The Public Health Status and Foresight report 2014: Four normative perspectives on a healthier Netherlands in 2040

Current practices, needs, and expectations of discussing work with a medical specialist from a patient's perspective: a qualitative study

PURPOSE

Attention to paid work in clinical health care-clinical work-integrating care (CWIC)-might be beneficial for patients of working age. However, the perceptions and expectations of patients about CWIC are unknown. The aim of this study was to develop an understanding of current practices, needs, and expectations among patients for discussing work with a medical specialist.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A qualitative study was undertaken involving patients with diverse medical conditions (n = 33). Eight online synchronous focus groups were held. A thematic analysis was then performed.

RESULTS

Three themes emerged from the data: (1) the process of becoming a patient while wanting to work again, (2) different needs for different patients, (3) patients' expectations of CWIC. We identified three different overarching categories of work-concerns: (a) the impact of work on disease, (b) the impact of disease or treatment on work ability, and (c) concerns when work ability remained decreased. For each category of concerns, patients expected medical specialists to perform differing roles.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients indicated that they need support for work-related concerns from their medical specialists and/or other professionals. Currently, not all work concerns received the requested attention, leaving a portion of the patients with unmet needs regarding CWIC.

Clinical Work-Integrating Care in Current Practice: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE

Clinical work-integrating care (CWIC) refers to paying attention to work participation in a clinical setting. Working patients may benefit from CWIC. The purpose of this study is to explore the extent and nature to which medical specialists provide CWIC and what policies and guidelines oblige or recommend specialists to do.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted. The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, Psychinfo, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched for studies on the extent and nature of CWIC and supplemented by gray literature on policies and guidelines. Six main categories were defined a priori. Applying a meta-aggregative approach, subcategories were subsequently defined using qualitative data. Next, quantitative findings were integrated into these subcategories. A separate narrative of policies and guidelines using the same main categories was constructed.

RESULTS

In total, 70 studies and 55 gray literature documents were included. The main findings per category were as follows: (1) collecting data on the occupation of patients varied widely; (2) most specialists did not routinely discuss work, but recent studies showed an increasing tendency to do so, which corresponds to recent policies and guidelines; (3) work-related advice ranged from general advice to patient-physician collaboration about work-related decisions; (4) CWIC was driven by legislation in many countries; (5) specialists sometimes collaborated in multidisciplinary teams to provide CWIC; and (6) medical guidelines regarding CWIC were generally not available.

CONCLUSION

Medical specialists provide a wide variety of CWIC ranging from assessing a patient's occupation to extensive collaboration with patients and other professionals to support work participation. Lack of medical guidelines could explain the variety of these practices.

Knowledge management tools and mechanisms for evidence-informed decision-making in the WHO European Region: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Knowledge management (KM) emerged as a strategy to promote evidence-informed decision-making. This scoping review aims to map existing KM tools and mechanisms used to promote evidence-informed health decision-making in the WHO European Region and identify knowledge gaps.

METHODS

Following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidance for conducting scoping reviews, we searched Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, and Open Grey. We conducted a descriptive analysis of the general characteristics of the included papers and conducted narrative analysis of the included studies and categorized studies according to KM type and phase.

RESULTS

Out of 9541 citations identified, we included 141 studies. The KM tools mostly assessed are evidence networks, surveillance tools, observatories, data platforms and registries, with most examining KM tools in high-income countries of the WHO European region. Findings suggest that KM tools can identify health problems, inform health planning and resource allocation, increase the use of evidence by policymakers and stimulate policy discussion.

CONCLUSION

Policymakers and funding agencies are called to support capacity-building activities, and future studies to strengthen KM in the WHO European region particularly in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. An updated over-arching strategy to coordinate KM activities in the WHO European region will be useful in these efforts.

The effect of the Progressive Goal Attainment Program on cognitions, perceptions, and work participation of workers with chronic health problems: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Cognitions and perceptions of workers with chronic health problems, such as catastrophizing thoughts and fear-avoidance beliefs, can negatively influence work participation. The Progressive Goal Attainment Program (PGAP) is an intervention developed in Canada with the aim of decreasing limiting cognitions and perceptions and increasing work participation. The objective of this protocol article is to describe the design of a randomized controlled superiority trial to study whether PGAP is effective in decreasing limiting cognitions and perceptions and increasing workability and work participation of workers with chronic health problems in the Netherlands.

Methods

This study is a randomized controlled superiority trial with two (parallel) groups, in which workers on sick leave are randomly assigned to an intervention group (PGAP intervention) or to a waiting-list control group (care as usual). The PGAP intervention consists of a maximum of 10 weekly individual sessions provided by a trained PGAP professional in which the worker learns about staying active, planning activities, and setting goals. Participants in this risk-targeted behavioral activation intervention also learn to be more aware of their cognitions and perceptions and learn about solution-focused problem-solving skills in challenging situations. The primary outcome is the degree of catastrophizing. Secondary outcomes are other personal cognitions and perceptions (e.g., expectations regarding return to work, self-efficacy), health symptoms (e.g., fatigue, depression), work participation (e.g., sick leave status, work hours), and other work-related outcomes (e.g., workability, quality of working life).

Discussion

Although PGAP shows positive effects in Canada, we do not know whether this intervention is effective in the Netherlands. This study is the first randomized controlled trial to test the effect of PGAP on limiting cognitions and perceptions and on work participation of workers with chronic health problems in the Netherlands. If PGAP is effective it could be implemented in the Netherlands in order to stimulate workability and work participation of workers.

