Are joint audits associated with higher audit fees?

In its October 2010 Green Paper on audit policy, the European Commission suggested that joint audits might be a way of improving the audit market in Europe. However, some parties consider that a joint audit system is not an efficient solution because the perceived improvements in audit quality, if any, are not commensurate with the significant increase in audit fees. We compare audit fees paid during the years 2007-2011 by listed companies in France, where joint audits are mandatory, with those paid by British and Italian companies. Theory suggests that audit fees in countries with high investor protection, such as the UK, are likely to be greater than those in countries with lower investor protection, such as France and Italy, ceteris paribus. However, we find significantly higher audit fees in France after controlling for well-documented auditor, client, and engagement attributes, which vary across countries. Furthermore, since we do not find statistically significant differences in the magnitude of abnormal accruals, the higher audit fees observed in France do not appear to be associated with higher audit quality.

Uptake of new treatment strategies for deep vein thrombosis: an international audit.

OBJECTIVE: Study of the uptake of new medical technologies provides useful information on the transfer of published evidence into usual practice. We conducted an audit of selected hospitals in three countries (Canada, France, and Switzerland) to identify clinical predictors of low-molecular-weight (LMW) heparin use and outpatient treatment, and to compare the pace of uptake of these new therapeutic approaches across hospitals. DESIGN: Historical review of medical records. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We reviewed the medical records of 3043 patients diagnosed with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in five Canadian, two French, and two Swiss teaching hospitals from 1994 to 1998. Measures. We explored independent clinical variables associated with LMW heparin use and outpatient treatment, and determined crude and adjusted rates of LMW heparin use and outpatient treatment across hospitals. RESULTS: For the years studied, the overall rates of LMW heparin use and outpatient treatment in the study sample were 34.1 and 15.8%, respectively, with higher rates of use in later years. Many comorbidities were negatively associated with outpatient treatment, and risk-adjusted rates of use of these new approaches varied significantly across hospitals. CONCLUSION: There has been a relatively rapid uptake of LMW heparins and outpatient treatment for DVT in their early years of availability, but the pace of uptake has varied considerably across hospitals and countries.

Missed appointments in an adolescent outpatient clinic: descriptive analyses of consultations over 8 years.

Missed appointments represent an important medical and economical issue. Few studies on the subject are reported in the literature, particularly regarding adolescents. Our aim was to characterize missed and cancelled appointments in a multidisciplinary outpatient clinic for adolescents, to assess the effectiveness of a policy aimed at reducing missed appointments by introducing payment for those missed appointments not cancelled in advance, and to compare the rates between staff and resident physicians. A total of 32,816 consultations (representing 35 patients aged 12-20 years, 82.4% females) between 1999 and 200 were analysed. The missed appointment rate was 11.8% whilst another 10.9% were cancellations. Females cancelled more than males (11.3% vs. 8.4%, AOR 1.31, 99% CI 1.08-1.59), but there was no difference for missed appointments (11.6% vs. 12.3%, AOR 0.88, 99% CI 0.61-1.08). April and June to October (vacation months) were associated with more missed appointments. Globally mornings had higher rates of missed appointments than afternoons (13.6% vs. 11.2%, AOR 1.25, 99% CI 1.11-1.40). There was a slight difference in missed appointment rates between staff physicians and residents (10.4%; 11.8%, AOR 1.20, 99% CI 1.08-1.33). Missed appointment rates before and after the new policy on missed appointments were similar (1999-2003: 11.9%; 2004-2006: 11.6%, AOR 0.96, 99% CI 0.83-1.10). Conversely, cancellation rates increased from 8.4% (1999-2003) to 14.5% (2004-2006) (AOR 1.83, 99% CI 1.63-2.05). Attendance rates among adolescents show variations depending on vacation and school hours. Being attentive to these factors could help prevent missed appointments. Although having to pay for missed appointments does not increase attendance, it increases cancellations with the advantage that the appointment can be rescheduled.