1
|
Shafaghat T, Bastani P, Nasab MHI, Bahrami MA, Montazer MRA, Zarchi MKR, Edirippulige S. A framework of evidence-based decision-making in health system management: a best-fit framework synthesis. Arch Public Health 2022; 80:96. [PMID: 35351210 PMCID: PMC8961960 DOI: 10.1186/s13690-022-00843-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/30/2021] [Accepted: 03/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Scientific evidence is the basis for improving public health; decision-making without sufficient attention to evidence may lead to unpleasant consequences. Despite efforts to create comprehensive guidelines and models for evidence-based decision-making (EBDM), there isn`t any to make the best decisions concerning scarce resources and unlimited needs. The present study aimed to develop a comprehensive applied framework for EBDM. Methods This was a Best-Fit Framework (BFF) synthesis conducted in 2020. A comprehensive systematic review was done via six main databases including PUBMED, Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct, EMBASE, and ProQuest using related keywords. After the evidence quality appraisal, data were extracted and analyzed via thematic analysis. Results of the thematic analysis and the concepts generated by the research team were then synthesized to achieve the best-fit framework applying Carroll et al. (2013) approach. Results Four thousand six hundred thirteen studies were retrieved, and due to the full-text screening of the studies, 17 final articles were selected for extracting the components and steps of EBDM in Health System Management (HSM). After collecting, synthesizing, and categorizing key information, the framework of EBDM in HSM was developed in the form of four general scopes. These comprised inquiring, inspecting, implementing, and integrating, which included 10 main steps and 47 sub-steps. Conclusions The present framework provided a comprehensive guideline that can be well adapted for implementing EBDM in health systems and related organizations especially in underdeveloped and developing countries where there is usually a lag in updating and applying evidence in their decision-making process. In addition, this framework by providing a complete, well-detailed, and the sequential process can be tested in the organizational decision-making process by developed countries to improve their EBDM cycle.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tahereh Shafaghat
- School of Management and Medical Informatics, Health Human Recourses Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.,Department of Health Care Management, School of Public Health, Health Policy and Management Research Center, Shahid Saoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran
| | - Peivand Bastani
- School of Management and Medical Informatics, Health Human Recourses Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. .,Faculty of Health and Behavioral Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Queensland, QLD, 4072, Brisbane, Australia.
| | - Mohammad Hasan Imani Nasab
- Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Lorestan University of Medical Sciences, Khorramabad, Iran
| | - Mohammad Amin Bahrami
- School of Management and Medical Informatics, Health Human Recourses Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
| | - Mahsa Roozrokh Arshadi Montazer
- Student Research Committee, School of Management and Medical Informatics, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
| | - Mohammad Kazem Rahimi Zarchi
- Department of Health Care Management, School of Public Health, Health Policy and Management Research Center, Shahid Saoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran
| | - Sisira Edirippulige
- Faculty of Medicine, Center for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bussières A, Cancelliere C, Ammendolia C, Comer CM, Zoubi FA, Châtillon CE, Chernish G, Cox JM, Gliedt JA, Haskett D, Jensen RK, Marchand AA, Tomkins-Lane C, O'Shaughnessy J, Passmore S, Schneider MJ, Shipka P, Stewart G, Stuber K, Yee A, Ornelas J. Non-Surgical Interventions for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Leading To Neurogenic Claudication: A Clinical Practice Guideline. THE JOURNAL OF PAIN 2021; 22:1015-1039. [PMID: 33857615 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2021.03.147] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2021] [Revised: 03/14/2021] [Accepted: 03/16/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) causing neurogenic claudication (NC) is increasingly common with an aging population and can be associated with significant symptoms and functional limitations. We developed this guideline to present the evidence and provide clinical recommendations on nonsurgical management of patients with LSS causing NC. Using the GRADE approach, a multidisciplinary guidelines panel based recommendations on evidence from a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews published through June 2019, or expert consensus. The literature monitored up to October 2020. Clinical outcomes evaluated included pain, disability, quality of life, and walking capacity. The target audience for this guideline includes all clinicians, and the target patient population includes adults with LSS (congenital and/or acquired, lateral recess or central canal, with or without low back pain, with or without spondylolisthesis) causing NC. The guidelines panel developed 6 recommendations based on randomized controlled trials and 5 others based on professional consensus, summarized in 3 overarching recommendations: (Grade: statements are all conditional/weak recommendations) Recommendation 1. For patients with LSS causing NC, clinicians and patients may initially select multimodal care nonpharmacological therapies with education, advice and lifestyle changes, behavioral change techniques in conjunction with home exercise, manual therapy, and/or rehabilitation (moderate-quality evidence), traditional acupuncture on a trial basis (very low-quality evidence), and postoperative rehabilitation (supervised program of exercises and/or educational materials encouraging activity) with cognitive-behavioral therapy 12 weeks postsurgery (low-quality evidence). Recommendation 2. In patients LSS causing NC, clinicians and patients may