et al. Structured, intensive education maximising engagement, motivation and long-term change for children and young people with diabetes: a cluster randomised controlled trial with integral process and economic evaluation -the CASCADE study. Health Technol Assess 2014;18(20).Health Technology Assessment is indexed and abstracted in Index Medicus/MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica/EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch ® ) and Current Contents ® / Clinical Medicine. Health Technology AssessmentHTA/HTA TAR ISSN 1366-5278 (Print) ISSN 2046-4924 (Online) Five-year impact factor: 5.804Health Technology Assessment is indexed in MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and the ISI Science Citation Index and is assessed for inclusion in the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects.This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (www.publicationethics.org/).Editorial contact: nihredit@southampton.ac.ukThe full HTA archive is freely available to view online at www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hta. Print-on-demand copies can be purchased from the report pages of the NIHR Journals Library website: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk Criteria for inclusion in the Health Technology Assessment journalReports are published in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) if (1) they have resulted from work for the HTA programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the reviewers and editors.Reviews in Health Technology Assessment are termed 'systematic' when the account of the search appraisal and synthesis methods (to minimise biases and random errors) would, in theory, permit the replication of the review by others. HTA programmeThe HTA programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was set up in 1993. It produces high-quality research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS. 'Health technologies' are broadly defined as all interventions used to promote health, prevent and treat disease, and improve rehabilitation and long-term care.The journal is indexed in NHS Evidence via its abstracts included in MEDLINE and its Technology Assessment Reports inform National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance. HTA research is also an important source of evidence for National Screening Committee (NSC) policy decisions.For more information about the HTA programme please visit the website: www.hta.ac.uk/ This reportThe research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by the HTA programme as project number 06/44/05. The contractual start date was in May 2008. The draft report began editorial review in January 2013 and was accepted for publication in June 2013. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The HTA editors and publisher have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors' report and would like to thank the reviewers...

BackgroundUganda halved its maternal mortality to 343/100,000 live births between 1990 and 2015, but did not meet the Millennium Development Goal 5. Skilled, timely and good quality antenatal (ANC) and delivery care can prevent the majority of maternal/newborn deaths and stillbirths. We examine coverage, equity, sector of provision and content of ANC and delivery care between 1991 and 2011.MethodsWe conducted a repeated cross-sectional study using four Uganda Demographic and Health Surveys (1995, 2000, 2006 and 2011).Using the most recent live birth and adjusting for survey sampling, we estimated percentage and absolute number of births with ANC (any and 4+ visits), facility delivery, caesarean sections and complete maternal care. We assessed socio-economic differentials in these indicators by wealth, education, urban/rural residence, and geographic zone on the 1995 and 2011 surveys. We estimated the proportions of ANC and delivery care provided by the public and private (for-profit and not-for-profit) sectors, and compared content of ANC and delivery care between sectors. Statistical significance of differences were evaluated using chi-square tests.ResultsCoverage with any ANC remained high over the study period (> 90% since 2001) but was of insufficient frequency; < 50% of women who received any ANC reported 4+ visits. Facility-based delivery care increased slowly, reaching 58% in 2011. While significant inequalities in coverage by wealth, education, residence and geographic zone remained, coverage improved for all indicators among the lowest socio-economic groups of women over time. The private sector market share declined over time to 14% of ANC and 25% of delivery care in 2011. Only 10% of women with 4+ ANC visits and 13% of women delivering in facilities received all measured care components.ConclusionsThe Ugandan health system had to cope with more than 30,000 additional births annually between 1991 and 2011. The majority of women in Uganda accessed ANC, but this contact did not result in care of sufficient frequency, content, and continuum of care (facility delivery). Providers in both sectors require quality improvements. Achieving universal health coverage and maternal/newborn SDGs in Uganda requires prioritising poor, less educated and rural women despite competing priorities for financial and human resources.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3546-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

