Randomized studies have shown that financial incentives can significantly increase the effect of smoking cessation treatment in company settings. Evidence of effectiveness alone is, however, not... Show moreRandomized studies have shown that financial incentives can significantly increase the effect of smoking cessation treatment in company settings. Evidence of effectiveness alone is, however, not enough to ensure that companies will offer this intervention. Knowledge about the barriers and facilitators for implementation in the workplace is needed, in order to develop an implementation strategy. We performed a qualitative needs assessment among 18 employers working in companies with relatively many employees with a low educational level, and our study revealed priority actions that aim to improve the implementation process in these types of workplaces. First, employers need training and support in how to reach their employees and convince them to take part in the group training. Second, employers need to be convinced that their non-smoking employees will not consider the incentives unfair, or they should be enabled to offer alternative incentives that are considered less unfair. Third, the cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation group trainings including financial incentives should be explained to employers. Finally, smoking cessation should become a standard part of workplace-based health policies. Show less
Background: eHealth promises to increase self-management and personalised medicine and improve cost-effectiveness in primary care. Paired with these promises are ethical implications, as eHealth... Show moreBackground: eHealth promises to increase self-management and personalised medicine and improve cost-effectiveness in primary care. Paired with these promises are ethical implications, as eHealth will affect patients’ and primary care professionals’ (PCPs) experiences, values, norms, and relationships.Objectives: We argue what ethical implications related to the impact of eHealth on four vital aspects of primary care could (and should) be anticipated.Discussion: (1) EHealth influences dealing with predictive and diagnostic uncertainty. Machine-learning based clinical decision support systems offer (seemingly) objective, quantified, and personalised outcomes. However, they also introduce new loci of uncertainty and subjectivity. The decision-making process becomes opaque, and algorithms can be invalid, biased, or even discriminatory. This has implications for professional responsibilities and judgments, justice, autonomy, and trust. (2) EHealth affects the roles and responsibilities of patients because it can stimulate self-management and autonomy. However, autonomy can also be compromised, e.g. in cases of persuasive technologies and eHealth can increase existing health disparities. (3) The delegation of tasks to a network of technologies and stakeholders requires attention for responsibility gaps and new responsibilities. (4) The triangulate relationship: patient–eHealth–PCP requires a reconsideration of the role of human interaction and ‘humanness’ in primary care as well as of shaping Shared Decision Making.Conclusion: Our analysis is an essential first step towards setting up a dedicated ethics research agenda that should be examined in parallel to the development and implementation of eHealth. The ultimate goal is to inspire the development of practice-specific ethical recommendations. Show less
Primary care is challenged to provide high quality, accessible and affordable care for an increasingly ageing, complex, and multimorbid population. To counter these challenges, primary care... Show morePrimary care is challenged to provide high quality, accessible and affordable care for an increasingly ageing, complex, and multimorbid population. To counter these challenges, primary care professionals need to take up new and innovative practices, including eHealth. eHealth applications hold the promise to overcome some difficulties encountered in the care of people with complex medical and social needs in primary care. However, many unanswered questions regarding (cost) effectiveness, integration with healthcare, and acceptability to patients, caregivers, and professionals remain to be elucidated. What conditions need to be met? What challenges need to be overcome? What downsides must be dealt with? This first paper in a series on eHealth in primary care introduces basic concepts and examines opportunities for the uptake of eHealth in primary care. We illustrate that although the potential of eHealth in primary care is high, several conditions need to be met to ensure that safe and high-quality eHealth is developed for and implemented in primary care. eHealth research needs to be optimized; ensuring evidence-based eHealth is available. Blended care, i.e. combining face-to-face care with remote options, personalized to the individual patient should be considered. Stakeholders need to be involved in the development and implementation of eHealth via co-creation processes, and design should be mindful of vulnerable groups and eHealth illiteracy. Furthermore, a global perspective on eHealth should be adopted, and eHealth ethics, patients’ safety and privacy considered. Show less
Kleij, R.M.J.J. van der; Kasteleyn, M.J.; Meijer, E.; Bonten, T.N.; Houwink, I.J.F.; Teichert, M.; ... ; Chavannes, N.H. 2019
OBJECTIVES: Older patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD),hospitalized for an acute exacerbation, often do not receive recommendedpost-acute pulmonary rehabilitation. This... Show moreOBJECTIVES: Older patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD),hospitalized for an acute exacerbation, often do not receive recommendedpost-acute pulmonary rehabilitation. This underuse might be related to theimpaired clinical and functional status of these patients, who are more likely topresent with frailty, comorbidities, and disability. Having developed andimplemented a geriatric rehabilitation program for these patients (GR_COPD), theprimary aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of this program.DESIGN AND INTERVENTION: A prospective cohort study with a 3-month follow-upperiod. Patients who declined the GR_COPD program were considered as controls.SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The study was conducted at the pulmonary department of2 hospitals. Patients were eligible when hospitalized as a result of an acuteexacerbation of COPD and indicated for the GR_COPD program based on standardizedcriteria.METHODS: Primary outcome was defined as change in disease-specific health statusmeasured with the clinical COPD questionnaire (CCQ), secondary outcome as theexacerbation rate ratio during follow-up. To balance potential confoundersbetween the intervention and control group, propensity score-based weightedlinear regression analyses were performed.RESULTS: Of the 158 included patients [78 (49.4%) male, mean age 70.8 (±8.1)years, mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second: 35.5 (±12.8) as % ofpredicted], 78 received the GR_COPD program. The results of the CCQ showed asignificant and clinically relevant treatment effect of -0.56 points [95%confidence interval (CI) -0.89, -0.23; P = .001). Patients in the control grouphad 2.77 times more exacerbations compared with the intervention group (95% CI2.13, 3.58; P < .001).CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: This study shows a clinically relevant effect of theGR_COPD program on disease-specific health status and exacerbation rate.Implementation of the program for older patients with severe COPD hospitalizedfor an acute exacerbation is recommended. Show less
Background: Mobile health can be used to generate innovative insights into optimizing treatment to improve allergic rhinitis (AR) control.Objectives: A cross-sectional real-world observational... Show moreBackground: Mobile health can be used to generate innovative insights into optimizing treatment to improve allergic rhinitis (AR) control.Objectives: A cross-sectional real-world observational study was undertaken in 22 countries to complement a pilot study and provide novel information on medication use, disease control, and work productivity in the everyday life of patients with AR.Methods: A mobile phone app (Allergy Diary, which is freely available on Google Play and Apple stores) was used to collect the data of daily visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for (1) overall allergic symptoms; (2) nasal, ocular, and asthma symptoms; (3) work; and (4) medication use by using a treatment scroll list including all allergy medications (prescribed and over-the-counter) customized for 22 countries. The 4 most common intranasal medications containing intranasal corticosteroids and 8 oral H-1-antihistamines were studied.Results: Nine thousand one hundred twenty-two users filled in 112,054 days of VASs in 2016 and 2017. Assessment of days was informative. Control of days with rhinitis differed between no (best control), single (good control for intranasal corticosteroid-treated days), or multiple (worst control) treatments. Users with the worst control increased the range of treatments being used. The same trend was found for asthma, eye symptoms, and work productivity. Differences between oral H-1-antihistamines were found.Conclusions: This study confirms the usefulness of the Allergy Diary in accessing and assessing behavior in patients with AR. This observational study using a very simple assessment tool (VAS) on a mobile phone had the potential to answer questions previously thought infeasible. Show less