Among injury victims relatively high prevalence rates of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have been found. PTSD is associated with functional impairments and decreased health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Previous studies that addressed the latter were restricted to injuries at the higher end of the severity spectrum. This study examined the association between PTSD symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in a comprehensive population of injury patients of all severity levels and external causes. We conducted a self-assessment survey which included items regarding demographics of the patient, accident type, sustained injuries, EuroQol health classification system (EQ-5D) and Health Utilities Index (HUI) to measure functional outcome and HRQoL, and the Impact of Event Scale (IES) to measure PTSD symptoms. An IES-score of 35 or higher was used as indication for the presence of PTSD. The survey was completed by 1,781 injury patients two years after they were treated at the Emergency Department (ED), followed by either hospital admission or direct discharge to the home environment. Symptoms indicative of PTSD were associated with more problems on all EQ-5D and HUI3 domains of functional outcome and a considerable utility loss in both hospitalized (0.23-0.24) and non-hospitalized (0.32-0.33) patients. Differences in reported problems between patients with IES scores higher or lower than 35 were largest for EQ-5D health domains pain/discomfort (82% versus 28%) and anxiety/depression (53% versus 11%) and HUI domains emotion (92% versus 33%) and pain (84% versus 38%). After adjusting for potential confounders, PTSD remained strongly associated with adverse HRQoL. Among patients treated at an ED posttraumatic stress symptoms indicative of PTSD were associated with a considerable decrease in HRQoL in both hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients. PTSD symptoms may therefore raise a major barrier for full recovery of injury patients of even minor levels of severity.

Value-based health care aims to optimize the balance of patient outcomes and health care costs. To improve value in perinatal care using this strategy, standard outcomes must first be defined. The objective of this work was to define a minimum, internationally appropriate set of outcome measures for evaluating and improving perinatal care with a focus on outcomes that matter to women and their families. An interdisciplinary and international Working Group was assembled. Existing literature and current measurement initiatives were reviewed. Serial guided discussions and validation surveys provided consumer input. A series of nine teleconferences, incorporating a modified Delphi process, were held to reach consensus on the proposed Standard Set. The Working Group selected 24 outcome measures to evaluate care during pregnancy and up to 6 months postpartum. These include clinical outcomes such as maternal and neonatal mortality and morbidity, stillbirth, preterm birth, birth injury and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) that assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL), mental health, mother-infant bonding, confidence and success with breastfeeding, incontinence, and satisfaction with care and birth experience. To support analysis of these outcome measures, pertinent baseline characteristics and risk factor metrics were also defined. We propose a set of outcome measures for evaluating the care that women and infants receive during pregnancy and the postpartum period. While validation and refinement via pilot implementation projects are needed, we view this as an important initial step towards value-based improvements in care.

Background: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide invaluable information on patients’ health outcomes and can be used to improve patient-related outcomes at the individual, organizational and policy levels. This systematic review aimed to a) identify contemporary applications and synthesize all evidence on the use of PROMs in these contexts and b) to determine characteristics of interventions associated with increased effectiveness. Methods: Five databases were searched for studies providing quantitative evidence of the impact of PROM interventions. Any study design was permitted. An overall benefit (worsening) in outcome was defined as a statistically significant improvement (deterioration) in either a PROM, patient-reported experience measure or clinical outcome. Study quality was assessed using the Effective Public Healthcare Panacea Project’s Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. A narrative synthesis was conducted. Results: Seventy-six studies of the 11,121 articles identified met the inclusion criteria. At the individual level, 10 (43%) of 23 studies that fed back PROMs to the patient or healthcare provider showed an improvement in outcome. This percentage increased in studies which used PROMs to monitor disease symptoms and linked these to care-pathways: 17 (68%) of 25 studies using this mechanism showed an improvement. Ten (71%) of 14 studies using PROMs to screen for disease found a benefit. The monitoring and screening approach was most effective using PROMs covering cancer-related, depression and gastro-intestinal symptoms. Three studies found that the mere collection of PROMs resulted in improved outcomes. Another three studies used PROMs in decision aids and found improved decision quality. At the organizational/policy level, none of the 4 studies that used PROMs for benchmarking found a benefit. The three studies that used PROMs for in-depth performance analyses and 1 study in a plan-do-study-act (PDCA) cycle found an improvement in outcome. Studies employing disease-specific PROMs tended to observe improved outcomes more often. There are concerns regarding the validity of findings, as studies varied from weak to moderate quality. Conclusions: The use of PROMs at the individual level has matured considerably. Monitoring/screening applications seem promising particularly for diseases for which treatment algorithms rely on the experienced symptom burden by patients. Organizational/policy-level application is in its infancy, and performance evaluation via in-depth analyses and PDCA-cycles may be useful. The findings of this review may aid stakeholders in the development and implementation of PROM-interventions which truly impact patient outcomes.

Immigrant elderly are a rapidly growing group in Dutch society; little is known about their health care use. This study assesses whether ethnic disparities in health care use exist and how they can be explained. Applying an established health care access model as explanatory factors, we tested health and socio-economic status, and in view of our research population we added an acculturation variable, elaborated into several sub-domains.

Our study aimed to (1) assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and mental well-being of healthy and diseased persons in the general population during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic and (2) examine the relationship between HRQoL and mental well-being and individual characteristics and government response against COVID-19, as measured by the stringency index. A web-based survey was administered to a cohort of persons from the general population of eight countries: Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Russia, South Africa, Sweden, the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States of America (US) from April 22 to May 5 and May 26 to June 1, 2020. Country-level stringency indices were adopted from the COVID-19 Government Response Tracker. Primary outcomes were HRQoL, measured using the EQ-5D-5L, and mental well-being, measured using the World Health Organization-5 Well-Being (WHO-5). 21,354 respondents were included in the study. Diseased respondents had lower EQ-5D-5L and WHO-5 scores compared to healthy respondents. Younger respondents had lower WHO-5 scores than older respondents. The stringency index had a stronger association with the EQ-5D-5L and WHO-5 among diseased respondents compared to healthy respondents. Increasing stringency was associated with an increase in EQ-5D-5L scores but a decrease in the WHO-5 index. The stringency of government response is inversely related to HRQoL and mental well-being with a small positive relation with HRQoL and strong negative relation with mental well-being. The magnitude of effects differed for healthy and diseased persons and by age but was most favourable for diseased and older persons.

Promotion of healthy pregnancies has gained high priority in the Netherlands because of the relatively unfavourable perinatal health outcomes. In response a nationwide study Healthy Pregnancy 4 All was initiated. This study combines public health and epidemiologic research to evaluate the effectiveness of two obstetric interventions before and during pregnancy: (1) programmatic preconception care (PCC) and (2) systematic antenatal risk assessment (including both medical and non-medical risk factors) followed by patient-tailored multidisciplinary care pathways. In this paper we present an overview of the study setting and outlines. We describe the selection of geographical areas and introduce the design and outline of the preconception care and the antenatal risk assessment studies. A thorough analysis was performed to identify geographical areas in which adverse perinatal outcomes were high. These areas were regarded as eligible for either or both sub-studies as we hypothesised studies to have maximal effect there. This selection of municipalities was based on multiple criteria relevant to either the preconception care intervention or the antenatal risk assessment intervention, or to both. The preconception care intervention was designed as a prospective community-based cohort study. The antenatal risk assessment intervention was designed as a cluster randomised controlled trial – where municipalities are randomly allocated to intervention and control. Optimal linkage is sought between curative and preventive care, public health, government, and social welfare organisations. To our knowledge, this is the first study in which these elements are combined.