Explore the vast range of titles available.

Implantable medical devices (IMDs) are medical instruments embedded inside the body. Well-informed and empowered patients living with IMDs are key players of improving IMD-related patient safety and health outcomes. However, little is known about IMD patients' epidemiology, characteristics, and current awareness levels. Our primary aim was to investigate the point and lifetime prevalence of patients living with IMDs. Patients' IMD-related knowledge and determinants of IMDs' impact on their life were also explored. An online cross-sectional survey was conducted. Respondents' IMD history, whether they received instructions for use and IMD's overall impact on life were recorded by self-reports. Patients' knowledge about living with IMDs was assessed on visual analogue scales (VAS, 0-10). Shared decision-making was analyzed by the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). Descriptive statistics and subgroup comparisons between IMD wearers were performed for statistical differences. Significant determinants of IMD's overall impact on life were examined in linear regression analysis. In the total sample (N = 1400, mean age 58.1 ±11.1; female 53.7%), nearly one third of respondents were living with IMD (30.9%; 433/1400). Among them, the most frequent IMDs were tooth implants (30.9%) and intraocular lens (26.8%). Mean knowledge VAS scores were similar (range: 5.5 ±3.8-6.5 ±3.2) but differences by IMD types were observed. Patients who received instructions for use or reported better impact on life indicated higher self-reported knowledge. Regression confirmed that patients' knowledge was significant predictor of IMD's impact on life, but this effect was overwritten by the SDM-Q-9. This first comprehensive epidemiological study on IMDs provides basic data for public health strategy planning alongside the implementation of MDR. Improved self-perceived outcomes were associated with higher knowledge hence education of patients receiving IMD deserves consideration. We suggest to investigate further the role of shared decision-making on IMD's overall impact on patients' life in future prospective studies.

Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are central to inform on the responsiveness of health systems to citizens' health care needs and expectations. At their current form, PREMs do not reflect the weights that patients assign to varying aspects of the care experience. We aimed to investigate patients' preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for attributes of the care experience in outpatient settings. A discrete choice experiment was conducted among a representative sample of the general adult population of Hungary (n = 1000). Choice set attributes and levels were defined based on OECD's standardized PREMs (e.g. a doctor spending enough time in consultation, providing easy to understand explanations, giving opportunity to ask questions, and involving in decision making) and a price attribute. Conditional and mixed logit analyses were conducted. WTP estimates were computed in preference and WTP space. The respondents most preferred attribute was that of a doctor spending enough time in consultation, followed by involvement in decision making. Moreover, waiting times had a less important effect on respondents' choice preference compared with aspects of the doctor-patient relationship. Estimates in the WTP space varied from [euro]4.38 (2.85-5.90) for waiting an hour less at a doctor's office to [euro]36.13 (32.07-40.18) for a consultation where a doctor spends enough time with a patient relative to a consultation where a doctor does not. A preference-based PREMs approach provide insight on the value patients assign to different aspects of their care experience. This can inform the decisions of policy-makers and other stakeholders to coordinate efforts and resource allocation in a more targeted manner, by acting on attributes of the care experience that have a greater impact on the implementation of patient-centered care.

