The appropriateness of using routinely collected laboratory data combined with administrative data for estimating influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) is still being explored. This paper outlines a protocol to estimate influenza VE using linked laboratory and administrative data which could act as a companion to estimates derived from other methods.
We will use the test-negative design to estimate VE for each influenza type/subtype and season. Province-wide individual-level records of positive and negative influenza tests at the Provincial Laboratory for Public Health in Alberta will be linked, by unique personal health numbers, to administrative databases and vaccination records held at the Ministry of Health in Alberta to determine covariates and influenza vaccination status, respectively. Covariates of interests include age, sex, immunocompromising chronic conditions and healthcare setting. Cases will be defined based on an individual’s first positive influenza test during the season, and potential controls will be defined based on an individual’s first negative influenza test during the season. One control for each case will be randomly selected based on the week the specimen was collected. We will estimate VE using multivariable logistic regression.
Ethics approval was obtained from the University of Alberta’s Health Research Ethics Board—Health Panel under study ID Pro00075997. Results will be disseminated by public health officials in Alberta.
To compare the characteristics of populations admitted to hospital-at-home services with the population admitted to hospital and assess the association of these services with healthcare costs and mortality.
In a retrospective observational cohort study of linked patient level data, we used propensity score matching in combination with regression analysis.
Patients aged 65 years and older admitted to hospital-at-home or hospital.
Three geriatrician-led admission avoidance hospital-at-home services in Scotland.
Healthcare costs and mortality.
Patients in hospital-at-home were older and more socioeconomically disadvantaged, had higher rates of previous hospitalisation and there was a greater proportion of women and people with several chronic conditions compared with the population admitted to hospital. The cost of providing hospital-at-home varied between the three sites from £628 to £2928 per admission. Hospital-at-home was associated with 18% lower costs during the follow-up period in site 1 (ratio of means 0.82; 95% CI: 0.76 to 0.89). Limiting the analysis to costs during the 6 months following index discharge, patients in the hospital-at-home cohorts had 27% higher costs (ratio of means 1.27; 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.41) in site 1, 9% (ratio of means 1.09; 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.24) in site 2 and 70% in site 3 (ratio of means 1.70; 95% CI: 1.40 to 2.07) compared with patients in the control cohorts. Admission to hospital-at-home was associated with an increased risk of death during the follow-up period in all three sites (1.09, 95% CI: 1.00 to 1.19 site 1; 1.29, 95% CI: 1.15 to 1.44 site 2; 1.27, 95% CI: 1.06 to 1.54 site 3).
Our findings indicate that in these three cohorts, the populations admitted to hospital-at-home and hospital differ. We cannot rule out the risk of residual confounding, as our analysis relied on an administrative data set and we lacked data on disease severity and type of hospitalised care received in the control cohorts.
Hands make it possible to be employable and productive, to communicate non-verbally and to perform fine motor tasks required in day-to-day activities. Sustaining a hand injury can be detrimental to function including the ability to work. As the literature on work-related transitions is scattered across a range of journals, it is difficult to get a sense of how much literature there is, what is known and where the gaps lie. This scoping study will provide a single source of up-to-date evidence to inform health professionals about the strategies occupational therapists employ to facilitate work-related transitions for people with hand injuries.
The methodological framework by Arksey and O’Malley (2005) will form the structure of the scoping review. The search strategy has been developed in collaboration with a subject librarian. The following databases will be searched: EBSCOhost including only Medline, CINAHL and Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition; PubMed, Scopus, The Cochrane library and Web of Science. Reference lists will be examined, and grey literature sources will be searched to ensure that literature missed in the database searches is included. Covidence will be used to manage the project. Full-texts will be uploaded for literature that meets the inclusion criteria. A process of blind review will be used to ensure that consistency and rigour is upheld.
The findings of the scoping review will be disseminated in an article, within 2019, to be published in a peer-reviewed journal. The findings will be presented at conferences to ensure the optimal dissemination of the scoping review’s conclusions.
The importance of patient-centred care (PCC) has been increasingly recognised. However, there is limited work exploring what doctors actually understand by PCC, and how they perceive they acquire PCC skills in the workplace. The objectives of our study were to explore (1) what UK doctors, in specialist training, perceive to be the essential components of PCC, (2) if/how they acquire these skills, (3) any facilitators/barriers for engaging in PCC and (4) views on their PCC training.
Qualitative study using in-depth individual semi-structured interviews with UK specialist trainees. Interview transcripts were thematically analysed.
Thirty-one specialist trainee doctors, with at least 4 years postgraduate experience, were interviewed. Participants worked in various medical specialities within the Medical Directorate of an acute hospital in the East Midlands of England.
Interview data were transcribed verbatim and categorised into three main themes. The first theme was ‘Understanding PCC’ where the doctors gave varied perspectives on what they understood by PCC. Although many were able to highlight key components of PCC, there were also some accounts which demonstrated a lack of understanding. The second theme was ‘Learning PCC skills: A work in progress’. Learning to be patient-centred was perceived to be an ongoing process. Within this, trainee doctors reported ‘on-the-job’ learning as the main means of acquiring PCC skills, but they also saw a place for formal training (eg, educational sessions focussing on PCC, role play). ‘Delivering PCC: Beyond the physician’ referred to the many influences the doctors reported in learning and delivering PCC including patients, the organisation and colleagues. Observing consultants taking a patient-centred approach was cited as an important learning tool.
Our findings may assist clinical educators in understanding how trainee doctors perceive PCC, and the factors that influence their learning, thereby helping them shape PCC skills training.