IntroductionType 1 diabetes (T1D) in children and adolescents is increasing worldwide with a particular increase in children <5 years. Fewer than 1 in 6 children and adolescents achieve recommended glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) values.MethodsA pragmatic, cluster-randomized controlled trial assessed the efficacy of a clinic-based structured educational group incorporating psychological approaches to improve long-term glycemic control, quality of life and psychosocial functioning in children and adolescents with T1D. 28 pediatric diabetes services were randomized to deliver the intervention or standard care. 362 children (8–16 years) with HbA1c≥8.5% were recruited. Outcomes were HbA1c at 12 and 24 months, hypoglycemia, admissions, self-management skills, intervention compliance, emotional and behavioral adjustment, and quality of life. A process evaluation collected data from key stakeholder groups in order to evaluate the feasibility of delivering the intervention.Results298/362 patients (82.3%) provided HbA1c at 12 months and 284/362 (78.5%) at 24 months. The intervention did not improve HbA1c at 12 months (intervention effect 0.11, 95% CI −0.28 to 0.50, p=0.584), or 24 months (intervention effect 0.03, 95% CI −0.36 to 0.41, p=0.891). There were no significant changes in remaining outcomes. 96/180 (53%) families in the intervention arm attended at least 1 module. The number of modules attended did not affect outcome. Reasons for low uptake included difficulties organizing groups and work and school commitments. Those with highest HbA1cs were less likely to attend. Mean cost of the intervention was £683 per child.ConclusionsSignificant challenges in the delivery of a structured education intervention using psychological techniques to enhance engagement and behavior change delivered by diabetes nurses and dietitians in routine clinical practice were found. The intervention did not improve HbA1c in children and adolescents with poor control.Trial registration numberISRCTN52537669, results.

Background: Asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases and a major economical burden to families and health systems. Whereas efficacy of current therapeutical options has been clearly established, cost-effectiveness analysis of public health interventions for asthma control are scarce.

Abstractobjective The objective of this study was to assess the role of the private sector in low-and middleincome countries (LMICs). We used Demographic and Health Surveys for 57 countries (2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013) to evaluate the private sector's share in providing three reproductive and maternal/newborn health services (family planning, antenatal and delivery care), in total and by socio-economic position.methods We used data from 865 547 women aged 15-49, representing a total of 3 billion people. We defined 'met and unmet need for services' and 'use of appropriate service types' clearly and developed explicit classifications of source and sector of provision.results Across the four regions (sub-Saharan Africa, Middle East/Europe, Asia and Latin America), unmet need ranged from 28% to 61% for family planning, 8% to 22% for ANC and 21% to 51% for delivery care. The private-sector share among users of family planning services was 37-39% across regions (overall mean: 37%; median across countries: 41%). The private-sector market share among users of ANC was 13-61% across regions (overall mean: 44%; median across countries: 15%). The private-sector share among appropriate deliveries was 9-56% across regions (overall mean: 40%; median across countries: 14%). For all three healthcare services, women in the richest wealth quintile used private services more than the poorest. Wealth gaps in met need for services were smallest for family planning and largest for delivery care.conclusions The private sector serves substantial numbers of women in LMICs, particularly the richest. To achieve universal health coverage, including adequate quality care, it is imperative to understand this sector, starting with improved data collection on healthcare provision.keywords maternal heath, family planning, antenatal care, delivery care, Demographic and Health Surveys, private sector

Family costs of severe asthma consumed over one-fourth of the family income of the underprivileged population in a middle-income country. Adequate management brings major economic benefit to individuals and families.

UK Department of Health, NHS City and Hackney.

SummaryBackgroundEarly HIV diagnosis reduces morbidity, mortality, the probability of onward transmission, and their associated costs, but might increase cost because of earlier initiation of antiretroviral treatment (ART). We investigated this trade-off by estimating the cost-effectiveness of HIV screening in primary care.MethodsWe modelled the effect of the four-times higher diagnosis rate observed in the intervention arm of the RHIVA2 randomised controlled trial done in Hackney, London (UK), a borough with high HIV prevalence (≥0·2% adult prevalence). We constructed a dynamic, compartmental model representing incidence of infection and the effect of screening for HIV in general practices in Hackney. We assessed cost-effectiveness of the RHIVA2 trial by fitting model diagnosis rates to the trial data, parameterising with epidemiological and behavioural data from the literature when required, using trial testing costs and projecting future costs of treatment.FindingsOver a 40 year time horizon, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were £22 201 (95% credible interval 12 662–132 452) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, £372 207 (268 162–1 903 385) per death averted, and £628 874 (434 902–4 740 724) per HIV transmission averted. Under this model scenario, with UK cost data, RHIVA2 would reach the upper National Institute for Health and Care Excellence cost-effectiveness threshold (about £30 000 per QALY gained) after 33 years. Scenarios using cost data from Canada (which indicate prolonged and even higher health-care costs for patients diagnosed late) suggest this threshold could be reached in as little as 13 years.InterpretationScreening for HIV in primary care has important public health benefits as well as clinical benefits. We predict it to be cost-effective in the UK in the medium term. However, this intervention might be cost-effective far sooner, and even cost-saving, in settings where long-term health-care costs of late-diagnosed patients in high-prevalence regions are much higher (≥60%) than those of patients diagnosed earlier. Screening for HIV in primary care is cost-effective and should be promoted.FundingNHS City and Hackney, UK Department of Health, National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care.