Reducing low-value care is a core component of healthcare reforms in many Western countries. A comprehensive and sound set of low-value care measures is needed in order to monitor low-value care use in general and in provider-payer contracts. Our objective was to review the scientific literature on low-value care measurement, aiming to assess the scope and quality of current measures. A systematic review was performed for the period 2010–2015. We assessed the scope of low-value care recommendations and measures by categorizing them according to the Classification of Health Care Functions. Additionally, we assessed the quality of the measures by 1) analysing their development process and the level of evidence underlying the measures, and 2) analysing the evidence regarding the validity of a selected subset of the measures. Our search yielded 292 potentially relevant articles. After screening, we selected 23 articles eligible for review. We obtained 115 low-value care measures, of which 87 were concentrated in the cure sector, 25 in prevention and 3 in long-term care. No measures were found in rehabilitative care and health promotion. We found 62 measures from articles that translated low-value care recommendations into measures, while 53 measures were previously developed by institutions as the National Quality Forum. Three measures were assigned the highest level of evidence, as they were underpinned by both guidelines and literature evidence. Our search yielded no information on coding/criterion validity and construct validity for the included measures. Despite this, most measures were already used in practice. This systematic review provides insight into the current state of low-value care measures. It shows that more attention is needed for the evidential underpinning and quality of these measures. Clear information about the level of evidence and validity helps to identify measures that truly represent low-value care and are sufficiently qualified to fulfil their aims through quality monitoring and in innovative payer-provider contracts. This will contribute to creating and maintaining the support of providers, payers, policy makers and citizens, who are all aiming to improve value in health care.

Background: Healthcare costs related to ESRD are well-described, but broader societal costs of ESRD are less known. This study aimed to estimate patient and family costs, including informal care costs and out-of-pocket costs, and costs due to productivity loss related to ESRD, for patients receiving dialysis and living with a kidney transplant, using a bottom-up approach. Methods: A total of 655 patients were asked to complete a digital questionnaire consisting of two standardised instruments (iMCQ and iPCQ) from November 2016 through January 2017. We applied a retrospective bottom-up cost estimation by combining data from the questionnaire with unit prices from the Dutch costing manual. Results: Our study sample consisted of 230 patients, of which 165 were kidney transplant recipients and 65 received dialysis. The total annual non-healthcare related costs were estimated at €8284 (SD: €14,266) for transplant recipients and €23,488 (SD: €39,434) for dialysis patients. Costs due to productivity loss contributed most to the total non-healthcare costs (66% for transplant recipients and 65% for dialysis patients), followed by informal care costs (26% resp. 29%) and out-of-pocket costs, such as medication and travel expenses (8% resp. 6%). Conclusion: By exposing patient, family and productivity costs, our study revealed that dialysis and transplantation are not only costly within the healthcare system, but also incur high non-healthcare costs (18–23% resp. 35% of the total societal costs). It is important to reveal these types of non-healthcare costs in order to understand the full burden of ESRD for society and the potential impact of new therapies.

Early detection of vulnerability during or before pregnancy can contribute to optimizing the first 1000 days, a crucial period for children’s development and health. We aimed to identify classes of vulnerability among pregnant women in the Netherlands using pre-pregnancy data on a wide range of social risk and protective factors, and validate these classes against the risk of adverse outcomes. We conducted a latent class analysis based on 42 variables derived from nationwide observational data sources and self-reported data. Variables included individual, socioeconomic, lifestyle, psychosocial and household characteristics, self-reported health, healthcare utilization, life-events and living conditions. We compared classes in relation to adverse outcomes using logistic regression analyses. In the study population of 4172 women, we identified five latent classes. The largest ‘healthy and socioeconomically stable’-class [n = 2040 (48.9%)] mostly shared protective factors, such as paid work and positively perceived health. The classes ‘high care utilization’ [n = 485 (11.6%)], ‘socioeconomic vulnerability’ [n = 395 (9.5%)] and ‘psychosocial vulnerability’ [n = 1005 (24.0%)] were characterized by risk factors limited to one specific domain and protective factors in others. Women classified into the ‘multidimensional vulnerability’-class [n = 250 (6.0%)] shared multiple risk factors in different domains (psychosocial, medical and socioeconomic risk factors). Multidimensional vulnerability was associated with adverse outcomes, such as premature birth and caesarean section. Co-existence of multiple risk factors in various domains is associated with adverse outcomes for mother and child. Early detection of vulnerability and strategies to improve parental health and well-being might benefit from focussing on different domains and combining medical and social care and support.

