-
The Medical journal of Australia 09/2012; 197(6):324-6. · 2.81 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The burden of patients with heart failure on health care systems is widely recognised, although there have been few attempts to quantify individual patterns of care and differences in health service utilisation related to age, socio-economic factors and the presence of co-morbidities. The aim of this study was to assess the typical profile, trajectory and resource use of a cohort of Australian patients with heart failure using linked population-based, patient-level data.
Using hospital separations (Admitted Patient Data Collection) with death registrations (Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages) for the period 2000-2007 we estimated age- and gender-specific rates of index admissions and readmissions, risk factors for hospital readmission, mean length of stay (LOS), median survival and bed-days occupied by patients with heart failure in New South Wales, Australia.
We identified 29,161 index admissions for heart failure. Admission rates increased with age, and were higher for males than females for all age groups. Age-standardised rates decreased over time (256.7 to 237.7/100,000 for males and 235.3 to 217.1/100,000 for females from 2002-3 to 2006-7; p = 0.0073 adjusted for gender). Readmission rates (any cause) were 27% and 73% at 28-days and one year respectively; readmission rates for heart failure were 11% and 32% respectively. All cause mortality was 10% and 28% at 28 days and one year. Increasing age was associated with more heart failure readmissions, longer LOS and shorter median survival. Increasing age, increasing Charlson comorbidity score and male gender were risk factors for hospital readmission. Cohort members occupied 954,888 hospital bed-days during the study period (any cause); 383,646 bed-days were attributed to heart failure admissions.
The rates of index admissions for heart failure decreased significantly in both males and females over the study period. However, the impact on acute care hospital beds was substantial, with heart failure patients occupying almost 200,000 bed-days per year in NSW over the five year study period. The strong age-related trends highlight the importance of stabilising elderly patients before discharge and community-based outreach programs to better manage heart failure and reduce readmissions.
BMC Health Services Research 04/2012; 12:103. · 1.66 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Objective To compare the relative importance of medicine attributes and decision-making preferences of patients with higher or lower levels of insurance coverage in a publicly funded health care system. Design and setting Cross-sectional telephone survey of randomly selected regular medicine users aged ≥18 years in the Hunter Valley, NSW, Australia. Main variables studied Questions about 27 medicine attributes and active involvement in decisions to start a new medicine. Results After adjustment, there were few differences between the 408 concession card holders (high insurance) and 410 general beneficiaries (low insurance) in their assessment of the importance of medicine attributes. For both groups, the explanation of treatment options, establishing the need for the medicine, and medicine efficacy and safety were the most important considerations. Medicine costs, the treatment burden and medicine familiarity were less important; the views of family and friends ranked lowest. There was a statistically significantly greater influence of the regular doctor for the concession card holders than general beneficiaries (93.6 vs. 84%, adjusted OR 2.80, 95% CI 1.31, 5.99). Concession card holders were more likely to favour doctors having more say in the decision-making process (crude OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.28, 2.24), and more likely to report the most recent treatment decision being made by the doctor alone, compared with general beneficiaries (61.2 vs. 40.3%). Conclusion Medicine need, efficacy and safety are viewed as paramount for most patients, irrespective of insurance status. While patients report the importance of participation in treatment decisions, delegation of decision making to the doctor was common in practice.
Health expectations: an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy 08/2011; · 1.80 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To assess patients' prescription medicine cost consciousness and explore the implications of further cost sharing increases for affordability.
A telephone interview survey of 818 randomly selected prescription medicine users (408 concession card holders, 410 general beneficiaries) resident in the Hunter Valley region of New South Wales, Australia.
Degree of prescription cost consciousness; attitudes towards prescription use and cost sharing; self-rated capacity to manage further co-payment increases and differences between concession card holders and general beneficiaries in these measures.