Trial registration

The protocol of this study is registered in the Netherlands Trial Register (NL9832) in October 2021.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06698-8.

Public and patient involvement in health data governance (DATAGov): protocol of a people-centred, mixed-methods study on data use and sharing for rare diseases care and research

INTRODUCTION

International policy imperatives for the public and patient involvement in the governance of health data coexist with conflicting cross-border policies on data sharing. This can challenge the planning and implementation of participatory data governance in healthcare services locally. Engaging with local stakeholders and understanding how their needs, values and preferences for governing health data can be articulated with policies made at the supranational level is crucial. This paper describes a protocol for a project that aims to coproduce a people-centred model for involving patients and the public in decision-making processes about the use and sharing of health data for rare diseases care and research.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This multidisciplinary project draws on an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study. A hospital-based survey with patients, informal carers, health professionals and technical staff recruited at two reference centres for rare diseases in Portugal will be conducted first. The qualitative study will follow consisting of semi-structured interviews and scenario-based workshops with a subsample of the participant groups recruited at baseline. Quantitative data will be analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Inductive and deductive approaches will be combined to analyse the qualitative interviews. Data from scenario-based workshops will be iteratively compared using the constant comparison method to identify cross-cutting themes and categories.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Ethics Committee for Health from the University Hospital Centre São João/Faculty of Medicine of University of Porto approved the study protocol (Ref. 99/19). Research findings will be disseminated at academic conferences and science promotion events, and through public meetings involving patient representatives, practitioners, policy-makers and students, a project website and peer-reviewed journal publications.

Systems medicine 2030: A Delphi study on implementation in the German healthcare system

INTRODUCTION

Systems medicine is based on approaches taken from systems biology, omics research, bio-informatics and network theory. It promises to facilitate a better understanding of the causes of diseases, detection at an earlier stage, and the use of tailor-made approaches to prevention and therapy. This study provides information on how systems medicine could be incorporated into the German healthcare system.

METHODS

In a Policy Delphi, consensus and divergence was elicited on whether experts believed systems medicine could be incorporated into the German healthcare system by 2030. Additionally, factors that could influence the implementation process were analysed. 11 theses on potential systems medicine developments and 193 arguments on influencing factors were evaluated. Experts from health and health-related fields were selected using "purposive sampling".

RESULTS

The experts interviewed expressed their trust in the provision of a legal-political framework, though they remained uncertain as to whether the necessary social discourse on the ethical and cultural questions surrounding systems medicine would occur. They do not (currently) expect systems medicine to be implemented by 2030.

CONCLUSION

Systems medicine is currently regarded as a visionary concept. As such, it would be premature to attempt to judge the success of the translation process at this stage. The results can help with the identification of the challenges involved in implementation, and the action required to achieve this aim.

Four normative perspectives on public health policy-making and their preferences for bodies of evidence

Calls for evidence-informed public health policy-making often ignore that there are multiple, and often competing, bodies of potentially relevant evidence to which policy-makers have recourse in identifying policy priorities and taking decisions. In this paper, we illustrate how policy frames may favour the use of specific bodies of evidence. For the sixth Dutch Public Health Status and Foresight report (2014), possible future trends in population health and healthcare expenditure were used as a starting point for a deliberative dialogue with stakeholders to identify and formulate the most important societal challenges for the Dutch health system. Working with these stakeholders, we expanded these societal challenges into four normative perspectives on public health. These perspectives can be regarded as policy frames. In each of the perspectives, a specific body of evidence is favoured and other types of evidence are neglected. Crucial outcomes in one body may be regarded as irrelevant from other perspectives. Consequently, the results of research from a single body of evidence may not be helpful in the policy-making processes because policy-makers need to account for trade-offs between all competing interests and values. To support these policy processes, researchers need to combine qualitative and quantitative methodologies to address different outcomes from the start of their studies. We feel it is time for the research community to re-politicise the idea of evidence use and for policy-makers to demand research that helps them to account for all health-related policy goals. This is a prerequisite for real evidence-informed policy-making.

The Dutch Public Health Foresight Study 2018: an example of a comprehensive foresight exercise

Background

The use of foresight studies is common in some policy fields, but not in public health. Interest in such studies is growing. This paper gives a general overview of the Dutch Public Health Foresight Study (PHFS) 2018, providing insight into what performing a broad scenario exercise in the field of public health entails and its societal impacts.

Methods

The aim of the PHFS-2018 was: (a) to show how public health and healthcare in the Netherlands will develop over the next 25 years if we pursue our current course and detect ‘new’ developments; (b) to give options for dealing with the major future societal challenges. Part a was addressed by means of a quantitative business-as-usual scenario exercise complemented with qualitative thematic studies, and part b by elaborating courses of action for three key challenges, based on stakeholder consultation. Typical aspects of the PHFS methods are a multidisciplinary, participatory and conceptual approach and using a broad definition of health.

Results

The PHFS-2018 is the basis for the upcoming National Health Policy Memorandum and the Trend Scenario is the baseline for the National Prevention Agreement. Unexpectedly, the findings about increasing mental pressure in young people received most attention. There still is room for expanding use of the study to its full potential.

Conclusions

Long-term thinking could be stimulated by using back casting techniques and stronger involvement of policy-makers in the elaboration of options for action. Lessons learned from developing intersectoral policy at the local level could be applied at the national level.