Evaluation of quality improvement for cesarean sections caesarean section programmes through mixed methods.

BACKGROUND The rate of avoidable caesarean sections (CS) could be reduced through multifaceted strategies focusing on the involvement of health professionals and compliance with clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Quality improvements for CS (QICS) programmes (QICS) based on this approach, have been implemented in Canada and Spain. OBJECTIVES Their objectives are as follows: 1) Toto identify clusters in each setting with similar results in terms of cost-consequences, 2) Toto investigate whether demographic, clinical or context characteristics can distinguish these clusters, and 3) Toto explore the implementation of QICS in the 2 regions, in order to identify factors that have been facilitators in changing practices and reducing the use of obstetric intervention, as well as the challenges faced by hospitals in implementing the recommendations. METHODS Descriptive study with a quantitative and qualitative approach. 1) Cluster analysis at patient level with data from 16 hospitals in Quebec (Canada) (n = 105,348) and 15 hospitals in Andalusia (Spain) (n = 64,760). The outcome measures are CS and costs. For the cost, we will consider the intervention, delivery and complications in mother and baby, from the hospital perspective. Cluster analysis will be used to identify participants with similar patterns of CS and costs based, and t tests will be used to evaluate if the clusters differed in terms of characteristics: Hospital level (academic status of hospital, level of care, supply and demand factors), patient level (mother age, parity, gestational age, previous CS, previous pathology, presentation of the baby, baby birth weight). 2) Analysis of in-depth interviews with obstetricians and midwives in hospitals where the QICS were implemented, to explore the differences in delivery-related practices, and the importance of the different constructs for positive or negative adherence to CPGs. Dimensions: political/management level, hospital level, health professionals, mothers and their birth partner. DISCUSSION This work sets out a new approach for programme evaluation, using different techniques to make it possible to take into account the specific context where the programmes were implemented.

Oral and general health-related quality of life in patients treated for oral cancer compared to control group.

BACKGROUND Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is gaining importance as a valuable outcome measure in oral cancer area. The aim of this study was to assess the general and oral HRQoL of oral and oropharyngeal cancer patients 6 or more months after treatment and compare them with a population free from this disease. METHODS A cross-sectional study was carried out with patients treated for oral cancer at least 6 months post-treatment and a gender and age group matched control group. HRQoL was measured with the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12); oral HRQoL (OHRQoL) was evaluated using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) and the Oral Impacts on Daily Performances (OIDP). Multivariable regression models assessed the association between the outcomes (SF-12, OHIP-14 and OIDP) and the exposure (patients versus controls), adjusting for sex, age, social class, functional tooth units and presence of illness. RESULTS For patients (n = 142) and controls (n = 142), 64.1% were males. The mean age was 65.2 (standard deviation (sd): 12.9) years in patients and 67.5 (sd: 13.7) years in controls. Patients had worse SF-12 Physical Component Summary scores than controls even in fully the adjusted model [β-coefficient = -0.11 (95% CI: -5.12-(-0.16)]. The differences in SF-12 Mental Component Summary were not statistically significant. Regarding OHRQoL patients had 11.63 (95% CI: 6.77-20.01) higher odds for the OHIP-14 and 21.26 (95% CI: 11.54-39.13) higher odds for OIDP of being in a worse category of OHRQoL compared to controls in the fully adjusted model. CONCLUSION At least 6 months after treatment, oral cancer patients had worse OHRQoL, worse physical HRQoL and similar psychological HRQoL than the general population.

Quality of life in patients with respiratory allergy is influenced by the causative allergen.

OBJECTIVE We aimed to analyze health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in adults with newly diagnosed respiratory allergy according to the sensitization profile for relevant aeroallergens in their usual area of residence. METHODS We performed a cross-sectional, epidemiological, observational, descriptive, multicenter study in allergy clinics in Spain. The sample comprised adults diagnosed with rhinitis, asthma, or both caused by significant allergens in their residential area (olive and/or grass pollen or house dust mite). Allergic rhinitis was classified according to the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma guidelines; asthma was classified according to the Guía Españiola para el Manejo del Asma (Spanish Guideline on the Management of Asthma). HRQOL was studied according to the ESPRINT-15 questionnaire and Mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire. Control of asthma was measured using the Asthma Control Questionnaire 5. RESULTS We studied 1437 patients. Rhinitis was the most common respiratory disease. The HRQOL of rhinitis patients was lower in those sensitized to olive pollen only and in those with combined sensitization to olive and grass pollens. HRQOL associated with rhinitis was worse in patients diagnosed with both rhinitis and asthma than in patients diagnosed with rhinitis only. Asthma patients sensitized to olive pollen or olive and grass pollens had worse HRQOL. CONCLUSIONS In our study population, the HRQOL of patients with respiratory allergies varied with the allergen responsible for symptoms. In patients with rhinitis, the presence of asthma significantly worsened rhinitis-associated HRQOL.