To evaluate the motor proficiency, identify risk factors for abnormal motor scores, and examine the relationship between motor proficiency and health-related quality of life in school-aged patients with CHD.

Patients ≥ 4 years old referred to the cardiac neurodevelopmental program between June 2017 and April 2020 were included. Motor skills were evaluated by therapist-administered Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency Second-Edition Short Form and parent-reported Adaptive Behavior Assessment System and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Inventory System Physical Functioning questionnaires. Neuropsychological status and health-related quality of life were assessed using a battery of validated questionnaires. Demographic, clinical, and educational variables were collected from electronic medical records. General linear modelling was used for multivariable analysis.

The median motor proficiency score was the 10th percentile, and the cohort (n = 272; mean age: 9.1 years) scored well below normative values on all administered neuropsychological questionnaires. In the final multivariable model, worse motor proficiency score was associated with family income, presence of a genetic syndrome, developmental delay recognised in infancy, abnormal neuroimaging, history of heart transplant, and executive dysfunction, and presence of an individualised education plan (p < 0.03 for all predictors). Worse motor proficiency correlated with reduced health-related quality of life. Parent-reported adaptive behaviour (p < 0.001) and physical functioning (p < 0.001) had a strong association with motor proficiency scores.

This study highlights the need for continued motor screening for school-aged patients with CHD. Clinical factors, neuropsychological screening results, and health-related quality of life were associated with worse motor proficiency.

INDUCT (Interdisciplinary Network for Dementia Using Current Technology), and DISTINCT (Dementia Inter-sectorial strategy for training and innovation network for current technology) are two Marie Sklodowska-Curie funded International Training Networks that aimed to develop a multi-disciplinary, inter-sectorial educational research framework for Europe to improve technology and care for people with dementia, and to provide the evidence to show how technology can improve the lives of people with dementia.

In INDUCT (2016-2020) 15 Early Stage Researchers worked on projects in the areas of Technology to support everyday life; technology to promote meaningful activities; and healthcare technology. In DISTINCT (2019-2023) 15 Early Stage Researchers worked on technology to promote Social health in three domains: fulfilling ones potential and obligations in society, managing one’s own life, and participation in social and other meaningful activities.

Both networks adopted three transversal objectives: 1) To determine practical, cognitive and social factors needed to make technology more useable for people with dementia; 2) To evaluate the effectiveness of specific contemporary technology; 3) To trace facilitators and barriers for implementation of technology in dementia care.

The main recommendations resulting from all research projects are integrated in a web-based digital Best Practice Guidance on Human Interaction with Technology in Dementia which was recently updated (Dec 2022 and June 2023) and will be presented at the congress. The recommendations are meant for different target groups, i.e. people in different stages of dementia, their (in)formal carers, policy makers, designers and researchers, who can easily find the recommendations relevant to them in the Best Practice Guidance by means of a digital selection tool.

The INDUCT/DISTINCT Best Practice Guidance informs on how to improve the development, usage, impact and implementation of technology for people with dementia in various technology areas. This Best Practice Guidance is the result of intensive collaborative partnership of INDUCT and DISTINCT with academic and non-academic partners as well as the involvement of representatives of the different target groups throughout the projects.

Neurodevelopmental challenges are the most prevalent comorbidity associated with a diagnosis of critical CHD, and there is a high incidence of gross and fine motor delays noted in early infancy. The frequency of motor delays in hospitalised infants with critical CHD requires close monitoring from developmental therapies (physical therapists, occupational therapists, and speech-language pathologists) to optimise motor development. Currently, minimal literature defines developmental therapists’ role in caring for infants with critical CHD in intensive or acute care hospital units.

This article describes typical infant motor skill development, how the hospital environment and events surrounding early cardiac surgical interventions impact those skills, and how developmental therapists support motor skill acquisition in infants with critical CHD. Recommendations for healthcare professionals and those who provide medical or developmental support in promotion of optimal motor skill development in hospitalised infants with critical CHD are discussed.

Infants with critical CHD requiring neonatal surgical intervention experience interrupted motor skill interactions and developmental trajectories. As part of the interdisciplinary team working in intensive and acute care settings, developmental therapists assess, guide motor intervention, promote optimal motor skill acquisition, and support the infant’s overall development.

Children with CHD are at risk for neurodevelopmental delays, and length of hospitalisation is a predictor of poorer long-term outcomes. Multiple aspects of hospitalisation impact neurodevelopment, including sleep interruptions, limited holding, and reduced developmental stimulation. We aimed to address modifiable factors by creating and implementing an interdisciplinary inpatient neurodevelopmental care programme in our Heart Institute.

In this quality improvement study, we developed an empirically supported approach to neurodevelopmental care across the continuum of hospitalisation for patients with CHD using three plan-do-study-act cycles. With input from multi-level stakeholders including parents/caregivers, we co-designed interventions that comprised the Cardiac Inpatient Neurodevelopmental Care Optimization (CINCO) programme. These included medical/nursing orders for developmental care practices, developmental kits for patients, bedside developmental plans, caregiver education and support, developmental care rounds, and a specialised volunteer programme. We obtained data from the electronic health record for patients aged 0–2 years admitted for at least 7 days to track implementation.