Background The aim of this study was to assess social preferences for two different advanced digital health technologies and investigate the contextual dependency of the preferences. Methods A cross-sectional online survey was performed among the general population of Hungary aged 40 years and over. Participants were asked to imagine that they needed a total hip replacement surgery and to indicate whether they would prefer a traditional or a robot-assisted (RA) hip surgery. To better understand preferences for the chosen method, the willingness to pay (WTP) method was used. The same assessment was conducted for preferences between a radiologist’s and AI-based image analysis in establishing the radiological diagnosis of a suspected tumour. Respondents’ electronic health literacy was assessed with the eHEALS questionnaire. Descriptive methods were used to assess sample characteristics and differences between subgroups. Associations were investigated with correlation analysis and multiple linear regressions. Results Altogether, 1400 individuals (53.7% female) with a mean age of 58.3 (SD = 11.1) years filled in the survey. RA hip surgery was chosen by 762 (54.4%) respondents, but only 470 (33.6%) chose AI-based medical image evaluation. Those who opted for the digital technology had significantly higher educational levels and electronic health literacy (eHEALS). The majority of respondents were willing to pay to secure their preferred surgical (surgeon 67.2%, robot-assisted: 68.8%) and image assessment (radiologist: 70.9%; AI: 77.4%) methods, reporting similar average amounts in the first ( p  = 0.677), and a significantly higher average amount for radiologist vs. AI in the second task ( p  = 0.001). The regression showed a significant association between WTP and income, and in the hip surgery task, it also revealed an association with the type of intervention chosen. Conclusions Individuals with higher education levels seem to accept the advanced digital medical technologies more. However, the greater openness for RA surgery than for AI image assessment highlights that social preferences may depend considerably on the medical situation and the type of advanced digital technology. WTP results suggest rather firm preferences in the great majority of the cases. Determinants of preferences and real-world choices of affected patients should be further investigated in future studies.

Patient-reported data are widely used for many purposes by different actors within a health system. However, little is known about the use of such data by health insurers. Our study aims to map the evidence on the use of patient-reported data by health insurers; to explore how collected patient-reported data are utilized; and to elucidate the motives of why patient-reported data are collected by health insurers. The study design is that of a scoping review. In total, 11 databases were searched on. Relevant grey literature was identified through online searches, reference mining and recommendations from experts. Forty-two documents were included. We synthesized the evidence on the uses of patient-reported data by insurers following a structure-process-outcome approach; we also mapped the use and function of those data by a health insurer. Health insurers use patient-reported data for assurance and improvement of quality of care and value-based health care. The patient-reported data most often collected are those of outcomes, experiences and satisfaction measures; structure indicators are used to a lesser extent and often combined with process indicators. These data are mainly used for the purposes of procurement and purchasing of services, quality assurance, improvement and reporting, and strengthening the involvement of insured people. The breadth to which insurers use patient-reported data in their business models varies greatly. Some hindering factors to the uptake of such data are the varying and overlapping terminology in use in the field and the limited involvement of insured people in a health insurer's business. Health insurers are advised to be more explicit in regard to the role they want to play within the health system and society at large, and accommodate implications for the use of patient-reported data accordingly.

Purpose The CarerQol instrument has been designed and validated as an instrument able to measure both the positive and the negative impacts of caregiving on the quality of life of informal caregivers (CarerQol-7D), as well as their general happiness (CarerQol-VAS). The aim of this study was to assess the construct validity of the CarerQol in the Hungarian context. Methods The CarerQol was translated into Hungarian. Subsequently, in a cross-sectional online survey, representative for the general Hungarian population ( N  = 1000), informal caregivers were identified ( N  = 149, female 51.2%, mean age 53.2). Clinical, convergent and discriminant validity of the CarerQol were evaluated in relation to the caregivers’ and care recipients’ EQ-5D-5L health status, and caregiving situation characteristics. Results Average CarerQol-7D and CarerQol-VAS scores were 76.0 (SD 16.2) and 6.8 (SD 2.3), respectively. CarerQol-7D and CarerQol-VAS scores were significantly correlated with caregiving time ( r  = − 0.257; − 0.212), caregivers’ EQ-5D-5L scores ( r  = 0.453; 0.326) and the CarerQol-7D also with care recipients’ EQ-5D-5L scores ( r  = 0.247). CarerQol-7D scores differed significantly with relevant caregiving characteristics (e.g. nature and severity of care recipients’ health status, sharing household) and both the CarerQol-7D and CarerQol-VAS with the overall care experience. Conclusion Our findings confirmed the validity of the Hungarian language version of the CarerQol and support the cross-cultural validity of the instrument. CarerQol-7D scores performed better in distinguishing caregiving situation characteristics than the general happiness measure CarerQol-VAS. Care recipients’ health status was only weakly associated with informal caregivers’ care-related quality of life and happiness. Caregivers’ own health and caregiving circumstances were more strongly associated with these scores.

