Limitations of epidemiologically based needs assessment. The case of prostatectomy

The methodology to estimate the demand and supply of national psychiatric services in Taiwan from 2005 to 2030

BACKGROUND

The transformation from institutionalization to community-based mental healthcare may increase the difficulty of psychiatric workforce estimation and change the role of psychiatrists in hospitals and private clinics.

METHODS

This study aimed to estimate the growth and forecast psychiatric services in hospitals and private clinics in Taiwan from 2005 to 2030. We first examined the correlation between the number of psychiatrists and several indicators of psychiatric services. The forecast of the national demand for psychiatrists was based on projected outpatient psychiatrist visits from historical data. We also estimated the supply of psychiatrists by the number of psychiatrists practicing in hospitals or private clinics from Taiwan's Medical Affairs System and examined the supply and demand of the psychiatrist workforce through 2030.

RESULTS

Outpatient visit was the most relevant indicator of psychiatric services to psychiatrist workforce. Growth rates in private clinics were higher than the hospital counterparts within the following decade (172.3 % vs. 37.7 %) and in the following decade (42.3 % vs. 13.3 %). The hospital-clinic disparity in the growth of psychiatric services also reflects the shortage of psychiatrists in private clinics but not in hospitals through 2030. The supply of 1158 psychiatrists in hospitals would nearly equal the clinical-based demand of 1156 psychiatrists in 2030. By contrast, the supply of 514 psychiatrists in private clinics would be lower than the clinical-based demand of 636 psychiatrists in 2030.

CONCLUSION

The hospital-clinic disparity in the growth of psychiatric services reflects the transformation from hospital-based to community-based mental healthcare in Taiwan.

Defining the Need for Breast Cancer Radiotherapy in the General Population: a Criterion-based Benchmarking Approach

AIMS

Determining the appropriate rate of radiotherapy is important for ensuring optimal radiotherapy utilisation and accessibility. A criterion-based benchmark (CBB) was developed for estimating the need for radiotherapy in incident breast cancer cases. Our primary objective was to compare an evidence-based estimate (Ebest) of need against the CBB. These estimates were then compared with radiotherapy rates in Ontario, Canada and the USA. Surgical rates were also examined.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Benchmarks were defined in Ontario as communities in proximity to cancer centres and without long waiting lists. Patient data from 1997 to 2001 were prospectively collected from radiotherapy cancer centres. Surgical data were obtained from the Canadian Institute for Health Information database. The public use file of Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) described treatment in the USA.

RESULTS

In total, 4241 cases of breast cancer were diagnosed in benchmark communities. The overall radiotherapy rate by Ebest was 64.0% (95% confidence interval: 58.1-69.8%) compared with the CBB of 60.7% (59.3-62.1%). In comparison, Ontario's overall radiotherapy rate was 55.6% (55.0-56.1%) and in SEER it was 49.3% (48.9-49.6%). Adjuvant radiotherapy rates after lumpectomy were 100% in Ebest and 83.6% (82.0-85.1%) by the CBB. The Ebest and CBB post-mastectomy rates were 21.9% (20.6-23.3%) and 34.6% (32.5-36.7%), respectively. Observed post-lumpectomy radiotherapy rates were 75.1% in Ontario and 65.3% in SEER. Post-mastectomy radiotherapy rates were 29.5% in Ontario and 17.0% in SEER.

CONCLUSIONS

CBB provides a reasonable estimate of the overall need for radiotherapy in breast cancer. Observed radiotherapy rates in Ontario and the USA suggest an age-related decrease in the use of radiotherapy. The benchmark estimate suggests a shortfall of adjuvant breast radiotherapy utilisation in Ontario.

