This review investigates the effectiveness of utilizing foreign physicians or International Medical Graduates to alleviate medical shortages in rural and underserved areas of developed countries. Conducted in February 2024, this systematic review follows PRISMA 2020 guidelines, analysing 15 English-language studies from the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. The focus is on comparing physicians with international graduation to national graduates in rural and underserved contexts. Results reveal diverse trends across countries: in the United States, national graduates are generally more represented in rural areas, while foreign physicians are more prevalent in Health Professional Shortage Areas. In Canada, foreign graduates are more common in rural areas, varying by province. Australia and New Zealand show foreign physicians practicing more in rural areas than national counterparts. This study underscores significant reliance on foreign physicians to mitigate rural healthcare disparities. While this strategy partially addresses immediate shortages, long-term effectiveness is uncertain due to retention and integration challenges. Future policies should focus on sustainable solutions for equitable healthcare access and physicians’ retention in underserved areas. This review emphasizes also the need for Europe-specific studies and further evaluation of policy effectiveness.

This review investigates the effectiveness of utilizing foreign physicians or International Medical Graduates to alleviate medical shortages in rural and underserved areas of developed countries. Conducted in February 2024, this systematic review follows PRISMA 2020 guidelines, analysing 15 English-language studies from the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. The focus is on comparing physicians with international graduation to national graduates in rural and underserved contexts. Results reveal diverse trends across countries: in the United States, national graduates are generally more represented in rural areas, while foreign physicians are more prevalent in Health Professional Shortage Areas. In Canada, foreign graduates are more common in rural areas, varying by province. Australia and New Zealand show foreign physicians practicing more in rural areas than national counterparts. This study underscores significant reliance on foreign physicians to mitigate rural healthcare disparities. While this strategy partially addresses immediate shortages, long-term effectiveness is uncertain due to retention and integration challenges. Future policies should focus on sustainable solutions for equitable healthcare access and physicians’ retention in underserved areas. This review emphasizes also the need for Europe-specific studies and further evaluation of policy effectiveness.

Background & Objective This systematic review evaluates the impact of guidelines on healthcare professionals’ behavior and explores the resulting outcomes. Methods Using PRISMA methodology, Scopus and Web of Science databases were searched, yielding 624 results. After applying inclusion criteria, 67 articles were selected for in-depth analysis. Results The studies focused on key clusters: Target behaviors, Effectiveness, Research designs, Behavioral frameworks, and Publication outlets. Prescription behavior was the most studied (58.2%), followed by other health-related behaviors (31.3%) and hygiene practices (10.4%). Significant behavior changes were reported in 46.3% of studies, with 17.9% showing negative effects, and 22.4% reporting mixed results. Quantitative methods dominated (56.8%), while qualitative methods (19.4%) and review designs (13.4%) were less common. Theoretical Domain Framework (TDF) and Behavior Change Wheel (BCW) were frequently used frameworks, with the UK and the USA contributing most studies. Medical doctors (44.8%) were the primary participants, followed by general healthcare providers (37.3%). Conclusions The study highlights the varied effectiveness of guidelines, with prescription behavior being the most investigated. Guidelines influenced behavior positively in less than half of the cases, and doctors were the primary focus, rather than nurses. The complexity of interventions suggests a need for further research to develop more effective behavioral interventions and to standardize methodological approaches to reduce clinical variation in healthcare.

Background Migrants and refugees may not access mental health services due to linguistic and cultural discordance between them and health and social care professionals (HSCPs). The aim of this review is to identify the communication needs and barriers experienced by third-country nationals (TCNs), their carers, and HSCPs, as well as the strategies they use and their preferences when accessing/providing mental health services and language barriers are present. Methods We undertook a rapid systematic review of the literature (01/01/2011 – 09/03/2022) on seeking and/or providing mental health services in linguistically discordant settings. Quality appraisal was performed, data was extracted, and evidence was reviewed and synthesised qualitatively. Results 58/5,650 papers met the inclusion criteria. Both TCNs (and their carers) and HSCPs experience difficulties when seeking or providing mental health services and language barriers are present. TCNs and HSCPs prefer linguistically and culturally concordant provision of mental health services but professional interpreters are often required. However, their use is not always preferred, nor is it without problems. Conclusions Language barriers impede TCNs’ access to mental health services. Improving language support options and cultural competency in mental health services is crucial to ensure that individuals from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds can access and/or provide high-quality mental health services.

Background Village doctors, as gatekeepers of the health system for rural residents in China, are often confronted with adversity in providing the basic public healthcare services. Objective We sought to summarize the training contents, training method, training location, and training costs most preferred by village doctors in China and hope to provide evidence and support for the government to deliver better training in the future. Methods Eight databases were searched to include studies that reported on the training needs of village doctors in China. We undertook a systematic review and a narrative synthesis of data. Results A total of 38 cross-sectional studies including 35,545 participants were included. In China, village doctors have extensive training needs. “Clinical knowledge and skill” and “diagnosis and treatment of common disease” were the most preferred training content; “continuing medical education” was the most preferred delivery method; above county- and county-level hospitals were the most desirable training locations, and the training costs were expected to be low or even free. Conclusion Village doctors in various regions of China have similar preferences for training. Thus, future training should focus more on the training needs and preferences of village doctors.