The majority of participants were cost conscious medicine users who act responsibly towards medicine use and believe that cost sharing is appropriate. Although there were no differences in cost consciousness scores, card holders appeared more sensitive to prescription costs and increases. Conversely, general beneficiaries were more likely to report difficulties with cost (avoiding seeing a doctor, not collecting prescription medicines, stopping or reducing the dose of a prescribed medicine). Although almost 75% of respondents reported that a co-payment increase would cause financial difficulty, only 28% indicated this would change their medicine use.
These results suggest that most Australian patients are cost conscious but many are also close to facing difficulties with prescription costs. Further increases in PBS cost sharing could compromise prescription affordability, particularly for general beneficiaries.
Australian health review: a publication of the Australian Hospital Association 02/2011; 35(1):37-44. · 0.55 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Investments in eHealth worldwide have been mirrored in Australia, with >90% of general practices computerized. Recent eHealth incentives promote the use of up to date electronic information sources relevant to general practice with flexibility in mode of access.
To determine GPs' access to and use of electronic information sources and computerized clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) for prescribing.
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 experienced GPs and nine GP trainees in New South Wales, Australia in 2008. A thematic analysis of interview transcripts was undertaken.
Information needs varied with clinical experience, and people resources (specialists, GP peers and supervisors for trainees) were often preferred over written formats. Experienced GPs used a small number of electronic resources and accessed them infrequently. Familiarity from training and early clinical practice and easy access were dominant influences on resource use. Practice time constraints meant relevant information needed to be readily accessible during consultations, requiring integration or direct access from prescribing software. Quality of electronic resource content was assumed and cost a barrier for some GPs.
The current Australian practice incentives do not prescribe which information resources GPs should use. Without integration into practice computing systems, uptake and routine use seem unlikely. CDSS developments must recognize the time pressures of practice, preference for integration and cost concerns. Minimum standards are required to ensure that high-quality information resources are integrated and regularly updated. Without standards, the anticipated benefits of computerization on patient safety and health outcomes will be uncertain.
Family Practice 02/2011; 28(1):93-101. · 1.50 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Healthcare systems face the problem of insufficient resources to meet the needs of ageing populations and increasing demands for access to new treatments. It is unclear whether doctors and consumers agree on the main challenges to health system sustainability.
We conducted a mail survey of Australian doctors (specialists and general practitioners) and a computer assisted telephone interview (CATI) of consumers to determine their views on contributors to increasing health care costs, rationing of services and involvement in health resource allocation decisions. Differences in responses are reported as odds ratios (OR) and 99% confidence intervals (CI).
Of 2948 doctors, 1139 (38.6%) responded; 533 of 826 consumers responded (64.5% response). Doctors were more concerned than consumers with the effects of an ageing population (OR 3.0; 99% CI 1.7, 5.4), and costs of new drugs and technologies (OR 5.1; CI 3.3, 8.0), but less likely to consider pharmaceutical promotional activities as a cost driver (OR 0.29, CI 0.22, 0.39). Doctors were more likely than consumers to view 'community demand' for new technologies as a major cost driver, (OR 1.6; 1.2, 2.2), but less likely to attribute increased costs to patients failing to take responsibility for their own health (OR 0.35; 0.24, 0.49). Like doctors, the majority of consumers saw a need for public consultation in decisions about funding for new treatments.
Australian doctors and consumers hold different views on the sustainability of the healthcare system, and a number of key issues relating to costs, cost drivers, roles and responsibilities. Doctors recognise their dual responsibility to patients and society, see an important role for physicians in influencing resource allocation, and acknowledge their lack of skills in assessing treatments of marginal value. Consumers recognise cost pressures on the health system, but express willingness to be involved in health care decision making.
PLoS ONE 01/2011; 6(4):e19222. · 4.09 Impact Factor
-
PLoS Medicine 09/2010; 7(9). · 16.27 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The aim of the study was to assess the extent of pharmacist participation in pharmaceutical industry-sponsored educational events in Australia.
A descriptive analysis was performed of 14 649 educational events provided by 43 companies between July and December 2007, using publicly available reports posted on the Medicines Australia website. Pharmacist participation was assessed according to duration and type of event, whether continuing professional education credits were awarded, type of venue, hospitality provided and cost of hospitality.
