Health Care System For People Research Articles

Home-based vs center-based exercise on patient-reported and performance-based outcomes for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Home-based exercise (HBE) represents an alternative to increase the accessibility of rehabilitation programs and relieve the burden on the health care system for people with knee osteoarthritis. To summarize for the first time the effectiveness of HBE as compared to center-based exercise (CBE), both with and without HBE, on patient-reported and performance-based outcomes in people with KOA. Searches were conducted on PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus until March 10, 2023, without date or language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials investigating HBE versus CBE or HBE combined with CBE for people with KOA were eligible. The primary outcomes were patient-reported: pain, physical disability, and quality of life. The secondary outcomes were performance-based: walking ability, lower limb muscle strength, and balance function. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and quality of evidence according to the GRADE. Eleven trials involving 956 participants were included. There was no difference in short-term pain (SMD, 0.22 [95% CI, -0.04 to 0.47], p = 0.09; I2 = 0%), physical disability (SMD, 0.17 [95% CI, -0.19 to 0.54], p = 0.35; I2 = 0%), walking ability (SMD, -0.21 [95% CI, -0.64 to 0.22], p = 0.33; I2 = 35%) and lower limb muscle strength (SMD, -0.24 [95% CI, -0.88 to 0.41], p = 0.47; I2 = 69%) between HBE and CBE. HBE combined with CBE has better benefits compared with HBE alone in short-term pain (SMD, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.60 to 1.17], p < 0.001; I2 = 11%) and physical disability (SMD, 0.25 [95% CI, 0.00 to 0.50], p = 0.05; I2 = 0%). Based on limited evidence, HBE is as effective as CBE on short-term pain, physical disability, walking ability, and lower limb muscle strength in people with knee osteoarthritis. Furthermore, combining HBE with CBE may enhance the overall efficacy of the intervention. PROSPERO, CRD42023416548.

How Do Case Mangers Determine the Types of Services Provided to Users in the Intensive Case Management? A Longitudinal Study

Introduction Intensive case management is an essential component of community mental health care system for people with severe mental illness. We examined the association of service types with previous and future functioning and hospital admissions using a longitudinal data, to clarify the case managers’ activity. Methods The study included baseline assessment, recording and analysis of services, and follow-up assessment. At the baseline and follow-up assessments, we examined functioning (ie, Personal and Social Performance Scale: PSP) and hospital admission of users for past periods. For recording and analysis of services, we recorded services provided by case managers over 2 months, and five core services were used for the analyses: regular face-to-face contact, outreach services, hospital-based (outpatient) services, and easy contacts and coordination. Results Outreach services were significantly associated with hospital admissions at baseline and follow-up assessments. Hospital-based services were significantly associated with lower PSP scores and hospital admission at follow-up assessment. Easy contacts and coordination were associated with lower PSP scores at follow-up assessment. Conclusion In Japan, most services are provided in the outpatient department of hospital, and outreach services are relatively time consuming for case managers; thus, the indications for providing outreach services need to be carefully considered. Therefore, we suggest that case managers provide flexible services to users according to the circumstances in Japan.

How are people with mild cognitive impairment or subjective memory complaints managed in primary care? A systematic review.

BackgroundPrimary care is typically the first point of contact in the health care system for people raising concerns about their memory. However, there is still a lack of high-quality evidence and understanding about how primary care professionals (PCPs) currently manage people at higher risk of developing dementia.ObjectivesTo systematically review management strategies provided by PCPs to reduce cognitive decline in people with mild cognitive impairment and subjective memory complaints.MethodA systematic search for studies was conducted in December 2019 across five databases (EMBASE, Medline, PsycInfo, CINAHL and Web of Science). Methodological quality of included studies was independently assessed by two authors using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.ResultsAn initial 11 719 were found, 7250 were screened and 9 studies were included in the review. Most studies were self-reported behaviour surveys. For non-pharmacological strategies, the most frequent advice PCPs provided was to increase physical activity, cognitive stimulation, diet and social stimulation. For pharmacological strategies, PCPs would most frequently not prescribe any treatment. If PCPs did prescribe, the most frequent prescriptions targeted vascular risk factors to reduce the risk of further cognitive decline.ConclusionPCPs reported that they are much more likely to provide non-pharmacological strategies than pharmacological strategies in line with guidelines on preventing the onset of dementia. However, the quality of evidence within the included studies is low and relies on subjective self-reported behaviours. Observational research is needed to provide an accurate reflection of how people with memory problems are managed in primary care.