The systematic use of patient-reported measures (PRMs) [i.e., patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs)] is advocated as an effective way to improve care practices. However, whether PRMs can lead to the performance assessment of healthcare organisations (HCOs) through valid quality indicators (QIs) for national purposes (i.e., public reporting and paying for performance) is open to debate. This study undertakes a scoping review to examine the use of PRMs as QIs for health policy purposes and to identify the challenges faced in the emblematic case of oncology. According to PRISMA guidelines, published papers, websites and reports published by national and international initiatives were analysed using five online databases (Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, JSTOR and Google Advanced Search), and then studied using the same keywords. We selected 61 articles and 19 websites/reports and identified 29 PREMs and 48 PROMs from 14 countries and two international initiatives that routinely used them as QIs for HCOs’ comparisons. Four types of barriers to this specific use were identified relating to the definition of a standard set, scientific soundness, data collection, and the actionability of such measures. Despite current developments, different barriers still must be overcome before PRMs can be used for health policy purposes in oncology. Future research is needed to ensure that valid QIs related to PRMs are applied at a national level.

Introduction: Several clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for cancer pain have been published; however, the quality of these guidelines has not been evaluated so far. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality of CPGs for cancer pain and identify gaps limiting knowledge. Methods: We systematically searched seven databases and 12 websites from their inception to July 20, 2021, to include CPGs related to cancer pain. We used the validated Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation Instrument II (AGREE II) and Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) checklist to assess the methodology and reporting quality of eligible CPGs. The overall agreement among reviewers with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated. The development methods of CPGs, strength of recommendations, and levels of evidence were determined. Results: Eighteen CPGs published from 1996 to 2021 were included. The overall consistency of the reviewers in each domain was acceptable (ICC from 0.76 to 0.95). According to the AGREE II assessment, only four CPGs were determined to be recommended without modifications. For reporting quality, the average reporting rates for all seven domains of CPGs was 57.46%, with the highest domain in domain 3 (evidence, 68.89%) and the lowest domain in domain 5 (review and quality assurance, 33.3%). Conclusion: The methodological quality of cancer pain CPGs fluctuated widely, and the complete reporting rate in some areas is very low. Researchers need to make greater efforts to provide high-quality guidelines in this field to clinical decision-making.

The notion of value-based healthcare has become increasingly important for healthcare institutions, and more and more countries are adopting its representative approach—namely, the US Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Triple Aim framework for optimizing health system performance in terms of population health, patient experience, and cost of care. In this study, using a five-step systematic review protocol and PRISMA methods we systematically review and analyze with descriptive and qualitative analysis methods literature on the results of using the Triple Aim framework for assessment at the health system level, especially the concept of balance among the framework's goals. Inclusion criteria were that the paper evaluated the policy-level impact of value-based healthcare movements based on the Triple Aim goals, discussing at least one of the goals or the balance. Our analysis shows a lack of consensus on the impact of each goal and on the concept of a balance between the goals, and a paucity of literature related to the pursuit of the Triple Aim at the health system level. To properly evaluate the impact of the value-based healthcare movement, a standard set of measures aligned with the context is needed. The results of this study are expected to contribute to the improved assessment of health system performance, development of the Triple Aim framework's measures, and ultimately, enhanced effectiveness in achieving healthcare goals.

Objectives Studies on variability drivers of treatment costs in hospitals can provide the necessary information for policymakers and healthcare providers seeking to redesign reimbursement schemes and improve the outcomes-over-cost ratio, respectively. This systematic literature review, focusing on the hospital perspective, provides an overview of studies focusing on variability in treatment cost, an outline of their study characteristics and cost drivers, and suggestions on future research methodology. Methods We adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We searched PubMED/MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, Science direct, OvidSP and Cochrane library. Two investigators extracted and appraised data for citation until October 2020. Results 90 eligible articles were included. Patient, treatment and disease characteristics and, to a lesser extent, outcome and institutional characteristics were identified as significant variables explaining cost variability. In one-third of the studies, the costing method was classified as unclear due to the limited explanation provided by the authors. Conclusion Various patient, treatment and disease characteristics were identified to explain hospital cost variability. The limited transparency on how hospital costs are defined is a remarkable observation for studies wherein cost variability is the main focus. Recommendations relating to variables, costs, and statistical methods to consider when designing and conducting cost variability studies were provided.

Many policies promote patient and public involvement (PPI) in health research and healthcare provision. However, research points to uncertainties about its impact. The aim of the article was to compare what types of impact have been reported in reviews of PPI in health research and healthcare, respectively, and to map differences and similarities between the review studies. A review of reviews was undertaken with a search strategy based on the PCC mnemonic for scoping reviews. Four online databases were searched. Studies published in English between the years 2000-2020, using a review-based method and aiming to demonstrate impact of PPI were included, resulting in sixty-one articles. More reviews of PPI impact in healthcare than in health research were found, although the latter included a larger number of empirical studies. Systematic reviews, quality assessment and quantitative studies were less common in health research. Many original studies were from the United Kingdom. In health research, reported impacts most often related to research design and delivery, while in healthcare the most commonly reported impacts were individual health outcomes/clinical outcomes. However, there is still uncertainty about the strength of evidence for PPI, in particular when it comes to collective involvement in healthcare, that is in policymaking and service improvement initiatives at hospitals or the like.