consider a trial of serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors or tricyclic antidepressants. (very low-quality evidence). Recommendation 3. For patients LSS causing NC, we recommend against the use of the following pharmacological therapies: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, methylcobalamin, calcitonin, paracetamol, opioids, muscle relaxants, pregabalin (consensus-based), gabapentin (very low-quality), and epidural steroidal injections (high-quality evidence). PERSPECTIVE: This guideline, on the basis of a systematic review of the evidence on the nonsurgical management of lumbar spine stenosis, provides recommendations developed by a multidisciplinary expert panel. Safe and effective non-surgical management of lumbar spine stenosis should be on the basis of a plan of care tailored to the individual and the type of treatment involved, and multimodal care is recommended in most situations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- André Bussières
- School of Physical Medicine & Occupational Therapy, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Département Chiropratique, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Quebec, Canada.
| | - Carolina Cancelliere
- Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Oshawa, Canada
| | - Carlo Ammendolia
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto and Mount Sinai Hospital, Ontario, Canada
| | - Christine M Comer
- Leeds Community Healthcare NHS Trust, Leeds, United Kingdom/ Faculty of Medicine, University of Leeds, United Kingdom
| | - Fadi Al Zoubi
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong
| | | | - Greg Chernish
- Family Medicine at the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | | | - Jordan A Gliedt
- Department of Neurosurgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
| | | | - Rikke Krüger Jensen
- NIKKB and Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark
| | - Andrée-Anne Marchand
- Département Chiropratique, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Quebec, Canada
| | - Christy Tomkins-Lane
- Department of Health and Physical Education, Mount Royal University, Calgary, Canada
| | - Julie O'Shaughnessy
- Département Chiropratique, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Quebec, Canada
| | - Steven Passmore
- Faculty of Kinesiology & Recreation Management, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | - Michael J Schneider
- Department of Physical Therapy, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Clinical and Translational Science Institute, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | | | | | - Kent Stuber
- Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario
| | - Albert Yee
- Health Systems Management, Rush University, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Joseph Ornelas
- American Hip Institute, Des Plaines, Illinois; Clinical and Translational Science Institute, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Roseleur J, Partington A, Karnon J. Scoping review of Australian evaluations of healthcare delivery models: are we making the most of the evidence? AUST HEALTH REV 2021; 44:557-562. [PMID: 32600524 DOI: 10.1071/ah19188] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/20/2019] [Accepted: 11/18/2019] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
Objective Healthcare delivery models describe the organisation of healthcare practitioners and other resources to provide health care for a defined patient population. The organisation of health care has a predominant effect on the receipt of timely and appropriate health care. Efforts to improve healthcare delivery should be evidence informed, and large numbers of evaluations of healthcare delivery models have been undertaken. This paper presents a scoping review of Australian evaluations of new healthcare delivery models to inform a discussion of the appropriate use of such evidence to improve the efficiency and sustainability of the Australian health system. Methods A systematic scoping review was undertaken, following an a priori published protocol. PubMed, Embase and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) were searched for primary comparative studies of healthcare delivery models undertaken in Australia and published between 2009 and 2018. Primary prevention studies, such as health promotion activities, were excluded. Results Of 14923 citations, 636 studies were included in the scoping review. Of these, 383 (60%) were randomised control trials. There were 18 clinical specialties in which over 10 evaluations were identified. Most models involved allied health practitioners or nurses. Conclusion Evaluations of healthcare delivery models provide important evidence that can be used to improve the use of the most important and costly assets of health systems, namely the healthcare practitioners who deliver health care. A nationally coordinated system is required to support local health services to assess the local value of alternative healthcare delivery models. What is known about the topic? The organisation and delivery of health care is continuously evolving in response to changes in the demand and supply of health care. New healthcare delivery models are often evaluated in specific locations, but it is not clear how such evidence informs the delivery of care in other locations. What does this paper add? This paper reports the findings of a scoping review of Australian evaluations of healthcare delivery models, highlighting the large and increasing number of such evaluations that have been published in the past 10 years. What are the implications for practitioners? Opportunities to improve health system efficiency are likely being lost due to the underuse of the available Australian evidence on new healthcare delivery models. Local health services need support to interpret such evidence in their local context, which could be provided through the development of a national framework for local evaluation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jacqueline Roseleur
- Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute, Flinders University, Sturt Road, Bedford Park, Adelaide, SA 5042, Australia. ; ; and School of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia; and Corresponding author.
