Ability of different adiposity indicators to identify children with elevated blood pressure.

OBJECTIVE: Body composition measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is believed to be superior to crude measures such as BMI or waist circumference (WC) to assess health risks associated with adiposity in adults. We compared the ability of BMI, WC, waist-to-height ratio (WHtR), percentage body fat from skinfold thickness, and measures of total and central fat assessed by DXA to identify children with elevated blood pressure (BP). STUDY DESIGN: The QUALITY Study follows 630 Caucasian families (father, mother, and child originally aged 8-10 years). BP, height, weight, WC, and skinfold thickness were measured according to standardized protocols. Elevated BP was defined as systolic or diastolic BP at least 90th age, sex, and height-specific percentile. Total and central fat were determined with DXA. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) statistic was computed from logistic models that adjusted for age, sex, height, Tanner stage, and physical activity. RESULTS: All adiposity indicators were highly correlated. WC and WHtR did not show superior ability over BMI to identify children with elevated SBP (P = 0.421 and 0.473). Measures of total and central fat from DXA did not show an improved ability over BMI or WC to identify children with elevated SBP (P = 0.325-0.662). CONCLUSION: Results support the use of BMI in clinical and public health settings, at least in this age group. As all indicators had a limited ability to identify children with elevated BP, results also support measurement of BP in all children of this age independent of a weight status.

Reproducibility of diabetes quality of care indicators as reported by patients and physicians.

INTRODUCTION: Self-report of diabetes care has moderate validity and is prone to under- and over-reporting. We assessed reproducibility of a range of processes and outcomes of diabetes care as reported by patients and physicians. METHODS: In a Swiss community-based survey, patients with diabetes and physicians independently reported past 12 months processes of care (HbA1c, lipids, microalbuminuria, blood pressure, weight, foot and eye examinations) and last measured values of HbA1c, height, weight and blood pressure. For dichotomous variables, we assessed reliability by Cohen's kappa and agreement by uniform kappa. For continuous measures, we used Lin's concordance correlation coefficient and limits of agreement, respectively. RESULTS: Mean age of the 210 patients was 65 years; 40% were women, and 51% had diabetes for >10 years. Agreement was good for recommended processes of care such as blood pressure (uniform kappa = 0.94), HbA1c (0.93), weight (0.88) and lipid (0.78), but lower for microalbuminuria, foot and eye examinations (all <0.50). Cohen's kappa values were all low (<0.25). Comparisons of reported continuous variables showed large limits of agreement for height (±6 cm) and weight (8-10 kg) despite high concordance correlation coefficients (0.93 and 0.97). Concordance correlation coefficients were smaller for HbA1c (0.72) and blood pressure (0.5-0.6), with large limits of agreement (±2% and ±25 mmHg). CONCLUSION: While agreement of routine processes of care was good, agreement was less satisfactory for microalbuminuria, foot and eye examinations. Reports of continuous outcomes yielded good reliability but too wide limits of agreement. Quality of care evaluation relying on self-report only should be made cautiously.

Key elements for, and indicators of, a successful transition: an international Delphi study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to reach an international consensus to determine what key elements should be part of a transition program and what indicators could be used to assess its success. METHODS: For this purpose, a Delphi study including an international panel of 37 experts was carried out. The study consisted of three rounds, with response rates ranging from 86.5% to 95%. At each round, experts were asked to assess key elements (defined as the most important elements for the task) and indicators (defined as quantifiable characteristics). At each round, panelists were contacted via e-mail explaining them the tasks to be done and giving them the Web link where to complete the questionnaire. At Round 3, each key element and indicator was assessed as essential, very important, important, accessory, or unnecessary. A 70% agreement was used as cutoff. RESULTS: At Round 3, more than 70% of panelists agreed on six key elements being essential, with one of them (Assuring a good coordination between pediatric and adult professionals) reaching an almost complete consensus (97%). Additionally, 11 more obtained more than 70% agreement when combined with the Very important category. Among indicators, only one (Patient not lost to follow-up) was considered almost unanimously (91%) as essential by the panelists and seven others also reached consensus when the Very important category was included. CONCLUSIONS: Using these results as a framework to develop guidelines at local, national, and international levels would allow better assessing and comparing transition programs.