An evidence-based estimate of the appropriate rate of utilization of radiotherapy for cancer of the cervix

PURPOSE

Current estimates of the proportion of cancer patients who will require radiotherapy (RT) are based almost entirely on expert opinion. The objective of this study was to calculate the proportion of incident cases of cervical cancer that should receive RT by application of an evidence-based approach.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A systematic review of the literature was done to identify indications for RT for cervical cancer and to ascertain the level of evidence that supported each indication. A survey of Canadian gynecologic oncologists and radiation oncologists who treat cervical cancer was done to determine the level of acceptance of each indication among doctors who practice in the field. An epidemiologic approach was then used to estimate the incidence of each indication for RT in a typical North American population of patients with cervical cancer.

RESULTS

The systematic review of the literature identified 29 different indications for RT for cervical cancer. The majority of the 75 experts who responded to the mail survey stated that they "usually" or "always" recommended RT in all but one of the clinical situations that were identified as indications for RT on the basis of the systematic review. The analysis of epidemiologic data revealed that, in a typical North American population, 65.4% +/- 2.5% of cervical cancer cases will develop one or more indications for RT at some point in the course of the illness, 63.4% +/- 2.3% will develop indications for RT as part of their initial management, and 2.0% +/- 0.9% will develop indications for RT for progressive or recurrent disease. The effects of variations in case mix on the need for RT was examined by sensitivity analysis, which suggested that the maximum plausible range for the appropriate rate of utilization of RT was 54.3% to 67.9%. The proportion of cases that required RT was stage dependent: 10.6% +/- 1.2% in Stage IA, 74.9% +/- 1.3% in Stage IB, 100% in Stages II and III, and 97.2% +/- 1.1% in Stage IV.

CONCLUSIONS

This evidence-based estimate of the appropriate rate of use of RT for cervical cancer adds to the growing pool of knowledge about the need for RT that will ultimately provide a rational basis for long-term planning for RT programs and for auditing access to RT in the general population.

The geographical distribution of specialists in public health in the United Kingdom: is capacity related to need?

OBJECTIVES

Recent organizational changes reflect the need to be more responsive to local populations and have included fostering a closer structural relationship between primary care and public health. In light of this, we explore the distribution of the specialist public health workforce and the relationship with population deprivation and need.

STUDY DESIGN

Questionnaire survey to all directors of public health working in primary care trusts (PCTs) and strategic health authorities (SHAs) in England to determine the number of specialists in public health working in either PCTs or SHAs. All identified specialists were given the opportunity to self-define in a further questionnaire survey. Whole-time-equivalent staffing, per head of population, was analysed against socio-economic deprivation, measured by the DETR 2000 Index of Multiple Deprivation. The analysis was conducted at the SHA level.

RESULTS

The survey was undertaken whilst public health in the UK was undergoing immense change. This presented specific challenges in identifying specialists in public health working within PCTs and SHAs. Seven hundred and eighty-three specialists working in PCTs and SHAs were identified. On average, in England, there are 1.69 specialists in public health per 100,000 population, with some variability at SHA level (range = 0.8-2.89). Findings indicate an overall positive association between capacity at SHA level and socio-economic need, although some discrepancies between need and provision are apparent.

CONCLUSIONS

The general positive association between capacity and deprivation should offer some reassurance to policy makers, researchers and patients alike. However, further efforts are needed to redistribute specialists in some areas to address organizational capacity and equity issues.

Improving care of the critically ill: institutional and health-care system approaches

Institutional and health-care system approaches complement bedside strategies to improve care of the critically ill. Focusing on the USA and the UK, we discuss seven approaches: education (especially of non-clinical managers, policy-makers, and the public), organisational guidelines, performance reporting, financial and sociobehavioural incentives to health-care professionals and institutions, regulation, legal requirements, and health-care system reorganisation. No single action is likely to have sustained effect and we recommend a combination of approaches. Several recent initiatives that hold promise tie performance reporting to financial incentives. Though performance reporting has been hampered by concerns over cost and accuracy, it remains an essential component and we recommend continued effort in this area. We also recommend more public education and use of organisational guidelines, such as admission criteria and staffing levels in intensive care units. Even if these endeavours are successful, with rising demand for services and continuing pressure to control costs, optimum care of the critically ill will not be realised without a fundamental reorganisation of services. In both the USA and UK, we recommend exploration of regionalised care, akin to US state trauma systems, and greater use of physician-extenders, such as nurse practitioners, to provide enhanced access to specialist care for critical illness.