Background The Versus Arthritis Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire (MSK-HQ) measures symptom severity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of people with musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions. We aimed to test the psychometric properties of the MSK-HQ among the general adult population and identify the determinants of MSK-HQ states. In addition, we aimed to explore the relationship between MSK-HQ and standard well-being measurement tools. Methods The translation proccess of the MSK-HQ into Hungarian followed the standard methods provided by the developer. A cross-sectional online survey was performed in Hungary involving a population normative sample ( N  = 2004, women: 53.1%; mean age: 48.3, SD = 16.6 years). Socio-demographic characteristics and self-reported MSK disorders were recorded. Alongside the MSK-HQ, standard measures of HRQoL (EQ-5D-5L), physical functioning (HAQ-DI) and well-being (ICECAP-A/O, WHO-5, Happiness VAS) were applied. Clinical and convergent validity were assessed by subgroup comparisons (Mann–Whitney-U and Kruskal–Wallis tests) and Spearman’s rank correlations. Internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach’s alpha. Test–retest reliability ( N  = 50) was evaluated by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Predictors of MSK-HQ were analysed by ordinary least square multiple regressions. Results The mean MSK-HQ index score was 44.1 (SD = 9.9). MSK-HQ scores were significantly lower in subgroups with self-reported MSK disorders. Correlations were strong between MSK-HQ and EQ-5D-5L (0.788), EQ VAS (0.644) and HAQ-DI (-0.698) and moderate with the well-being measures ( p  < 0.05). Cronbach’s alpha was 0.924 and ICC was 0.936 ( p  < 0.05). Being a man, living in the capital, having higher income and education were positively associated with MSK-HQ scores. Conclusions This is the first study to prove the validity and reliability of the MSK-HQ among the general public. The impact of socio-demographic characteristics on MSK-HQ scores deserves consideration in clinical studies.

ObjectivesTo estimate the cost-effectiveness of using a removable boot versus a cast following ankle fracture from the National Health Service and Personal Social Services (NHS+PSS) payer and societal perspectives and explore the impact of both treatments on participants’ activities of daily living.DesignCost-effectiveness analyses and qualitative interviews performed alongside a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial.SettingEight UK NHS secondary care trusts.Participants243 participants (60.5% female, on average 48.2 years of age (SD 16.4)) with ankle fracture. Qualitative interviews with 16 participants. Interventions removable air boot versus plaster cast 2 weeks after surgery weight bearing as able with group-specific exercises.Primary and secondary outcome measuresQuality-adjusted life years (QALYs) estimated from the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire, costs and incremental net monetary benefit statistics measured 12 weeks after surgery, for a society willing-to-pay £20 000 per QALY.ResultsCare in the boot group cost, on average, £88 (95% CI £22 to £155) per patient more than in the plaster group from the NHS+PSS perspective. When including all societal costs, the boot saved, on average, £676 per patient (95% CI −£337 to £1689). Although there was no evidence of a QALY difference between the groups (−0.0020 (95% CI −0.0067 to 0.0026)), the qualitative findings suggest participants felt the boot enhanced their quality of life. Patients in the boot felt more independent and empowered to take on family responsibilities and social activities.ConclusionsWhile the removable boot is slightly more expensive than plaster cast for the NHS+PSS payer at 12 weeks after surgery, it reduces productivity losses and the need for informal care while empowering patients. Given that differences in QALYs and costs to the NHS are small, the decision to use a boot or plaster following ankle surgery could be left to patients’ and clinicians’ preferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN15497399, South Central—Hampshire A Research Ethics Committee (reference 14/SC/1409).