Insurance-Based Disparities In Access, Utilization, And Financial Strain For Adults With Psychological Distress.

Limited provider participation within Medicaid and narrow provider networks on health insurance Marketplaces pose potential barriers to accessing and using the health care system for people with behavioral health needs. We compared employer-sponsored insurance, Medicaid, and Marketplace coverage for people with psychological distress across three domains of health care: access, utilization, and financial strain. We found evidence that adults with psychological distress reported greater difficulty accessing health care relative to those without such distress, regardless of insurance source. Among adults with psychological distress, Medicaid enrollees were more likely to use care and less likely to experience health-related financial strain than those enrolled in employer-sponsored insurance were. However, people with Marketplace coverage were more likely to experience barriers across all domains, relative to people with the other two coverage sources. Policy makers should be cognizant of the participation of providers within Medicaid and the Marketplaces and work to make network breadth more transparent.

Awareness and accessibility of the Dutch mental health care system for people with borderline intellectual functioning or mild intellectual disabilities

PurposeIn The Netherlands, curative mental health care and supportive care for people with an intellectual disability (ID) are organised in separate domains. Prevalence of mental health problems is known to be high among people with borderline intellectual functioning (BIF) or mild intellectual disabilities (MID). By contrast, according to recent findings, prevalence of BIF and MID is high among patients in mental health care (17.5–58 per cent). In The Netherlands, a new quality standard of care (QSOC) on mental health care for people with BIF or MID is developed. It is designed to supplement existing guidelines on mental health care so that they can be used appropriately in people with BIF or MID and meant for use in both mental health care organisations (MHCO) as in organisations for ID care. To a large extent, the QSOC should describe the existing practice. This paper aims to discuss these issues.Design/methodology/approachTo assess the existing practice in current mental health care for people with BIF or MID in The Netherlands, the authors examined the views and accessibility of MHCO on the mental health care for patients with and IQ<85. In addition, the authors reviewed published criteria for in- and exclusion of all 39 top clinical mental health care departments for criteria on BIF or (mild) ID.FindingsThe authors found there is a clear awareness of the high prevalence of BIF and MID among large Dutch MHCO. Dutch MHCO estimate the prevalence of BIF and MID among their patients to be around 30 per cent. Nonetheless, most MCHO surveyed (76 per cent) indicated they do not routinely estimate or measure IQ among their patients and 53 per cent of MHCO indicated not having knowledge and expertise on the dual diagnoses of mental health problems and BIF or MID. Fitting in with the new QSOC most of the MHCO (59 per cent) agreed on the statement in the survey that professionals should be able to treat patients with BIF or ID and all but one of the MHCO stated to have some form of collaboration with an institute for ID care.Originality/valueThe authors concluded there is a clear awareness of the high prevalence of BIF and MID among large Dutch MHCO. The new QSOC on mental health care for people with BIF or MID can help improve accessibility and quality of mental health care for these patients.

Determining the impact of a new physiotherapist-led primary care model for back pain: protocol for a pilot cluster randomized controlled trial

BackgroundBack pain is a leading contributor to disability, healthcare costs, and lost work. Family physicians are the most common first point of contact in the healthcare system for people with back pain, but physiotherapists (PTs) may be able to support the primary care team through evidence-based primary care. A cluster randomized trial is needed to determine the clinical, health system, and societal impact of a primary care model that integrates physiotherapists at the first visit for people with back pain. Prior to conducting a future fully powered cluster randomized trial, we need to demonstrate feasibility of the methods. Therefore, the purpose of this pilot study will be to:Determine feasibility of patient recruitment, assessment procedures, and retention.Determine the feasibility of training and implementation of a new PT-led primary care model for low back pain (LBP)Explore the perspectives of patients and healthcare providers (HCPs) related to their experiences and attitudes towards the new service delivery model, barriers/facilitators to implementation, perceived satisfaction, perceived value, and impact on clinic processes and patient outcomes.MethodsThis pilot cluster randomized controlled trial will enroll four sites and randomize them to implement a new PT-led primary care model for back pain or a usual physician-led primary care model. All adults booking a primary care visit for back pain will be invited to participate. Feasibility outcomes will include: recruitment and retention rates, completeness of assessment data, PT training participation and confidence after training, and PT treatment fidelity. Secondary outcomes will include the clinical, health system, cost, and process outcomes planned for the future fully powered cluster trial. Results will be analyzed and reported descriptively and qualitatively. To explore perspectives of both HCPs and patients, we will conduct semi-structured qualitative interviews with patients and focus groups with HCPs from participants in the PT-led primary care sites.DiscussionIf this pilot demonstrates feasibility, a fully powered trial will provide evidence that has the potential to transform primary care for back pain. The full trial will inform future service design, whether these models should be more widely implemented, and training agendas.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03320148. Submitted for registration on 17 September 2017.