Defining the need for radiotherapy for lung cancer in the general population: a criterion-based, benchmarking approach

BACKGROUND

We have previously used an evidence-based, epidemiologic approach to estimate the proportion of incident cases that should be treated with radiotherapy (RT) for lung cancer. The first objective of the present study was to compare this evidence-based estimate of the appropriate rate of use of RT with the rates observed in selected "benchmark" communities where there are no barriers to the appropriate use of RT and no incentives to the unnecessary use of RT. The second objective of the study was to compare the rates of use of RT in the general populations in the United States and Canada with the estimated appropriate rate.

METHODS

We established benchmark rates for the use of RT for lung cancer in Ontario, Canada, where: 1) residents make no direct payments for RT; 2) all RT is provided by site-specialized radiation oncologists in multidisciplinary cancer centers, and 3) radiation oncologists receive a salary in lieu of technical fees. Communities located close to cancer centers without long waiting lists for RT were selected to serve as benchmarks. Prospectively gathered electronic treatment records from all RT cancer centers were linked to the provincial cancer registry to describe the rate of use of RT in Ontario. The public use file of Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Registries (SEER) was used to describe the use of RT in the United States.

RESULTS

Overall, 41.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 39.9%, 42.7%) of incident cases of lung cancer received RT as part of their initial management in the benchmark communities compared with the evidence-based estimate of 41.6% (95% CI, 39.2%, 44.1%). The rate of use of RT in the initial management of nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the benchmark communities was 49.3% (95% CI, 47.5%, 51.1%) compared with the evidence-based estimate of 45.9% (95% CI, 41.6%, 50.2%). The use of RT in the initial management of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) in the benchmark communities was 47.0% (95% CI, 43.3%, 50.7%) compared with the evidence-based estimate of 45.4% (95% CI, 42.4%, 48.4%). In many counties of Ontario, the observed rates of RT use in the initial management of lung cancer were significantly lower than either the benchmark rate or the evidence-based estimate of the appropriate rate. In contrast, rates of use of RT in most counties in the SEER regions of the United States were close to, or higher than, the estimated appropriate rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The observed benchmark rate converged on the evidence-based estimate of the appropriate rate of use of RT for lung cancer, suggesting that either measure might reasonably be used as a "standard" against which to compare rates observed in similar populations elsewhere.

An evidence-based estimate of the appropriate radiotherapy utilization rate for colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

Current estimates of the proportion of cancer patients who will require RT are based almost entirely on expert opinion. The objective of this study was to estimate the proportion of incident cases of colorectal cancer that should receive RT using an evidence-based approach.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to identify indications for RT for colorectal cancer, and to ascertain the level of evidence that supported each indication. An epidemiologic approach was then used to estimate the incidence of each indication for RT in a typical North American population of colorectal cancer patients. The effect of sampling error on the estimated appropriate rate of RT was calculated mathematically, and the effect of systematic error was estimated by sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

It was estimated that 23.7% +/- 1.0% of colorectal cancer cases develop one or more indications for RT at some point in the course of the illness: 20.9% +/- 1.1% as part of their initial treatment, and 2.8% +/- 0.5% later for recurrence or progression. We estimated that 7.1% +/- 0.8% of colon carcinoma patients will require RT at some point in the course of the illness: 4.0% +/- 0.7% as part of their initial treatment, and 3.1% +/- 0.4% later for recurrence or progression. We estimated that 72.3% +/- 1.0% of rectal carcinoma patients will require RT at some point in the course of the illness: 69.6% +/- 0.9% as part of their initial treatment and 2.7% +/- 0.2% later for recurrence or progression.

