Building primary care in Japan: Literature review

Japan's health system is well known for achieving one of the world's highest life expectancy with universal health coverage. However, the country now faces challenges of a rapidly aging population and changes in patterns and burden of disease. Primary care is an important component of a well-functioning health system. In Japan, primary care services are provided in both the community and hospital settings. The distinction between primary and secondary care may not always be clear. This review is based on the framework from the 2015 WHO publication on primary care systems in Europe. Our aim is to describe the journey of primary care in Japan, with its past, present, and future as a valuable addition to the academic English literature. We also hope that this article would inspire readers outside of Japan who might face similar issues in their respective countries.

Using pathology-specific laboratory profiles in clinical pathology to reduce inappropriate test requesting: two completed audit cycles

Background

Systematic reviews have shown that, although well prepared, the Consensus Guidelines have failed to change clinical practice. In the healthcare district of Castelnovo né Monti (Reggio Emilia, Italy), it became necessary for the GPs and Clinical Pathologists to work together to jointly define laboratory profiles.

Methods

Observational study with two cycles of retrospective audit on test request forms, in a primary care setting. Objectives of the study were to develop pathology-specific laboratory profiles and to increase the number of provisional diagnoses on laboratory test request forms. A Multiprofessional Multidisciplinary Inter-hospital Work Team developed pathology-specific laboratory profiles for more effective test requesting. After 8 training sessions that used a combined strategy with multifaceted interventions, the 23 General Practitioners (GPs) in the trial district (Castelnovo nè Monti) tested the profiles; the 21 GPs in the Puianello district were the control group; all GPs in both districts participated in the trial. All laboratory tests for both healthcare districts are performed at the Laboratory located in the trial district. A baseline and a 1-year audit were performed in both districts on the GPs’ request forms.

Results

Seven pathology-specific laboratory profiles for outpatients were developed. In the year after the first audit cycle: 1) the number of tests requested in the trial district was distinctly lower than that in the previous year, with a decrease of about 5% (p < 0.001); 2) the provisional diagnosis on the request forms was 52.8% in the trial district and 42% in the control district (P < 0.001); 3) the decrease of the number of tests on each request form was much more marked in the trial district (8.73 vs. 10.77; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

The first audit cycle showed a significant decrease in the number of tests ordered only in the trial district. The combined strategy used in this study improved the prescriptive compliance of most of the GPs involved. The presence of the clinical pathologist is seen as an added value.

[Proposal of laboratory test panel based on patients' chief complaints in emergency department]

BACKGROUND

A test panel is a group of tests that are simultaneously performed for diagnosis and follow-up of patients. Organ-specific or disease-specific test panels are currently available. Since the patient's chief complaint plays a key role in obtaining the personal and medical history and performing physical examinations, we proposed a test panel based on the chief complaints of the patients.

METHODS

We collected data from 3,127 adults with apparent symptoms who visited the emergency department from April 2009 to May 2009. Subsequently, we classified the patients' chief complaints, ordered the laboratory tests on the basis of these complaints, considered the patients' disease entities, and reviewed the relevant literature.

RESULTS

The patients were categorized into 14 groups on the basis of the most common chief complaints presented in the emergency department. We first selected the basic test panels and then organized the test panel for each chief complaint to enable differential diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

We proposed test panels based on the chief complaints of the patients; these test panels could allow rapid diagnosis and be more useful than the organ-specific or disease-specific tests in critical pathway development. The next step will be evaluating the efficiency and cost effectiveness of the test panel that we suggested.

Cost-effectiveness analysis in diagnosis of coronary artery disease: Choice of laboratory markers

OBJECTIVES

The aim of our study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of coronary artery disease (CAD) diagnostic parameters in a clinical laboratory setting.

DESIGN AND METHODS

The effectiveness of apolipoproteins, lipoproteins and high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) supplementary to Framingham scoring data within a CAD risk assessment procedure was established in 221 CAD patients and 289 controls. The total costs of diagnostic procedures were calculated and incremental cost-effectiveness analysis was applied.

RESULTS

A diagnostic strategy employing Framingham calculation followed by apolipoprotein A-I (apoA-I) had the lowest cost per additional successfully diagnosed patient than the same strategy followed by hs-CRP in the low (2.63 vs. 24.47 euros) and intermediate-risk groups (2.96 vs. 122.85 euros). In the high-risk group the diagnostic strategy employing apoA-I saved 9.14 euros in comparison to the strategy employing hs-CRP.

CONCLUSION

Cost-effectiveness analysis of different diagnostic markers results in improved identification of at-risk patients at a lower health cost for society.