Most of the 14 649 industry-sponsored events reported in this mandatory reporting programme were targeted at doctors (specialists and general practitioners). Pharmacists were present at 621 events (4.2%); 209 events were pharmacist-only events. Of pharmacist-only events, 68% were held in hospitals and professional rooms and 13% in restaurants. In contrast, 32% of events involving doctors were held in restaurants (difference in proportions 18.9%; 95% confidence interval 13.5-22.9%) Sixty-six per cent of pharmacist-only events were 1 h or less in duration; 81% were 2 h or less. Almost 40% were reported as training or in-service activities, generally conducted in hospitals. Only three events had continuing professional education credits assigned. The most common topics discussed were oncology, diabetes, haematology, cardiology and gastroenterology; a specific medicine was mentioned in the descriptor for 23 of the 209 (11%) events. Hospitality provided was generally modest, averaging AU$36.24 per pharmacist across all pharmacist-only events, and lower in hospital (AU$9.21 per head) than those held in restaurants (AU$51.42).
The data from this first report suggest pharmacists were not a major target for industry-funded educational events. Exposure to such events will likely increase as pharmacists take on enhanced prescribing roles and it is important that this is captured under the mandatory disclosure requirements that have been introduced in a number of jurisdictions. It is also desirable that such schemes include generic medicines manufacturers and that pharmacy professional bodies use these data to monitor and manage the level and impact of interactions between pharmacists and industry.
International Journal of Pharmacy Practice 04/2010; 18(2):88-92.
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Computerised clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) are being used increasingly to support evidence-based decision-making by health care professionals. This systematic review evaluated the impact of CDSSs targeting pharmacists on physician prescribing, clinical and patient outcomes. We compared the impact of CDSSs addressing safety concerns (drug interactions, contraindications, dose monitoring and adjustment) and those focusing on medicines use in line with guideline recommendations (hereafter referred to as Quality Use of Medicines, or QUM). We also examined the influence of clinical setting (institutional versus ambulatory care), system- or user-initiation of CDSS, prescribing versus clinical outcomes reported and use of multi-faceted versus single interventions on system effectiveness.
We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO (1990-2009) for methodologically adequate studies (experiments and strong quasi-experiments) comparing a CDSS with usual pharmacy care. Individual study results are reported as positive trends or statistically significant results in the direction of the intentions of the CDSS being tested. Studies are aggregated and compared as the proportions of studies showing the effectiveness of the CDSS on the majority (> or = 50%) of outcomes reported in the individual study.
Of 21 eligible studies, 11 addressed safety and 10 QUM issues. CDSSs addressing safety issues were more effective than CDSSs focusing on QUM (10/11 versus 4/10 studies reporting statistically significant improvements in favour of CDSSs on > or = 50% of all outcomes reported; P = 0.01). A number of QUM studies noted the limited contact between pharmacists and physicians relating to QUM treatment recommendations. More studies demonstrated CDSS benefits on prescribing outcomes than clinical outcomes (10/10 versus 0/3 studies; P = 0.002). There were too few studies to assess the impact of system- versus user-initiated CDSS, the influence of setting or multi-faceted interventions on CDSS effectiveness.
Our study demonstrated greater effectiveness of safety-focused compared with QUM-focused CDSSs. Medicine safety issues are traditional areas of pharmacy activity. Without good communication between pharmacists and physicians, the full benefits of QUM-focused CDSSs may not be realised. Developments in pharmacy-based CDSSs need to consider these inter-professional relationships as well as computer-system enhancements.
International Journal of Pharmacy Practice 04/2010; 18(2):69-87.
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To assess the impact of two interventions on computer-generated prescriptions for antibiotics--(i) an educational intervention to reduce automatic computerised ordering of repeat antibiotic prescriptions, and (ii) a legislative change prohibiting the "no brand substitution" box being checked as a default setting in prescribing software--and to compare these findings with those of a similar survey we conducted in 2000.
