Value-Based Healthcare in Urology: A Collaborative Review

Reitblat, Chanan; Bain, Paul; Porter, Michael E.; Bernstein, David N.; Feeley, Thomas W.; Graefen, Markus; Iyer, Santosh; Resnick, Matthew J.; Stimson, C.J.; Trinh, Quoc‐Dien; Gershman, Boris

doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2020.12.008

Cited by 32 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Few articles described implementation of multiple agenda items. The lack of implementation articles was in line with other research in hospital settings; Reitblat et al concluded that the implementation and investigation of the strategic agenda in urology was limited 21 and another scoping review specifically focusing on VBHC implementation in hospital settings showed the same scarcity. 22 One reason for the lack of implementation articles might be the absence of a practical implementation guide for VBHC.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 57%

Mapping the extent, range and nature of research activity on value-based healthcare in the 15 years following its introduction (2006–2021): a scoping review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesWe aimed to systematically map the extent, range and nature of research activity on value-based healthcare (VBHC), and to identify research gaps.DesignA scoping review with an additional cited reference search was conducted, guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology.Data sourcesThe search was undertaken in PubMed, Embase and Web of Science.Eligibility criteriaEligible articles mentioned VBHC or value with reference to the work of Porter or provided a definition of VBHC or value.Data extraction and synthesisData were independently extracted using a data extraction form. Two independent reviewers double extracted data from 10% of the articles. Data of the remaining articles (90%) were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second. The strategic agenda of Porter and Lee was used to categorise the included articles.ResultsThe searches yielded a total of 27,931 articles, of which 1,242 were analysed. Most articles were published in North America. Most articles described an application of VBHC by measuring outcomes and costs (agenda item 2). The other agenda items were far less frequently described or implemented. Most of these articles were conceptual, meaning that nothing was actually changed or implemented.ConclusionThe number of publications increased steadily after the introduction of VBHC in 2006. Almost one-fifth of the articles could not be categorised in one of the items of the strategic agenda, which may lead to the conclusion that the current strategic agenda could be extended. In addition, a practical roadmap or guideline to implement VBHC is still lacking. Future research could fill this gap by specifically studying the effectiveness of VBHC in day-to-day clinical practice.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 57%

Mapping the extent, range and nature of research activity on value-based healthcare in the 15 years following its introduction (2006–2021): a scoping review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As recommended previously (Lu et al, 2021b), meta-analyses of KLT should be conducted and reported using the AMSTAR 2 tool and PRISMA 2020 guidelines, respectively. As health technology assessment and economic evaluation are being gradually incorporated for informed clinical decision making and drug pricing (Huang et al, 2022), and as value-based healthcare concept is emerging (Reitblat et al, 2021), future studies should not only report survival data from long-term follow-up, but they should also pay more attention to the cost-effectiveness of KLT as an adjunctive treatment, as of the whole field of traditional medicine, as well (Chen, 2022).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Kanglaite (Coix Seed Extract) as Adjunctive Therapy in Cancer: Evidence Mapping Overview Based on Systematic Reviews With Meta-Analyses

et al. 2022

Front. Pharmacol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Several quantitative systematic reviews of Kanglaite (KLT), an herb preparation used to treat cancer and malignant pleural effusion, have been published in recent years. However, the clinical evidence reported in these studies has not been pursued further and the methodological quality of these meta-analyses remains unknown. Therefore, an overview was designed to map the evidence landscape based on the published meta-analyses on KLT in cancer treatment.Methods: Two bibliographic databases (PubMed and Embase) were searched from inception to 25 November 2021. Two independent reviewers were involved in study selection, data abstraction, and methodological quality assessment using AMSTAR 2. The principal features of publications and the clinical outcomes of efficacy and safety were synthesized narratively, and results of methodological quality were reported as frequencies and percentages with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. The evidence map was used to visualize the overall quality. Excel 2016 and Stata 17/SE were used for data analysis.Results: Thirteen meta-analyses published in English were included for in-depth analysis. Among them, the year of publication ranged from 2008 to 2021, and the number of included patients ranged from 488 to 2,964. Regarding the cancer type, seven articles focused on non-small cell lung cancer, two on malignant pleural effusion, and four reviews on digestive system malignancies, such as hepatocellular carcinoma and pancreatic cancer. Almost all included meta-analyses reported that KLT as adjunctive therapy could improve various efficacy outcomes (such as disease response rates, quality of life, immune indicators) and reduce the rate of occurrence of adverse reactions, such as nausea and vomiting, leukopenia, and anemia. In terms of their methodological quality, three meta-analyses were of low quality, whereas 10 studies were critically low in quality. The methodological flaws main involved items 2 (“predesigned protocol and registration informatio’’), 3 (“rationale of study design for inclusion”), 4 (“comprehensive search strategy’’), 5 (“literature selection in duplicate’’), 7 (“list of excluded studies with reasons’’), 8 (“adequate information on included studies’’), 10 (“funding support for included primary studies’’), and 12 (“evaluation of the potential impact of risk of bias’’) based on the AMSTAR 2 tool.Conclusion: Current evidence reveals that KLT is effective and safe as an adjunctive treatment for non-small cell lung cancer, malignant pleural effusion, and digestive system malignancies (such as hepatocellular carcinoma). However, the results assessed in this overview should be further verified using well-designed and clearly reported clinical trials and meta-analyses of KLT.

show abstract

“…For example, centralisation is associated with increased compliance to guidelines and reduced costs. Centralisation also offers novel surgeons the opportunity to learn from expert surgeons, which may increase the quality of care in the entire network (47,48).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Prostate Cancer Care through Quality Assurance Programs

Veerman¹,

Hagens²,

Vis³

et al. 2022

Urologic Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Continuous quality assurance assessment and control in healthcare is essential to provide patients with the best possible care. Quality assurance programs have been developed to improve future healthcare by thoroughly studying patient outcomes on a physician-or institutional-level. Through the continuous and cyclical process of data registration, evaluation and adaptation, opportunities are sought to improve (individual) patient outcomes. Over the past decade, quality assurance programs have been initiated within urological clinical practice, mainly focusing on the diagnosis and surgical treatment of prostate cancer. While they all share the same philosophy to improve healthcare, existing quality assurance programs differ greatly. To date, little is known about their effects on the outcomes of prostate cancer care. In this chapter, we summarize the current knowledge regarding quality assurance program within prostate cancer care. We provide insights into how quality Assurance programs can improve and assure future diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer.

show abstract

Value-Based Healthcare in Urology: A Collaborative Review

Cited by 32 publications

References 63 publications

Mapping the extent, range and nature of research activity on value-based healthcare in the 15 years following its introduction (2006–2021): a scoping review

Mapping the extent, range and nature of research activity on value-based healthcare in the 15 years following its introduction (2006–2021): a scoping review

Kanglaite (Coix Seed Extract) as Adjunctive Therapy in Cancer: Evidence Mapping Overview Based on Systematic Reviews With Meta-Analyses

Improving Prostate Cancer Care through Quality Assurance Programs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About