CONCLUSIONS

This method provides a rational starting point for the long-term planning of radiation services, and for the audit of access to RT at the population level. By completing such evaluations in the major cancer sites, it will be possible to estimate the appropriate RT treatment rate for the cancer population as a whole.

The appropriate rate of breast conserving surgery: an evidence-based estimate

PURPOSE

The objective of the present study was to estimate the proportion of incident cases of breast cancer that should receive breast conserving surgery (BCS), using an evidence-based approach.

METHODS

An extensive search of the literature was undertaken to identify eligibility criteria for BCS. The eligibility criteria for BCS were combined with the information about case mix and patient preference to estimate the need for BCS. An epidemiological approach was then used to estimate the incidence of each eligibility criterion for BCS in a typical North American population of breast cancer patients. The effect of sampling error on the estimated appropriate rate of BCS was calculated, and the effect of systematic error using alternative sources of information, was estimated by sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

The analysis showed that 69.6% of breast cancer cases are eligible for BCS, and that 48.0 +/- 6.0% of breast cancer patients are both eligible for BCS and prefer it to mastectomy. Based on sensitivity analysis, the plausible range of the appropriate rate was 42.1% to 49.43%. The proportion of breast cancer cases in which BCS was appropriate was stage dependent; 63.0 +/- 11.5% in ductal carcinoma in-situ; 57.0 +/- 9.9% in stage I; 52.2 +/- 9.4% in stage II, and 27.2 +/- 5.2% in stage III.

CONCLUSIONS

This model suggests that BCS is appropriate in 48% of all breast cancer patients. This information may be useful in auditing surgical practice, and may serve as a basis for planning of ancillary services, including radiotherapy.

Evidence-based estimate of appropriate radiotherapy utilization rate for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Current estimates of the proportion of cancer patients who will require radiotherapy (RT) are based almost entirely on expert opinion. The objective of this study was to use an evidence-based approach to estimate the proportion of incident cases of prostate cancer that should receive RT at any point in the evolution of the illness.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to identify indications for RT for prostate cancer and to ascertain the level of evidence that supported each indication. An epidemiologic approach was then used to estimate the incidence of each indication for RT in a typical North American population of prostate cancer patients. The effect of sampling error on the estimated appropriate rate of RT was calculated mathematically, and the effect of systematic error using alternative sources of information was estimated by sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

It was estimated that 61.2% +/- 5.6% of prostate cancer cases develop one or more indications for RT at some point in the course of the illness. The plausible range for this rate was 57.3%-69.8% on sensitivity analysis. Of all prostate cancer patients, 32.2% +/- 3.8% should receive RT in their initial treatment and 29.0% +/- 4.1% later for recurrence or progression. The proportion of cases that ever require RT is risk grouping dependent; 43.9% +/- 2.2% in low-risk disease, 68.7% +/- 3.5% in intermediate-risk disease; and 79.0% +/- 3.8% in high-risk locoregional disease. For metastatic disease, the predicted rate was 66.4% +/- 0.3%.

CONCLUSION

This method provides a rational starting point for the long-term planning of radiation services and for the audit of access to RT at the population level. By completing such evaluations in major cancer sites, it will be possible to estimate the appropriate RT rate for the cancer population as a whole.