Barriers and Facilitators of Healthcare for People with Mental Illness: Why Integrated Patient Centered Healthcare Is Necessary

Understanding barriers and facilitators of healthcare for people with mental illness is essential for healthcare and mental healthcare organizations moving towards patient centered care. This paper presents findings of a measure on barriers and facilitators of healthcare completed by 204 patients being served at a co-located wellness center (primary healthcare clinic) located in an urban mental health center. The top 10 results show important findings for planning healthcare services that are responsive to the needs of people with mental illness. Basic structural issues as a result of poverty are extremely important (transportation, housing, payment) as well as difficulty with public healthcare that often involves long wait-times for appointments and at the doctor's office and hours that might not be convenient. Healthcare services that want to meet the needs of people with mental illness need to address these issues. What facilitates healthcare is not just removing the barriers to receiving healthcare services but instead involves more interpersonal aspects of healthcare such as liking your provider, being able to talk with your provider, feeling your provider cares about you and listens to you. Structural supports such as also being in mental health services, having systems for remembering appointments, and/or having appointment times that are convenient also facilitate seeking healthcare. Facilitating healthcare seeking also seems to involve a sense of agency—looking forward to taking charge of your health and feeling capable of following healthcare provider instructions. Healthcare systems for people with mental illness need to support these facilitators to give care-seekers the support they need. Key points are provided on how organizations and staff can work more effectively in implementing patient centered care.

Lessons from community mental health to drive implementation in health care systems for people with long-term conditions.

This paper aims to identify which lessons learned from the evidence and the experiences accruing from the transformation in mental health services in recent decades may have relevance for the future development of healthcare for people with long-term physical conditions. First, nine principles are discussed which we first identified to guide mental health service organisation, and all of which can be potentially applied to long term care as well (autonomy, continuity, effectiveness, accessibility, comprehensiveness, equity, accountability, co-ordination, and efficiency). Second, we have outlined innovative operational aspects of service user participation, many of which were first initiated and consolidated in the mental health field, and some of which are now also being implemented in long term care (including case management, and crisis plans). We conclude that long term conditions, whether mental or physical, deserve a long-term commitment from the relevant health services, and indeed where continuity and co-ordination are properly funded implemented, this can ensure that the symptomatic course is more stable, quality of life is enhanced, and the clinical outcomes are more favourable. Innovations such as self-management for long-term conditions (intended to promote autonomy and empowerment) need to be subjected to the same level of rigorous scientific scrutiny as any other treatment or service interventions.

Wait Times for Physical and Occupational Therapy in the Public System for People with Arthritis in Quebec

Although arthritis is the leading cause of pain and disability in Canada, and physical therapy (PT) and occupational therapy (OT) are beneficial both for chronic osteoarthritis (OA) and for inflammatory arthritis such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA), there appear to be problems with access to such services. The aim of this study was to document wait times from referral by physician to consultation with PT or OT in the public health care system for people with arthritis in Quebec, Canada. Appointments were requested by telephone, using hypothetical case scenarios; wait times were defined as the time between initial request and appointment date. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the wait times in relation to diagnosis, service provider and geographic area. For both scenarios (OA and RA) combined, 13% were offered an appointment within 6 months, 13% offered given an appointment within 6-12 months, 24% were told they would need to wait longer than 12 months, and 22% were refused services. The remaining 28% were told they would require an evaluation appointment for functional assessment before being given an appointment for therapy. No difference was found between RA and OA diagnoses. Our study suggests that most people with arthritis living in the province of Quebec are not receiving publicly accessible PT or OT intervention in a timely manner.

Mortalidade evitável: adequado manejo e assistência à saúde podem salvar vidas de pessoas com epilepsia?