There were 619 admissions in 18 months. Utilisation of CINCO interventions increased over time, particularly for the medical/nursing orders and caregiver handouts. The volunteer programme launch was delayed but grew rapidly and within six months, provided over 500 hours of developmental interaction with patients.

We created and implemented a low-cost programme that systematised and expanded upon existing neurodevelopmental care practices in the cardiac inpatient units. Feasibility was demonstrated through increasing implementation rates over time. Key takeaways include the importance of multi-level stakeholder buy-in and embedding processes in existing clinical workflows.

The aim of this study was to suggest options for a national and standardized process for the reimbursement of costly drugs provided in Austrian hospitals.

For answering the research questions, reimbursement processes of ten countries were investigated and the strengths and weaknesses of elaborated options of actions were analyzed, resulting in suggestions for solutions in the Austrian reimbursement processes for hospital drugs.

Based on the information derived from the international analysis and the deliberation of the strengths and weaknesses on optional approaches, as well as, on the consideration of the existing reimbursement processes in Austria, three options to reorganize the current decentralized inpatient reimbursement process in Austria were suggested. The first option presents a process following the established processes of the decision making for outpatient drugs. The second option suggests stronger coordination of and cooperation across the existing processes of the nine regional “Pharmaceutical and Therapeutics Committees”. The third option proposes to expand the already established reimbursement process for non-drug interventions.

Evidence-based, transparent, fair and efficient resource allocations are needed for priority setting decisions. However, a decision process can be based on the best available evidence, can be fair and transparent, although it might be substantially more time-consuming. Thus, a pragmatic balance between quality, transparency and timeliness is crucial.

In the context of limited healthcare resources and high healthcare expenditures, the introduction of new, cost-intensive medicines forces decision-makers to prioritize drug funding, especially in the areas of orphan diseases and oncology. In democratic societies, health policy decisions need to be evidence-based, transparent, fair, and efficient. Therefore, in some countries standardized (transparent) processes exist. In Austria, decisions on the reimbursement of new medicines have not been made for a long time. The aim of the present study was to develop different scenarios for a standardized, centralized reimbursement process for expensive hospital drugs in Austria that favors democratic decisions.

A multi-stage approach was undertaken. Firstly, the reimbursement processes (only for original preparations) in Austria and other selected countries were investigated. Secondly, the strengths and weaknesses of these processes were analyzed based on predefined criteria, following the concepts of “accountability for reasonableness” (A4R) and “deliberative decision making”. Thirdly, scenarios for an Austria-wide uniform reimbursement process for hospital drugs were developed.

Three scenarios were identified: (i) a reimbursement process for hospital drugs that follows the existing reimbursement process in the outpatient sector in Austria; (ii) a cooperative of decentralized Pharmaceutical and Therapeutics Committees for procurement, use, and reimbursement decisions for hospital drugs; and (iii) an adaptation of the existing reimbursement process of non-drug, highly specialized technologies to pharmaceutical interventions.

According to the concepts of A4R and deliberative decision making, a transparent, evidence-based, fair, and efficient allocation of limited healthcare resources is indispensable for justifying decisions on health funding priorities in democracies. However, these criteria can be diametrically opposed. For example, methods, processes, and decisions can be evidence based, transparent, and fair, but also significantly more time consuming. Thus, a balance between the individual options for action is necessary, and priorities must be set.

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) are neurodevelopmental disorders with considerable overlap in terms of their defining symptoms of compulsivity/repetitive behaviour. Little is known about the extent to which ASD and OCD have common versus distinct neural correlates of compulsivity. Previous research points to potentially common dysfunction in frontostriatal connectivity, but direct comparisons in one study are lacking. Here, we assessed frontostriatal resting-state functional connectivity in youth with ASD or OCD, and healthy controls. In addition, we applied a cross-disorder approach to examine whether repetitive behaviour across ASD and OCD has common neural substrates.

A sample of 78 children and adolescents aged 8–16 years was used (ASD n = 24; OCD n = 25; healthy controls n = 29), originating from the multicentre study COMPULS. We tested whether diagnostic group, repetitive behaviour (measured with the Repetitive Behavior Scale-Revised) or their interaction was associated with resting-state functional connectivity of striatal seed regions.

No diagnosis-specific differences were detected. The cross-disorder analysis, on the other hand, showed that increased functional connectivity between the left nucleus accumbens (NAcc) and a cluster in the right premotor cortex/middle frontal gyrus was related to more severe symptoms of repetitive behaviour.

We demonstrate the fruitfulness of applying a cross-disorder approach to investigate the neural underpinnings of compulsivity/repetitive behaviour, by revealing a shared alteration in functional connectivity in ASD and OCD. We argue that this alteration might reflect aberrant reward or motivational processing of the NAcc with excessive connectivity to the premotor cortex implementing learned action patterns.