Although effects of alternative payment models on health outcomes and health spending are unclear, they are increasingly implemented in maternity care. We aimed to provide an overview of alternative payment models implemented in maternity care, describing their key design elements among which the type of APM, the care providers that participate in the model, populations and care services that are included and the applied risk mitigation strategies. Next to that, we made an inventory of the empirical evidence on the effects of APMs on maternal and neonatal health outcomes and spending on maternity care. We searched PubMed, Embase and Scopus databases for articles published from January 2007 through October 2020. Search key words included ‘alternative payment model’, ‘value based payment model’, ‘obstetric’, ‘maternity’. English or Dutch language articles were included if they described or empirically evaluated initiatives implementing alternative payment models in maternity care in high-income countries. Additional relevant documents were identified through reference tracking. We systematically analyzed the initiatives found and examined the evidence regarding health outcomes and health spending. The process was guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) to ensure validity and reliability. We identified 17 initiatives that implemented alternative payment models in maternity care. Thirteen in the United States, two in the United Kingdom, one in New Zealand and one in the Netherlands. Within these initiatives three types of alternative payment models were implemented; pay-for-performance (n = 2), shared savings models (n = 7) and bundled payment models (n = 8). Alternative payment models that shifted more financial accountability towards providers seemed to include more strategies that mitigated those risks. Risk mitigation strategies were applied to the included population, included services or at the level of total expenditures. Of these seventeen initiatives, we found four empirical effect studies published in peer-reviewed journals. Three of them were of moderate quality and one weak. Two studies described an association of the alternative payment model with an improvement of specific health outcomes and two studies described a reduction in medical spending. This study shows that key design elements of alternative payment models including risk mitigation strategies vary highly. Risk mitigation strategies seem to be relevant tools to increase APM uptake and protect providers from (initially) bearing too much (perceived) financial risk. Empirical evidence on the effects of APMs on health outcomes and spending is still limited. A clear definition of key design elements and a further, in-depth, understanding of key design elements and how they operate into different health settings is required to shape payment reform that aligns with its goals.

Background: As the incidence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is on the rise, new therapies are being developed for delaying ESRD. This study is aimed at constructing a generic model for estimating the cost-effectiveness of delaying ESRD in 7 European countries: the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Spain, Finland and Hungary. The use of this model is illustrated by assessing 2 fictitious, but realistic therapy options. Methods: Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and societal costs were estimated using a state-transition model. Age-dependent survival after renal replacement therapy was estimated using data from the Dutch Renal Registry. Healthcare costs and utilities were obtained from published reports. Country-specific differences regarding access to transplantation and value of productivity were factored. Results: A 1-year delay of ESRD rendered an estimated gain of 0.6 QALYs and 0.3 years in productivity. Access to transplantation had a minimal impact, whereas savings on productivity had a significant impact. For a 1-year delay free of charge, societal savings would range from €8,000 in the United Kingdom to €17,000 in Germany. Applying thresholds of €20,000-€40,000 per QALY gained, one-time cell-based therapy would be economically acceptable if it delayed ESRD by 0.2-0.5 years. It would be cost saving for a delay in excess of 0.5 years. Continuous use of medication is unlikely to be cost-effective for prices higher than €30,000 per year. Conclusion: This study provides evidence for the economic potential of new therapies delaying ESRD. The constructed model provides users with information about the market success rates of treatment options at an early stage.