Prospective audit of consecutive prescriptions for four antibiotics (amoxycillin, amoxycillin/clavulanate, roxithromycin, and cefaclor) commonly prescribed for upper respiratory tract infections in community pharmacies in New South Wales and Queensland between 1 November 2008 and 31 January 2009.
Primary outcome: rate of repeat prescription ordering on computer-generated versus handwritten prescriptions. Secondary outcome: rate of checking of the "no brand substitution" box on computer-generated versus handwritten prescriptions.
Data were collected on 2807 prescriptions presented to 51 pharmacies (50 in NSW, one in Queensland), of which 2354 were computer-generated. Repeats were ordered on 1633 computer-generated prescriptions (69%) compared with 183 handwritten prescriptions (40%). These proportions were identical to those found in 2000, although the rates of computer prescribing were much higher in this study (84% v 54%). This difference in repeat prescribing was statistically significant (odds ratio adjusted for clustering at pharmacy level, 2.87; 95% CI, 2.32-3.55). Twenty-three (1%) of the computer-generated prescriptions had the "no brand substitution" box checked compared with 3 (0.7%) of the handwritten prescriptions (27% and 1%, respectively, in our previous survey).
The legislative change which disallowed having the "no brand substitution" box checked as a default setting in prescribing software had a dramatic impact on the checking of the "no brand substitution" box. In contrast, there was no sustained effect of educating prescribers about software default settings relating to repeat prescribing of antibiotics. Other actions are required if unnecessary repeat prescriptions for some medicines, such as antibiotics, are to be reduced.
The Medical journal of Australia 02/2010; 192(4):192-5. · 2.81 Impact Factor
-
JAMIA. 01/2010; 17:25-33.
-
PLoS Medicine 11/2009; 6(11):e1000128. · 16.27 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Computerised clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) are used widely to improve quality of care and patient outcomes. This systematic review evaluated the impact of CDSSs in targeting specific aspects of prescribing, namely initiating, monitoring and stopping therapy. We also examined the influence of clinical setting (institutional vs ambulatory care), system- or user-initiation of CDSS, multi-faceted vs stand alone CDSS interventions and clinical target on practice changes in line with the intent of the CDSS.
We searched Medline, Embase and PsychINFO for publications from 1990-2007 detailing CDSS prescribing interventions. Pairs of independent reviewers extracted the key features and prescribing outcomes of methodologically adequate studies (experiments and strong quasi-experiments).
56 studies met our inclusion criteria, 38 addressing initiating, 23 monitoring and three stopping therapy. At the time of initiating therapy, CDSSs appear to be somewhat more effective after, rather than before, drug selection has occurred (7/12 versus 12/26 studies reporting statistically significant improvements in favour of CDSSs on = 50% of prescribing outcomes reported). CDSSs also appeared to be effective for monitoring therapy, particularly using laboratory test reminders (4/7 studies reporting significant improvements in favour of CDSSs on the majority of prescribing outcomes). None of the studies addressing stopping therapy demonstrated impacts in favour of CDSSs over comparators. The most consistently effective approaches used system-initiated advice to fine-tune existing therapy by making recommendations to improve patient safety, adjust the dose, duration or form of prescribed drugs or increase the laboratory testing rates for patients on long-term therapy. CDSSs appeared to perform better in institutional compared to ambulatory settings and when decision support was initiated automatically by the system as opposed to user initiation. CDSSs implemented with other strategies such as education were no more successful in improving prescribing than stand alone interventions. Cardiovascular disease was the most studied clinical target but few studies demonstrated significant improvements on the majority of prescribing outcomes.
Our understanding of CDSS impacts on specific aspects of the prescribing process remains relatively limited. Future implementation should build on effective approaches including the use of system-initiated advice to address safety issues and improve the monitoring of therapy.
