How can hospitals change practice to better implement smoking cessation interventions? A systematic review

Smoking cessation reduces the risk of death, improves recovery, and reduces the risk of hospital readmission. Evidence and policy support hospital admission as an ideal time to deliver smoking-cessation interventions. However, this is not well implemented in practice. In this systematic review, the authors summarize the literature on smoking-cessation implementation strategies and evaluate their success to guide the implementation of best-practice smoking interventions into hospital settings. The CINAHL Complete, Embase, MEDLINE Complete, and PsycInfo databases were searched using terms associated with the following topics: smoking cessation, hospitals, and implementation. In total, 14,287 original records were identified and screened, resulting in 63 eligible articles from 56 studies. Data were extracted on the study characteristics, implementation strategies, and implementation outcomes. Implementation outcomes were guided by Proctor and colleagues' framework and included acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, cost, feasibility, fidelity, penetration, and sustainability. The findings demonstrate that studies predominantly focused on the training of staff to achieve implementation. Brief implementation approaches using a small number of implementation strategies were less successful and poorly sustained compared with well resourced and multicomponent approaches. Although brief implementation approaches may be viewed as advantageous because they are less resource-intensive, their capacity to change practice in a sustained way lacks evidence. Attempts to change clinician behavior or introduce new models of care are challenging in a short time frame, and implementation efforts should be designed for long-term success. There is a need to embrace strategic, well planned implementation approaches to embed smoking-cessation interventions into hospitals and to reap and sustain the benefits for people who smoke.     

Public Preferences for Policies to Promote COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake: A Discrete Choice Experiment in The Netherlands

ObjectivesThe COVID-19 pandemic forms an unprecedented public health, economic, and social crisis. Uptake of vaccination is critical for controlling the pandemic. Nevertheless, vaccination hesitancy is considerable, requiring policies to promote uptake. We investigate Dutch citizens’ preferences for policies that aim to promote vaccination through facilitating choice of vaccination, profiling it as the norm, making vaccination more attractive through rewards, or punishing people who reject vaccination.MethodsWe conducted a discrete choice experiment in which 747 respondents were asked to choose between policies to promote vaccination uptake and their impacts on the number of deaths, people with permanent health problems, households with income loss, and a tax increase.ResultsRespondents generally had a negative preference for policies that promote vaccination. They particularly disliked policies that punish those who reject the vaccine and were more favorable toward policies that reward vaccination, such as awarding additional rights to vaccinated individuals through vaccination passports. Respondents who reject vaccination were in general much more negative about the policy options than respondents who consider accepting the vaccine. Nevertheless, vaccination passports are supported by both respondents who accept the vaccine, those who reject vaccination, and those who are unsure about vaccination.ConclusionsThis study provides concrete directions for governments attempting to increase the vaccination uptake in ways that are supported by the public. Our results could encourage policy makers to focus on policy options that make vaccination easier and reward people who take the vaccine, as especially the implementation of vaccination passports was supported.     

Policy Analysis for Prevention and Control of Influenza in Aged Care

ObjectiveThis study aimed to analyze national influenza infection control policy documents within aged care settings by identifying the consistencies, inconsistencies, and gaps with the current evidence and by evaluating methodological quality. Aged care providers can use these findings to identify their policy documents' strengths and weaknesses.DesignA quality and content analysis of national level policy documents.Setting and ParticipantsAged care settings rely on national agencies' policy recommendations to control and prevent outbreaks. There is limited research on the effectiveness of control measures to prevent and treat influenza within aged care settings. Because of the complexities around aged care governance, the primary responsibility in developing a comprehensive facility-level, infection-prevention policy, falls to the providers.MethodsThe analysis was conducted using the (1) International Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation assessment tool, containing 23 items across 6 domains; and the (2) Influenza Related Control Measures in Aged Care settings checklist, developed by the authors, with 82 recommendations covering: medical interventions, nonmedical interventions, and physical layout.ResultsThere were 19 documents from 9 different high-income countries, with a moderately high methodological quality in general. The quality assessment's average score was 40.2% (95% CI 31.9%–44.7%). “Stakeholder involvement” ranked third, and “Editorial independence” and “Rigor of development” had the lowest average scores across all domains. The content analysis' average score was 37.2% (95% CI 10.5%–21.5%). The highest scoring document (59.1%) included term definitions, cited evidence for recommendations, and clear measurable instructions. “Physical Layout” had the least coverage and averaged 21.9% (95% CI 4.2%–37.5%), which shows a substantial gap in built environment recommendations.Conclusions and ImplicationsExisting policy documents vary in their comprehensiveness. The higher scoring documents provide an ideal model for providers. The checklist tools can be used to assess and enhance documents. Further research on document end-user evaluation would be useful, as there is room for improvement in methodological quality and coverage of recommendation coverage, especially related to physical layout.     