| | - Andrew Partington
- Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute, Flinders University, Sturt Road, Bedford Park, Adelaide, SA 5042, Australia. ; ; and Macquarie University Centre for the Health Economy, Macquarie University, 3 Innovation Road, Macquarie Park, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia
| | - Jonathan Karnon
- Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute, Flinders University, Sturt Road, Bedford Park, Adelaide, SA 5042, Australia. ;
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Shafaghat T, Imani Nasab MH, Bahrami MA, Kavosi Z, Roozrokh Arshadi Montazer M, Rahimi Zarchi MK, Bastani P. A mapping of facilitators and barriers to evidence-based management in health systems: a scoping review study. Syst Rev 2021; 10:42. [PMID: 33516269 PMCID: PMC7847165 DOI: 10.1186/s13643-021-01595-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/29/2020] [Accepted: 01/20/2021] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Healthcare settings are complex, and the decision-making process is usually complicated, too. Precise use of best evidence from different sources for increasing the desired outcomes is the result of EBM. Therefore, this study aimed to map the potential facilitators and barriers to EBM in health systems to help the healthcare managers to better implement EBM in their organizations. METHODS The present study was a scoping review (SR) conducted in 2020 based on the integration of the frameworks presented by Arksey and O'Malley (2005) and Levac et al. (2010) considering the Joanna Briggs Institute guideline (2015). These frameworks consist of 6 steps. After finalizing the search strategy, 7 databases were searched, and the PRISMA-ScR was used to manage the retrieval and inclusion of the evidence. Microsoft Excel 2013 was used to extract the data, and the graphic description was presented. The summative analysis approach was used applying MAXQDA10. RESULTS According to the systematic search, 4815 studies were retrieved after eliminating duplicates and unrelated articles, 49 articles remained to extract EBM facilitators and barriers. Six main aspects attitude toward EBM, external factors, contextual factors, resources, policies and procedures, and research capacity and data availability were summarized as EBM facilitators. The barriers to EBM were similarly summarized as attitude toward EBM, external factors, contextual factors, policies and procedures, limited resources, and research capacity and data availability. The streamgraphs describe that the international attention to the sub-aspects of facilitators and barriers of EBM has been increased since 2011. CONCLUSIONS The importance of decision-making regarding complex health systems, especially in terms of resource constraints and uncertainty conditions, requires EBM in the health system as much as possible. Identifying the factors that facilitate the use of evidence, as well as its barriers to management and decision-making in the organization, can play an important role in making systematic and reliable decisions that can be defended by the officials and ultimately lead to greater savings in organization resources and prevent them from being wasted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tahereh Shafaghat
- Student Research Committee, School of Management and Medical Informatics, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
| | - Mohammad Hasan Imani Nasab
- Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Lorestan University of Medical Sciences, Khorramabad, Iran
| | - Mohammad Amin Bahrami
- Health Human Resources Research Center, School of Management and Medical Informatics, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
| | - Zahra Kavosi
- Health Human Resources Research Center, School of Management and Medical Informatics, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
| | - Mahsa Roozrokh Arshadi Montazer
- Student Research Committee, School of Management and Medical Informatics, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
| | - Mohammad Kazem Rahimi Zarchi
- Health Policy and Management Research Center, Department of Health Care Management, School of Public Health, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran
| | - Peivand Bastani
- Health Human Resources Research Center, School of Management and Medical Informatics, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
De Gagne JC, Yang Y, Rushton S, Koppel PD, Hall K. Email Use Reconsidered in Health Professions Education: Viewpoint. JMIR MEDICAL EDUCATION 2020; 6:e19300. [PMID: 32478659 PMCID: PMC7296417 DOI: 10.2196/19300] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2020] [Revised: 05/09/2020] [Accepted: 05/14/2020] [Indexed: 05/06/2023]
Abstract
Email has become a popular means of communication in the past 40 years, with more than 200 billion emails sent each day worldwide. When used appropriately, email can be an effective and useful form of correspondence, although improper practices, such as email incivility, can present challenges. Email is ubiquitous in education and health care, where it is used for student-to-teacher, provider-to-provider, and patient-to-provider communications, but not all students, faculty members, and health professionals are skilled in its use. This paper examines the challenges and opportunities posed by email communication in health professions education and reveals important deficiencies in training, as well as steps that can be taken by health professions educators to address them. Recommendations are offered to help health professions educators develop approaches for teaching email professionalism.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Yesol Yang
