicate the execution of international economic evaluations. The aim of this study was to develop cross-European recommendations for the identification, measurement and valuation of resource use and lost productivity in economic evaluations using a Delphi procedure. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify European guidelines on the execution of economic evaluations or costing studies as part of economic evaluations. Guideline recommendations were extracted by two independent reviewers and formed the basis for the first round of the Delphi study, which was conducted among European health economic experts. During three written rounds, consensus (agreement of 67% or higher) was sought on items concerning the identification, measurement and valuation of costs. Results: Recommendations from 18 guidelines were extracted. Consensus among 26 panellists from 17 European countries was reached on 61 of 68 items. The recommendations from the Delphi study are to adopt a societal perspective, to use patient report for measuring resource use and lost productivity, to value both constructs with use of country-specific standardized/unit costs and to use country-specific discounting rates. Conclusion: This study provides consensus-based cross-European recommendations on how to measure and value resource use and lost productivity in economic evaluations. These recommendations are expected to support researchers, healthcare professionals, and policymakers in executing and appraising economic evaluations performed in international contexts.

Objectives: Differences between country-specific guidelines for economic evaluations complicate the execution of international economic evaluations. The aim of this study was to develop cross-European recommendations for the identification, measurement and valuation of resource use and lost productivity in economic evaluations using a Delphi procedure. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify European guidelines on the execution of economic evaluations or costing studies as part of economic evaluations. Guideline recommendations were extracted by two independent reviewers and formed the basis for the first round of the Delphi study, which was conducted among European health economic experts. During three written rounds, consensus (agreement of 67% or higher) was sought on items concerning the identification, measurement and valuation of costs. Results: Recommendations from 18 guidelines were extracted. Consensus among 26 panellists from 17 European countries was reached on 61 of 68 items. The recommendations from the Delphi study are to adopt a societal perspective, to use patient report for measuring resource use and lost productivity, to value both constructs with use of country-specific standardized/unit costs and to use country-specific discounting rates. Conclusion: This study provides consensus-based cross-European recommendations on how to measure and value resource use and lost productivity in economic evaluations. These recommendations are expected to support researchers, healthcare professionals, and policymakers in executing and appraising economic evaluations performed in international contexts.

Funding Information: The IBenC project was a Collaborative Research Project funded by the European Union in the Programme: FP7-HEALTH-2012-INNOVATION-1 under grant agreement no. 305912. The funding had no role in study design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation, or preparation of the manuscript. Funding Information: This research was supported by Stichting Preventie Vroegdiagnostiek en e-Health. The authors thank the home care clients and home care organizations for their involvement in the project. Publisher Copyright: © 2021, The Author(s). ; Background: Accurate identification of older persons at risk of unplanned hospital visits can facilitate preventive interventions. Several risk scores have been developed to identify older adults at risk of unplanned hospital visits. It is unclear whether risk scores developed in one country, perform as well in another. This study validates seven risk scores to predict unplanned hospital admissions and emergency department (ED) visits in older home care recipients from six countries. Methods: We used the IBenC sample (n = 2446), a cohort of older home care recipients from six countries (Belgium, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Italy and The Netherlands) to validate four specific risk scores (DIVERT, CARS, EARLI and previous acute admissions) and three frailty indicators (CHESS, Fried Frailty Criteria and Frailty Index). Outcome measures were unplanned hospital admissions, ED visits or any unplanned hospital visits after 6 months. Missing data were handled by multiple imputation. Performance was determined by assessing calibration and discrimination (area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC)). Results: Risk score performance varied across countries. In Iceland, for any unplanned hospital visits DIVERT and CARS reached a fair predictive value (AUC 0.74 [0.68–0.80] and AUC 0.74 [0.67–0.80]), respectively). In Finland, DIVERT had fair performance predicting ED visits (AUC 0.72 [0.67–0.77]) and any unplanned hospital visits (AUC 0.73 [0.67–0.77]). In other countries, AUCs did not exceed 0.70. Conclusions: Geographical validation of risk scores predicting unplanned hospital visits in home care recipients showed substantial variations of poor to fair performance across countries. Unplanned hospital visits seem considerably dependent on healthcare context. Therefore, risk scores should be validated regionally before applied to practice. Future studies should focus on identification of more discriminative predictors in order to develop more accurate risk scores. ; Peer reviewed

OBJECTIVES: Differences between country-specific guidelines for economic evaluations complicate the execution of international economic evaluations. The aim of this study was to develop cross-European recommendations for the identification, measurement and valuation of resource use and lost productivity in economic evaluations using a Delphi procedure. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify European guidelines on the execution of economic evaluations or costing studies as part of economic evaluations. Guideline recommendations were extracted by two independent reviewers and formed the basis for the first round of the Delphi study, which was conducted among European health economic experts. During three written rounds, consensus (agreement of 67% or higher) was sought on items concerning the identification, measurement and valuation of costs. RESULTS: Recommendations from 18 guidelines were extracted. Consensus among 26 panellists from 17 European countries was reached on 61 of 68 items. The recommendations from the Delphi study are to adopt a societal perspective, to use patient report for measuring resource use and lost productivity, to value both constructs with use of country-specific standardized/unit costs and to use country-specific discounting rates. CONCLUSION: This study provides consensus-based cross-European recommendations on how to measure and value resource use and lost productivity in economic evaluations. These recommendations are expected to support researchers, healthcare professionals, and policymakers in executing and appraising economic evaluations performed in international contexts.

Background: The objective was to identify predictors of societal costs covering formal and informal care utilization by older home care clients in 11 European countries. Methods: Societal costs of 1907 older clients receiving home care for 12 months from the Aged in Home care (AdHoc) study were estimated using the InterRAI Minimum Data Set for Home Care's (MDS-HC) resource use items. Predictors (medical, functional, and psychosocial domains) of societal costs were identified by performing univariate and multivariate generalized linear model analyses. Results: Mean societal costs per participant were €36 442, ranging from €14 865 in Denmark to €78 836 in the United Kingdom. In the final multivariate model, country, being married, activities of daily living (ADL) dependency, cognitive impairment, limitations of going out, oral conditions, number of medications, arthritis, and cerebro vascular accident (CVA) were significantly associated with societal costs. Conclusions: Of the predictors, ADL dependency and limitations of going out may be modifiable. Developing interventions targeted at improving these conditions may create opportunities to curtail societal costs.