Involvement of Patients and Medical Professionals in the Assessment of Relative Effectiveness: A Need for Closer Cooperation

ObjectivesInvolvement of patients and medical professionals in assessment of relative effectiveness (relative effectiveness assessment) contributes to an efficient and effective health technology assessment (HTA) process and supports acceptance and implementation of the outcome. This study aimed to analyze stakeholder involvement in assessing relative effectiveness and how the parties involved value this collaboration.MethodsThis is a document analysis of all drug assessments completed in 2019 (20) by the public HTA agency of The Netherlands, enriched with semistructured interviews with employees of the HTA agency (18) and representatives of patient (5) and medical (11) associations involved in these assessments. Data were analyzed, coded, and categorized.ResultsIn almost half of the assessments, there was no coordination with the medical associations at the start of the relative effectiveness assessment and no patient associations involved in this phase. During the assessment procedure, patient and medical associations were always asked to comment on the draft report. Nevertheless, the strict 5-day deadline that the HTA agency uses as a response period often hampered a proper response and involvement. According to interviewees of the HTA agency, this leads to a great diversity in the substantive quality of their input. Patient and medical associations indicated that the HTA agency relies too much on “paper knowledge,” which leads to a (perceived) lack of alignment with clinical practice.ConclusionsThe limited involvement results in a lack of coordination and mutual trust. Optimizing involvement of patients and medical professionals in HTA practice requires effort from all parties involved. Procedural adjustments and better coordination, especially at the start of the assessment, would probably improve cooperation.     

The social vulnerability metric (SVM) as a new tool for public health

Objective

To derive and validate a new ecological measure of the social determinants of health (SDoH), calculable at the zip code or county level.

Data Sources and Study Setting

The most recent releases of secondary, publicly available data were collected from national U.S. health agencies as well as state and city public health departments.

Study Design

The Social Vulnerability Metric (SVM) was constructed from U.S. zip-code level measures (2018) from survey data using multidimensional Item Response Theory and validated using outcomes including all-cause mortality (2016), COVID-19 vaccination (2021), and emergency department visits for asthma (2018). The SVM was also compared with the existing Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) to determine convergent validity and differential predictive validity.

Data Collection/Extraction Methods

The data were collected directly from published files available to the public online from national U.S. health agencies as well as state and city public health departments.

Principal Findings

The correlation between SVM scores and national age-adjusted county all-cause mortality was r = 0.68. This correlation demonstrated the SVM's robust validity and outperformed the SVI with an almost four-fold increase in explained variance (46% vs. 12%). The SVM was also highly correlated (r ≥ 0.60) to zip-code level health outcomes for the state of California and city of Chicago.

Conclusions

The SVM offers a measurement tool improving upon the performance of existing SDoH composite measures and has broad applicability to public health that may help in directing future policies and interventions. The SVM provides a single measure of SDoH that better quantifies associations with health outcomes.     

Five-year results of no-fault compensation related to childbirth injuries in Taiwan

ObjectiveIncreasing obstetric medical litigations had great impacts in health care system resulted in lower recruitment of residents and higher medical cost of defensive medicine in Taiwan. In order to reduce medical litigation, the “Childbirth Accident Emergency Relief Act” was implemented in June 2016. This study presented five-year results of a novel childbirth accident compensation system.Materials and methodsThe purpose of the Relief Act was to establish a national relief system to ensure timely relief, reduce medical disputes, promote the partnership between patient and medical personnel. The compensations included maximal 2 million NTD for maternal death, maximal 0.3 million NTD for neonatal and fetal deaths, and 3, 2, and 1.5 million NTD for maternal or neonatal profound, severe, and moderate disabilities, respectively. Puerperal hysterectomy was included with maximal 0.8 million NTD compensation.ResultsSince June 30, 2016 to June 30, 2021, there were 1340 applications reviewed by Committee and 1258 were approved with total relief of 744.7 million NTD (26.6 million USD) with approve rate of 93.9%. It took an average of 109.8 days to start application from childbirth and 102.4 days to get compensation from application. 66.1% of accident victims agreed this system can restore doctor–patient relationship by immediate care and assistance from medical institutions.ConclusionThe Relief Act is the first government leading compensation system to establish a national relief system. It was enacted to reduce medical disputes, promote the partnership between patient and medical personnel, and enhance health and safety of women during childbirth. A no-fault compensation would be an efficient alternative disputes resolution to childbirth accidents.     

Assessment of the Benefits of Targeted Interventions for Pandemic Control in China Based on Machine Learning Method and Web Service for COVID-19 Policy Simulation

Taking the Chinese city of Xiamen as an example, simulation and quantitative analysis were performed on the transmissions of the Coronavirus Disease 2019(COVID-19) and the influence of intervention combinations to assist policymakers in the preparation of targeted response measures. A machine learning model was built to estimate the effectiveness of interventions and simulate transmission in different scenarios. The comparison was conducted between simulated and real cases in Xiamen. A web inter...