INTRODUÇÃO: A mortalidade por epilepsia ainda é uma questão negligenciada e as mortes relacionadas com a epilepsia não são bem compreendidas. Recentemente, alguns estudos têm operacionalizado a metodologia de mortalidade evitável, descrevendo as causas de morte que não devem ocorrer na presença de boa qualidade de serviços e tratamento médico adequado. Esse debate sobre causas de morte evitáveis é amplo e parece promissor para o desenvolvimento do monitoramento e avaliação de desempenho da atenção à saúde de pessoas com epilepsia. OBJETIVO: explorar e selecionar os estudos que priorizaram a epilepsia como evento sentinela ou estudos de mortalidade evitável onde a seleção da epilepsia foi caracterizada dentro do grupo de causas evitáveis de morte. METODOLOGIA: A revisão baseou-se numa pesquisa do banco de dados PubMed, usando os descritores, "mortality", "avoidable", "death" e "epilepsy", sem limites de tempo na data de publicação. Apenas artigos de particular relevância para a compreensão da morte evitável por epilepsia foram recuperados e revistos. RESULTADOS: Encontramos uma variedade de estudos que incluíram a epilepsia dentro do grupo de causas de morte evitáveis e assim, pudemos discorrer a temática que pode nortear as ações e políticas públicas de saúde, facilitando a adoção de mecanismos de monitoramento do desempenho da atenção e da prevenção da saúde dos pacientes com epilepsia. CONCLUSÕES: Diante dos resultados encontrados, sugerimos como estratégias que poderiam ser consideradas pelos órgãos públicos de saúde, a implantação de comitês de mortalidade, que sejam de natureza interinstitucional, multiprofissional e confidencial para a prevenção da mortalidade relacionada à epilepsia. Com isso, medidas de intervenção podem ser realizadas para melhorar o atendimento das pessoas com epilepsia e, consequentemente, reduzir os óbitos relacionados à epilepsia.

Divided We Stand, United We Fall: Personal Budgets Versus Universal Coverage

Divided We Stand, United We Fall: Personal Budgets Versus Universal Coverage

The experience of dying: an ethnographic nursing home study.

This article reviews the literature on "The Experience of Dying" and presents data from a larger, ongoing study of an ethnography of dying in nursing homes. The purpose of the ethnographic study was to investigate the process of providing end-of-life care to residents who were dying in nursing homes. Participant observation, in-depth interviews, and event analysis were used to obtain data in three nursing facilities. The review of the literature disclosed that research on the experience of dying is limited; most of the studies have been conducted in acute care hospitals among people who were dying of cancer. The ethnographic study found that lack of attention to cultural needs, cognitive status, inadequate staffing, and inappropriate and inadequate communication between health care providers and nursing home residents and their families were the predominant factors that influenced the experience of dying. Future research is needed on: The experience of dying for patients with dementia, for people in a comatose state, and for non-English speaking patients; symptom management; health care provider/patient-family interaction; the burden of caregiving for families; and the consequences of the constraints within our health care system for people who are dying in various settings.

Public-sector mental health care: new challenges.

Mental health care is unique in that state and local governments finance and manage a distinct health care system for people with these disorders. This public system serves as a safety net, providing for the uninsured and compensating for inadequate benefits in commercial plans. Concerns about inadequate and flawed public systems dominated public debate about mental health care in the 1970s and 1980s. However, in the 1990s issues such as managed care and insurance parity have taken over as dominant concerns. A review of two past issues of Health Affairs that focused on mental health policy during the 1990s illustrates how concerns have shifted. In the Fall 1992 issue about half of the papers primarily addressed public-sector concerns. 1 Only a single paper primarily addressed managed care. 2 In contrast, the Fall 1995 issue was subtitled “Mental Health in the Age of Managed Care.” Clearly, managed care had become a dominant concern; only one of the major papers in this issue focused primarily on state mental health systems. 3 Does a reduced level of policy debate about public systems mean that change has slowed? What are the current trends, issues, problems, and possibilities in this sector of health care? In this paper I address these questions, with illustrations from Ohio. n Today’s public systems. Behavioral disorders remain essentially the only set of health problems for which state and local governments finance and manage a specialty treatment system. Public funds pay for a large portion of the costs of care for certain other disorders (such as Medicare financing of dialysis), and public services exist for a few rare disorders such as leprosy. However, the public mental health system is the only substantial, disorder-specific treatment system in existence today. States remain the largest single payers for mental health care, if states’ contributions to Medicaid are considered. National mental health spending in 1996 totaled $66.7 billion. 4 State (and local) governments spent $11.6 billion, not including their share of Medicaid (which ranges from about 30 percent to 50 percent). Medicaid mental health spending was $12.6 billion. In sum, public spending covered 53 percent of all mental health treatment costs. Private insurance payments of $17.9 billion covered only about a quarter of costs.