BMC Health Services Research 09/2009; 9:154. · 1.66 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In this paper we argue that Australia's pharmaceutical cost sharing policy has been applied as if cost sharing is unproblematic for medicine affordability and good health outcomes. Australian and international experience with pharmaceutical cost sharing strongly suggests a negative impact on affordability and quality use of medicines, disproportionately affecting low income patients. We argue that Australia's use of cost sharing reflects the currency of a cognitively powerful and morally charged idea - moral hazard. Moral hazard refers to the change in behaviour induced by insurance coverage. Applied to pharmaceuticals, this means that low out-of-pocket cost will lead to waste. Moral hazard mixes the explanatory power of price with the intuitively cogent notion that if people do not experience consequences they will behave irresponsibly. Cost sharing policy has gone unscrutinised and uncontested not because cost sharing is unproblematic, but because in the light of the idea of moral hazard it has all the question-deadening weight of common sense.
Australian health review: a publication of the Australian Hospital Association 06/2009; 33(2):231-40. · 0.55 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Australia's system for assessing the cost-effectiveness of drugs for listing under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) is recognised internationally. A variety of mechanisms, such as evidence-based rules for determining eligibility for initial or continuing subsidy, price-volume agreements, rebates, and caps on government expenditure are used to contain PBS expenditures. In this paper we assess the extent of use of special pricing arrangements in Australia and how and where they are communicated to health professionals and the community. We searched publicly available documents published by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Pricing Authority (PBPA). We found 73 medicines where special pricing arrangements had been applied and where prices appearing on the Schedule of Pharmaceutical Benefits might differ from those considered to be "cost-effective" by the PBAC. Reporting of these special pricing agreements was inconsistent and generally non-transparent. In some, the lack of transparency may have reflected the desire of manufacturers to disguise the true negotiated price, lest it weaken their negotiation position in other jurisdictions.
Australian health review: a publication of the Australian Hospital Association 06/2009; 33(2):192-9. · 0.55 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To document the inclusion of key medicines for children in national essential medicines lists (EMLs) and standard treatment guidelines, and to assess the availability and cost of these medicines in 14 countries in central Africa.
Surveys were conducted in 12 public and private sector medicine outlets in each country's capital city. Data were collected on medicine availability on the survey day and on the cost to the patient of the lowest priced medicine in stock.
The proportion of survey medicines in national EMLs ranged from 50% to 90%. In only three countries were more than 50% of such medicines available from central medical stores (range: 15-75%). Availability in nongovernmental organization stores was not consistently better (range: 10-65%) but tended to be higher in teaching hospitals, although the range was similar (15-70%). District hospitals (range: 10-80%) had slightly better availability than teaching hospitals, while primary health care clinics generally had poorer availability (range: 18-48%). Retail or private pharmacies tended to have more survey medicines available (range: 38-62%). There was considerable variability in prices, which tended to be higher in retail pharmacies.
The availability of key essential medicines for children was poor. Better understanding of the supply systems in the countries studied and of the pattern of demand for medicines is needed before improvements can be made. Medicines must be available, affordable and acceptable to patients. Substantial progress towards Millennium Development Goals will not occur without a major effort to improve access to medicines for children.
Bulletin of the World Health Organisation 04/2009; 87(3):231-7. · 4.64 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To test the effect of a AU dollars 2 scratch lottery ticket on response rates to a national mailed questionnaire of Australian general practitioners (GPs) and medical specialists.
A randomized controlled trial was conducted and the incentive sent to half of the participants with the first mailing. A single follow-up mailing without incentive was sent to all non-respondents. Survey respondents were then informed of the research question regarding incentives and allowed to withdraw their study data. Differences in response rates between doctors receiving and not receiving the incentive, and between respondents and non-respondents, were examined.
The overall response rate was 47% (443 respondents). Twenty-two respondents (5%) withdrew their data after being informed of the research question. Of the remaining 421 respondents, 233 had received the incentive (response rate 49.7%) and 188 had not (40.1%, p=0.0032). The absolute increase in response rate with the incentive (9.6%, 95%CI 3.2, 15.9) was quantitatively similar in effect to the reminder mailing (11.8%). The incentive had a larger effect among the GP sample compared with specialists (13.4 vs. 5.9%), although the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.20). There were no systematic differences in demographic characteristics between respondents and non-respondents.