- Duke University School of Nursing, Durham, NC, United States
| | - Sharron Rushton
- Duke University School of Nursing, Durham, NC, United States
| | - Paula D Koppel
- Duke University School of Nursing, Durham, NC, United States
| | - Katherine Hall
- West Virginia University School of Nursing, Morgantown, WV, United States
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Bibliometric Review of the Knowledge Base on Healthcare Management for Sustainability, 1994–2018. SUSTAINABILITY 2019. [DOI: 10.3390/su12010205] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
In response to the United Nations’ (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), health care organizations throughout the world have adopted management initiatives designed to increase their sustainability. This review of research used bibliometric methods to analyze a dataset comprised of 477 documents extracted from the Scopus database. The review sought to document research on sustainable healthcare management (SHM) that has accumulated over the past 25 years. Results indicated that the intellectual structure of this body of knowledge is comprised of three schools of thought: (1) sustainable change in health care services, (2) innovations in managing health care operations, and (3) prioritizing and allocating resources for sustainability. The review also highlighted the recent topical focus of research in this literature. Key topics were linked to organization and management of health care services, quality of patient care, and sustainability of health care delivery.
Collapse
|
7
|
Shrestha RM, Ghimire M, Shakya P, Ayer R, Dhital R, Jimba M. School health and nutrition program implementation, impact, and challenges in schools of Nepal: stakeholders' perceptions. Trop Med Health 2019; 47:32. [PMID: 31114429 PMCID: PMC6515607 DOI: 10.1186/s41182-019-0159-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2019] [Accepted: 04/24/2019] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The School Health and Nutrition (SHN) program is a cost-effective intervention for resource-poor countries. SHN program aims to provide timely support and preventive measures to improve the health of school children, which can be associated with their cognitive development, learning, and academic performance. Stakeholders at different tiers can play significant roles in the program implementation and its success. Their perceptions are equally important to provide information on the factors influencing the implementation process and help to identify the gaps in the process. However, the evidence is scarce on the school health and nutrition policy and program implementation in developing countries. No study has yet explored stakeholders' perceptions on the SHN program implementation process in low-income countries, including Nepal. Therefore, we conducted a qualitative study to explore (1) the SHN program implementation, (2) its impact, and (3) challenges in Nepal. Methods We conducted a qualitative study through 32 in-depth interviews of the key informants who were actively involved in SHN program implementation in Nepal. The key informants were identified through personal network and snowballing procedure. We adopted a thematic approach for the data analysis. Results We categorized interview data into three broad themes: (1) SHN program implementation, (2) its impact, and (3) challenges during implementation. Almost all the key informants appreciated the program for its positive impact on students, schools, and communities. The positive impacts included improved students' health and school environment and enhanced community awareness. However, the key impediments in implementing the program included a lack of coordination between stakeholders, lack of resources, limited training opportunities, and doubts regarding the sustainability of the program. Conclusions This study provided a deeper understanding of the linkage between the SHN program implementation, impact, and challenges in Nepal. Despite the challenges, all the stakeholders acknowledged that the SHN program had positive impacts on students, schools, and communities. Our findings highlighted that stakeholders from all tiers should coordinate, collaborate, and continue their efforts to effectively implement and expand the program nationwide. Awareness campaigns and advocacy for the program are indispensable to pull more resources from relevant stakeholders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachana Manandhar Shrestha
- 1Department of Community and Global Health, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-0033 Japan
| | - Mamata Ghimire
- 2Department of Health Care Policy and Management, Graduate School of Comprehensive Human Sciences, University of Tsukuba, 1-1-1, Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 301-8577 Japan
| | - Prakash Shakya
- 3Graduate School of International Cooperation Studies, Kyorin University, 5-4-1, Shimorenjaku, Mitaka-shi, Tokyo, 181-8612 Japan
| | - Rakesh Ayer
- 1Department of Community and Global Health, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-0033 Japan