Background/Objectives: Parental involvement is essential in managing type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) in children, particularly with the growing use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). Validated tools assessing parental self-efficacy in this context remain limited. This study aimed to validate the Parental Self-Efficacy Scale for Diabetes Management (PSESDM) among parents of children using a CGM sensor and to examine its associations with diabetes outcomes and parental characteristics. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted involving 106 parent–child dyads at a university pediatric diabetes center. Parents completed the Hungarian PSESDM. Data regarding children’s HbA1c level were recorded, along with standard measures of their general and diabetes-specific quality of life (EQ-5D-Y-3L, PedsQL Diab); data regarding parents’ health literacy (Chew), fear of hypoglycemia (HFS), health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), and capability well-being (ICECAP-A) were also collected. The PSESDM’s reliability, internal consistency, and discriminant and criterion validity were assessed using standard statistical methods. Results: The PSESDM demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.857) and strong item–total correlations (range: 0.678–0.791). Higher parental self-efficacy was significantly associated with better glucose control (lower HbA1c, rs = −0.50) and weakly correlated with the child’s diabetes-specific quality of life (rs = 0.20). Among parental characteristics, self-efficacy correlated strongly with capability well-being (rs = 0.52), moderately with health literacy (rs = −0.30), and showed no difference between socio-demographic subgroups, except for the subgroup related to income. Conclusions: The PSESDM is a valid and reliable tool for measuring self-efficacy in parents of children with T1DM using CGM sensors. Its associations with children’s HbA1c levels, diabetes-specific quality of life, and parental characteristics support its clinical relevance and potential use in identifying families at risk for poorer diabetes outcomes.

Objective The ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O were validated as capability wellbeing measures of adults aged 18 + and 65 + years, respectively. We aimed to compare their measurement properties in age group 50-70. Methods Data were derived from a cross-sectional survey among a sample representative for the adult Hungarian population. Respondents aged between 50 and 70 filled in both the ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O questionnaires. We assessed and compared feasibility, agreement, discriminatory power, convergent and content validity of the two instruments and explored the determinants of the differences between the two measures. Results 707 respondents (99.4%) provided full answers to both questionnaires (46.3% women, average age 60.1 years). The instruments showed similar construct and convergent validity and discriminatory power. Pearson-correlations between instrument items were strong (r>0.5). ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O scores could be calculated from each other with a good confidence (R² = 0.69 and 0.71). ICECAP-O scores (mean 0.87, SD = 0.12) were systematically higher than ICECAP-A scores (0.85, SD = 0.15) in most subgroups. The difference increased with the deterioration of capability and health, and with age. Regression results showed that employment and health status had larger marginal effect on the ICECAP-A than on the ICECAP-O scores, and these effects were larger than the effect of age on both measures. Conclusion Validity of both instruments was confirmed in the age groups 50-70. Given that employment and health status are important determinants of the differences between the two instruments besides age, the possibility of linking the choice between ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O to these factors should be investigated by further research.

Patient reported outcomes and costs of illness are useful to capture some of the multiple effects of a disease and its treatments. Our aim was to assess quality of life (QoL) and costs of Parkinson's disease (PD) in Hungary, and to analyze their associations. A cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted in one neurology university clinic. Clinical characteristics, PD related resource utilizations and productivity loss in the past 12 months were recorded; the Hoehn&Yahr (HY) scale, PDQ-39 and EQ-5D questionnaires were applied. Cost calculation was performed from the societal perspective. 110 patients (34.5% female) were involved with mean age of 63.3 (SD=11.3) and disease duration of 8.2 (SD=5.8) years. PDQ-39 summary score was 48.1 (SD=13.4). The average EQ-5D score was 0.59 (SD=0.28), and was significantly lower than the population norm in age-groups 45-74. The correlation was significant between EQ-5D and PDQ-39 (-0.47, p=0.000), the HY scale and EQ-5D (-0.3416, p=0.0008) and PDQ-39 (0.3419, p=0.0006) scores. The total mean cost was €6030.2 (SD=6163.0)/patient/year (direct medical 35.7%, direct non-medical 29.4%, indirect cost 34.9%). A one year increase in disease duration and 0.1 decrease of the EQ-5D utility score increase the yearly costs by 8 to 10%, and 7.8%, respectively. The effect of the PDQ-39 score on total cost was not significant. Disease severity and public health importance of PD are clearly demonstrated by the magnitude of QoL loss. PD-related costs are substantial, but are much lower in Hungary than in Western European countries. Disease duration and EQ-5D score are significant proxy of costs.