An evidence-based estimate of appropriate radiotherapy utilization rate for breast cancer

PURPOSE

Current estimates of the proportion of cancer patients who will require radiotherapy (RT) are based almost entirely on expert opinion. We sought to use an evidence-based approach to estimate the proportion of incident cases of breast cancer that will require RT at any point in the evolution of the illness.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We undertook a systematic review of the literature to identify indications for RT for breast cancer and to ascertain the level of evidence that supported each indication. An epidemiologic approach was then used to estimate the incidence of each indication for RT in a typical North American population of breast cancer patients. The effect of sampling error on the estimated appropriate rate of RT was calculated mathematically, and the effect of systematic error was estimated by sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

It was estimated that 66.4% +/- 4.8% of breast cancer patients develop one or more indications for RT at some point in the course of the illness. The plausible range for this rate was 56.3%-72.4% on sensitivity analysis. Of all breast cancer patients, 57.3% +/- 4.7% require RT in their initial treatment and 9.1% +/- 1.0% do so later for recurrence or progression. The proportion of patients who ever require RT is stage dependent: 39.8% +/- 1.1% in ductal carcinoma in situ; 68.6% +/- 4.1% in Stage I invasive carcinoma; 81.5% +/- 2.3% in Stage II; 95.3% +/- 0.3% in Stage III; and 63.7% +/- 0.3% in Stage IV.

CONCLUSION

This method provides a rational starting point for the long-term planning of RT services and for the audit of access to RT at the population level. By completing such evaluations in the major cancer sites, it will be possible to estimate the appropriate RT treatment rate for the cancer population as a whole.

Estimating the need for radiotherapy for lung cancer: an evidence-based, epidemiologic approach

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Current estimates of the proportion of cancer patients who will require radiotherapy (RT) are based almost entirely on expert opinion. The objective of this study was to use an evidence-based approach to estimate the proportion of incident cases of lung cancer that will require RT at any point in the evolution of the illness.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to identify indications for RT for lung cancer, and to ascertain the level of evidence that supported each indication. An epidemiologic approach was then used to estimate the incidence of each indication for RT in a typical North American population of lung cancer patients. The effect of sampling error on the estimated appropriate rate of RT was calculated mathematically, and the effect of systematic error, was estimated by sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

It was shown that 53.6% +/- 3.3% of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) cases develop one or more indications for RT at some point in the course of the illness, 45.4% +/- 4.3% in their initial treatment, and 8.2% +/- 1.5% later for recurrence of progression. Overall, 64.3% +/- 4.7% of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases require RT, 45.9% +/- 4.3% in their initial treatment, and 18.3% +/- 1.8% later in the course of the illness. The proportion of NSCLC cases that ever require RT is stage dependent; 41.0% +/- 5.5% in Stage I; 54.5% +/- 6.5% in Stage II; 83.5% +/- 10.6% in Stage III; and 65.7% +/- 7.6% in Stage IV. In total, 61.0% +/- 3.9% of all patients with lung cancer will develop one or more indications for RT at some point in the illness, 44.6% +/- 3.6% in their initial treatment, and 16.5% +/- 1.5% later for recurrence or progression.

CONCLUSION

This method provides a rational starting point for the long-term planning of radiation services, and for the audit of access to RT at the population level. We now plan to extend this study to the other major cancer sites to enable us to estimate the appropriate RT treatment rate for the cancer population as a whole.

Estimating the "avoidable" burden of disease by Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALYs)

The World Bank's Global Burden of Disease Study pioneered the use of Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALYs). In this paper we distinguish between the total and the "avoidable" burden of disease. We identify different ways of measuring DALYs: incidence-based DALYs are appropriate where the means of reducing the burden of disease is by prevention; prevalence-based DALYs are appropriate when a disease cannot be prevented but effective treatment is available. The methods of estimating each are explained and we describe how we have applied these methods to seven causes of death and disability in the South and West Region. We discuss the relevance of this work for monitoring the health of populations and deciding how best to use scarce resources to improve health.

Population requirement for primary hip-replacement surgery: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

There has been a long-standing failure in many countries to satisfy the demand for several elective surgical treatments, including total hip replacement. We set out to estimate the population requirement for primary total hip replacement in England.