A cost-effectiveness evaluation of reticulocyte measurement in new outpatients with or without hematologic disorders

BACKGROUND

Although reticulocyte counts provide very useful information, few studies have analyzed the cost-effectiveness of this testing.

METHODS

The yield and cost of reticulocyte count testing were analyzed in 719 new outpatients who visited the comprehensive medicine clinics and received both reticulocyte and complete blood count (CBC) testing. A "useful result" (UR) of the testing was defined as a finding that contributed to a change in a physician's diagnosis or decision-making between the pre- and post-test diagnosis. Patients' medical records were thoroughly reviewed for the assignment of URs. A simulation study was performed, blinding the reticulocyte data to the examiners, for the determination of URs generated by CBC alone.

RESULTS

CBC and reticulocyte testing generated a total of 838 URs in 719 patients, while the simulation study demonstrated 612 URs with CBC testing alone. When patients were grouped into 11 major disease categories according to a pre-test diagnosis, clinical effectiveness (UR/patient) varied from 1.69 (hematologic) to 0.13 (metabolic/endocrine patients), with a cost disparity from 206yen to 2784yen/UR. The cost-effectiveness (Deltacost/DeltaUR) of reticulocyte addition against CBC alone was 515yen per additional UR as a whole. Reticulocyte testing showed favorable cost-effectiveness in gastrointestinal ( 234yen) and hematologic patients ( 338yen/additional UR), while the test added few URs in metabolic/endocrine and neurologic patients, resulting in possibly unacceptable cost-effectiveness ( 3240yen and 2916yen/additional UR, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Wide disparity in its cost-effectiveness among patients apparently indicated that reticulocyte count testing should be performed for selected patient groups on the basis of its cost-effectiveness.

Economic consequence of immediate testing for C-reactive protein and leukocyte count in new outpatients with acute infection

BACKGROUND

There have been few well-designed studies that assess the cost-effectiveness of near-patient immediate testing.

METHODS

We analyzed the economic outcome of immediate testing for C-reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell count (WBC) in 305 new outpatients with acute infections. Patients were randomized into two groups: 147 patients were tested immediately for CRP and WBC before the physician's initial consultation (advance testing), and 154 patients were not subjected to advance testing. The subsequent prescribing decision and the drug/testing/personnel costs were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

In the advance-testing group, the initial consultation was followed by a total of 84 prescriptions of oral antibiotics, against 158 in the other group. Comparing the total costs of oral and parenteral antibiotics between the two groups, a 30% reduction was achieved with advance testing ( yen105,830 vs. yen151,102). However, the savings were largely offset by frequent prescription of newer, expensive influenza neuraminidase inhibitors. Advance testing also significantly reduced additional laboratory use. More frequent urgent testing increased personnel costs in the non-advance-testing group. Overall, total cost was somewhat higher in the advance-testing group ( yen1,028,827 vs. yen984,105).

CONCLUSIONS

The cost per antibiotic prescription reduced with advance testing was yen604 (approximately 5.8 US dollars) in our clinical setting. Judicious use of antivirals and introduction of a simple CRP test kit would improve cost-effectiveness.

Utilization of common inflammatory markers in new, symptomatic, primary care outpatients based on their cost-effectiveness

Few studies have demonstrated the optimal usage of common inflammatory markers, alone or in combination, based on the cost-effectiveness. We analyzed the yield and cost of C-reactive protein (CRP), white blood cell count (WBC), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), sialic acid, and protein fractionation in 177 new primary care outpatients with inflammation-related symptoms. A useful result (UR) was assigned if tests contributed to a change in physician's diagnosis or decision-making. Costs of testing were calculated based on either single or simultaneous measurement. Five inflammatory markers generated 147 URs in 123 patients. CRP showed the best contribution to generation of UR, followed by sialic acid, protein fractionation, WBC, and ESR. CRP demonstrated poor correlation with WBC (r = 0.458), while sialic acid strongly correlated with total absolute amount of alpha1 and alpha2 fractions in protein fractionation (r = 0.855) and moderately with ESR (r = 0.651). The combination of CRP and WBC produced the best cost-effectiveness at a cost of Yen 1169 (US dollars 9.6 or Euro 9.7)/additional UR against CRP testing alone. Sialic acid, an automated multichannel analyzer-based test, demonstrated the favorable cost-effectiveness over ESR or protein fractionation when combined with CRP (and WBC). Our results indicate that the optimal usage of these inflammatory markers should involve careful cost-effectiveness considerations.