SocialPosition : Social Position Indicators Construction Toolbox

This R package provides to sociologists (and related scientists) a toolbox to facilitate the construction of social position indicators from survey data. Social position indicators refer to what is commonly known as social class and social status. There exists in the sociological literature many theoretical conceptualisation and empirical operationalization of social class and social status. This first version of the package offers tools to construct the International Socio-Economic Index of Occupational Status (ISEI) and the Oesch social class schema. It also provides tools to convert several occupational classifications (PCS82, PCS03, and ISCO08) into a common one (ISCO88) to facilitate data harmonisation work, and tools to collapse (i.e. group) modalities of social position indicators.

Les déterminants de la prolongation des séjours en SSRG et les indicateurs du devenir des patients après leur sortie : Étude rétrospective au CHRU de Strasbourg [Determinants of prolonged stays in geriatric rehabilitation department and indicators of patient outcome after discharge: A retrospective study in Strasbourg university hospital]

Objectif. Analyser les déterminants de la prolongation des séjours hospitaliers en service de soins de suite et réadaptation gériatrique (SSRG) et identifier les indicateurs du devenir des patients après leur sortie. Méthode. Étude rétrospective au CHRU de Strasbourg de l'ensemble des séjours de durée supérieure à 90 jours entre le 1 janvier 2012 et le 30 septembre 2013. L'ensemble des données sociodémographiques, descriptives des séjours et de l'état de santé des patients ont été analysées. Les patients ont été suivis 9 mois après leur sortie. Les réhospitalisations, l'admission en institution et le décès ont été informés par un contact téléphonique auprès du médecin traitant ou de la famille. Résultats. Quarante-six séjours ont été analysés. Les patients étaient à 68,0 % des femmes. La moyenne d'âge était de 82,9 ± 5,8 ans. Quatre-vingt-dix-huit pour cent d'entre eux vivaient à domicile avant l'admission en milieu hospitalier. Les raisons justifiant la prolongation étaient d'ordre médical (60,8 %), psychique (45,6 %), social (65,2 %) et liées à la difficulté de trouver une solution d'aval (58,7 %). À la fin de leur séjour, 9 patients ont pu regagner leur domicile et 37 ont été admis directement en institution. Durant la période de suivi, 17 patients ont été réhospitalisés au moins une fois et 3 jusqu'à trois fois. Au 9e mois, 9 patients étaient décédés dans un délai moyen de 75 jours après la sortie du SSRG. Les résultats des analyses unifactorielles et multivariées ont permis d'identifier des indicateurs d'évolution défavorable (décès et/ou réhospitalisation). Aucune des variables sociodémographiques ou de syndrome gériatrique n'a été identifiée. Par contre un « motif d'hospitalisation pour une maladie infectieuse », ou pour « un trouble de la marche ou une chute », une « prolongation du séjour en SSRG pour raison médicale » et un « séjour prolongé en court séjour » étaient les facteurs identifiés. Conclusion. Dans la tendance actuelle à améliorer la rentabilité de l'utilisation des ressources de santé, ces résultats rappellent qu'il est important de maintenir un juste équilibre entre utilisation raisonnée des ressources et les besoins spécifiques des patients âgés.

Towards actionable international comparisons of health system performance: expert revision of the OECD framework and quality indicators.

OBJECTIVE: To review and update the conceptual framework, indicator content and research priorities of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's (OECD) Health Care Quality Indicators (HCQI) project, after a decade of collaborative work. DESIGN: A structured assessment was carried out using a modified Delphi approach, followed by a consensus meeting, to assess the suite of HCQI for international comparisons, agree on revisions to the original framework and set priorities for research and development. SETTING: International group of countries participating to OECD projects. PARTICIPANTS: Members of the OECD HCQI expert group. RESULTS: A reference matrix, based on a revised performance framework, was used to map and assess all seventy HCQI routinely calculated by the OECD expert group. A total of 21 indicators were agreed to be excluded, due to the following concerns: (i) relevance, (ii) international comparability, particularly where heterogeneous coding practices might induce bias, (iii) feasibility, when the number of countries able to report was limited and the added value did not justify sustained effort and (iv) actionability, for indicators that were unlikely to improve on the basis of targeted policy interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The revised OECD framework for HCQI represents a new milestone of a long-standing international collaboration among a group of countries committed to building common ground for performance measurement. The expert group believes that the continuation of this work is paramount to provide decision makers with a validated toolbox to directly act on quality improvement strategies.