METHODS

We undertook a cross-sectional study of a stratified random sample of 28,080 individuals aged 35 and over from 40 general practices in inner-city, urban, and rural areas of Avon and Somerset, UK. Prevalent disease was identified through a two-stage process: a self-report screening questionnaire (22,978 of 26,046 responded) and subsequent clinical examination. Incident disease was estimated from the point prevalence by statistical modelling. The requirement for total hip replacement surgery was estimated on the basis of pain and loss of functional ability, with adjustment for evidence of comorbidity and patients' treatment preferences.

FINDINGS

3169 people reported hip pain on the screening questionnaire. 2018 were invited for clinical examination, and 1405 attended. The prevalence of self-reported hip pain was 107 per 1000 (95% CI 101-113) for men and 173 per 1000 (166-180) for women. The prevalence of hip disease severe enough to require surgery was 15.2 (12.7-17.8) per 1000 aged 35-85 years. The corresponding annual incidence of hip disease requiring surgery was estimated as 2.23 (1.56-2.90), which suggests an overall requirement in England of 46,600 operations per year for patients who expressed a preference for, and were suitable for, surgery; the recent actual provision in England was about 43,500.

INTERPRETATION

This research suggests that the satisfaction of demand for total hip replacement, given agreed criteria for surgery, is a realistic objective.

An epidemiological needs assessment of carotid endarterectomy in an English health region. Is the need being met?

OBJECTIVE

To compare the level of provision of carotid endarterectomy (an intervention of proved efficacy for prevention of stroke in patients with symptomatic high grade carotid artery stenosis) with estimates of need.

DESIGN

Comparison of regional, district, and age-sex specific operation rates derived from hospital episode statistics with estimates of need based on demographic and epidemiological data; interviews with regional vascular surgeons and a joint provider-purchaser workshop to discuss implications.

SETTING

Former Wessex Regional Health Authority, 1991-2 to 1995-6.

SUBJECTS

All residents covered by Wessex region treated for carotid artery reconstruction.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Regional, district, and age-sex operation rates as three year average 1993-6 (use) compared with respective estimates of need for carotid endarterectomy among those who presented with symptomatic carotid disease-transient ischaemic attack or minor stroke.

RESULTS

The operation rate more than doubled between 1991-2 and 1995-6, from 35 to 89 per million population, compared with an estimated level of need in the region's general population of 153 per million population (transient ischaemic attack 77, minor stroke 76). The ratio of use to need was 0.47 (95% confidence interval 0.4 to 0.54); district ratios were 0.28 (0.19-0.38) to 0.81 (0.62 to 1.06). The annual use:need ratio rose over the three years 1993-6 from 0.38 to 0.59. Use:need ratios were lower in elderly and female patients. Providers were keen to develop guidelines for referral and to increase access to diagnostic facilities; purchasers were more reluctant, given the limited impact of this intervention on the incidence of stroke and the relatively high cost of the operation.

CONCLUSION

Although treatment rates increased in Wessex there is still unmet need. Further research is needed to determine the referral pathways of patients with symptomatic carotid disease for diagnosis and operation and to evaluate strategies to improve access to diagnostic facilities.

Demand-based assessment of workforce requirements for orthopaedic services

On the basis of an analysis of the supply of and demand for orthopaedic surgeons, we projected that there will be 21,134 full-time-equivalent orthopaedists in the year 2010 if training continues at current levels. We estimated a demand-based requirement of 17,012 full-time-equivalent orthopaedic surgeons, indicating a surplus of 4122 full-time equivalents. In terms of orthopaedist-to-population ratios, we estimated that there will be 7.5 full-time-equivalent orthopaedists per 100,000 population in 2010 compared with a demand-based requirement of 6.0 full-time equivalents. However, we did not include estimates of the demand for orthopaedic surgeons as assistants in the operating room in our model. If an assistant orthopaedic surgeon is required for all procedures, an additional 3906 full-time-equivalent orthopaedists would be demanded, thus eliminating the surplus. The demand for an assistant orthopaedic surgeon in only half of the procedures would still lead to a sizable reduction in the surplus.