Increased response rates associated with a small incentive may reduce the need for a second mailed reminder, but strong views about the use of incentives may negatively influence the participation of some practitioners. While the overall response rate was low, there was no evidence of bias in our sample.
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety 09/2005; 14(8):571-7. · 2.53 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: All Australian citizens are provided affordable access to prescription medicines through the nation's system of universal pharmaceutical subsidies--the pharmaceutical benefits scheme. The rapid increase in pharmaceutical related expenditure has generated the concern that Australians are taking advantage of prescription subsidies and are using more medicines than are necessary, thereby creating a 'moral hazard'. This concern is predicated on a number of assumptions about patient behaviour rather than on empirical observation. These assumptions amount to a view that patients are consumers who treat prescription medicines as common goods subject to informed and rational calculation of the cost and benefits of their use. This paper reports the findings of an in-depth interview study undertaken to explore how prescription cost influences Australians' medicine use. Qualitative data were analysed to compare medicine users' descriptions of the role of prescription cost in medicine use against the assumptions that underlie the belief in moral hazard. Moral hazard did not appear to be significantly operating in the accounts of medicine use collected for this study. Interviewees' accounts of medicine use revealed an act characterised by ambivalence, a mix of desire and antipathy, faith and suspicion. Medicines appeared in interviewees' accounts as both pharmacologically and symbolically potent substances, which despite their familiarity as objects, are often mysterious to non-expert patients. Cost appeared as a secondary factor in patients' decision to access a prescription medicine. Using a prescription was predicated on the medicine being necessary, with necessity typically established by an expert doctor prescribing the medicine. Prescription medicines did not appear as 'common goods' where subsidised access motivates a 'consumer' to demand more or make the prospect of prescription use more attractive or necessary.
Social Science [?] Medicine 05/2005; 60(7):1437-43. · 2.70 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To investigate how prescription co-payments influence the medicine use of Australian patients.
Two surveys and an in-depth interview study were conducted in the Newcastle/Hunter region of New South Wales (NSW). A community-based survey explored how often prescription cost posed a barrier to prescription use. A general practice patient survey investigated the impact of prescription cost on the timing of medical consultations and prescription collection. Quantitative data were summarised using descriptive statistics; associations between household characteristics and outcomes were explored using odds ratios and chi square analysis. In-depth interviews were conducted to explore the role of prescription cost in medicine use. The interview data were qualitatively analysed for relevant themes using 'grounded theory'.
420 of 950 households (44%) participated in the community survey: 110 (26%) reported delaying visiting a GP, 85 (20%) not buying all of their prescription medicines and 77 (18%) not refilling a prescription because of cost. Sixty-two (15%) households reported significant difficulties with prescription costs. Households with children had twice the odds of reporting significant difficulties than those without (OR= 2.0, 95% CI 1.2-3.5). Of the 442 (43%) GP patients who participated, 25 (6%) patients reported prescription cost as the reason for delaying their visit. Of the 291 patients who received a prescription, 26 (9%) patients reported cost as the reason for not collecting some or all of their prescriptions.
Given the wide variation in patients' capacity to manage increased out-of-pocket costs, co-payments may add to patients' burden and place a potential barrier to safe and timely prescription use.
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 03/2004; 28(1):62-7. · 1.20 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To investigate specialists' influence on prescribing by general practitioners.
A focus group study of 35 GPs.
Hunter Urban Division of General Practice, New South Wales.
Although GPs thought specialists had only a small influence on their prescribing overall, it was substantial in some clinical areas, in complex conditions and conditions seen infrequently. Specialists were seen as authoritative and unbiased. Local specialists were particularly influential. Specialist influence came from seeing how specialists managed patients, clinical meetings, and specific verbal advice. It influenced the prescribing of new drugs, selection of drugs within a class and sometimes changed established prescribing practices.
Interventions to change GPs' prescribing practices should address the importance of specialist influence, and not focus on GPs alone.
Australian family physician 08/2003; 32(7):573-6. · 0.73 Impact Factor