| | - Rolina Dhital
- 1Department of Community and Global Health, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-0033 Japan
| | - Masamine Jimba
- 1Department of Community and Global Health, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-0033 Japan
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Harris C, Allen K, Ramsey W, King R, Green S. Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 11: reporting outcomes of an evidence-driven approach to disinvestment in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res 2018; 18:386. [PMID: 29843702 PMCID: PMC5975394 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-018-3172-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/06/2017] [Accepted: 05/01/2018] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background This is the final paper in a thematic series reporting a program of Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) in a local healthcare setting. The SHARE Program was established to explore a systematic, integrated, evidence-based organisation-wide approach to disinvestment in a large Australian health service network. This paper summarises the findings, discusses the contribution of the SHARE Program to the body of knowledge and understanding of disinvestment in the local healthcare setting, and considers implications for policy, practice and research. Discussion The SHARE program was conducted in three phases. Phase One was undertaken to understand concepts and practices related to disinvestment and the implications for a local health service and, based on this information, to identify potential settings and methods for decision-making about disinvestment. The aim of Phase Two was to implement and evaluate the proposed methods to determine which were sustainable, effective and appropriate in a local health service. A review of the current literature incorporating the SHARE findings was conducted in Phase Three to contribute to the understanding of systematic approaches to disinvestment in the local healthcare context. SHARE differed from many other published examples of disinvestment in several ways: by seeking to identify and implement disinvestment opportunities within organisational infrastructure rather than as standalone projects; considering disinvestment in the context of all resource allocation decisions rather than in isolation; including allocation of non-monetary resources as well as financial decisions; and focusing on effective use of limited resources to optimise healthcare outcomes. Conclusion The SHARE findings provide a rich source of new information about local health service decision-making, in a level of detail not previously reported, to inform others in similar situations. Multiple innovations related to disinvestment were found to be acceptable and feasible in the local setting. Factors influencing decision-making, implementation processes and final outcomes were identified; and methods for further exploration, or avoidance, in attempting disinvestment in this context are proposed based on these findings. The settings, frameworks, models, methods and tools arising from the SHARE findings have potential to enhance health care and patient outcomes. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3172-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Harris
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. .,Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
| | - Kelly Allen
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Wayne Ramsey
- Medical Services and Quality, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Richard King
- Medicine Program, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Sally Green
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Zhu Z, Xing W, Hu Y, Zhou Y, Gu Y. Improving Evidence Dissemination and Accessibility through a Mobile-based Resource Platform. J Med Syst 2018; 42:118. [DOI: 10.1007/s10916-018-0969-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/04/2017] [Accepted: 05/18/2018] [Indexed: 10/14/2022]
|
10
|
Harris C, Green S, Ramsey W, Allen K, King R. Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 9: conceptualising disinvestment in the local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res 2017; 17:633. [PMID: 28886735 PMCID: PMC5591535 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-017-2507-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2016] [Accepted: 08/03/2017] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This is the ninth in a series of papers reporting a program of Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) in a local healthcare setting. The disinvestment literature has broadened considerably over the past decade; however there is a significant gap regarding systematic, integrated, organisation-wide approaches. This debate paper presents a discussion of the conceptual aspects of disinvestment from the local perspective. DISCUSSION Four themes are discussed: Terminology and concepts, Motivation and purpose, Relationships with other healthcare improvement paradigms, and Challenges to disinvestment. There are multiple definitions for disinvestment, multiple concepts underpin the definitions and multiple alternative terms convey these concepts; some definitions overlap and some are mutually exclusive; and there are systematic discrepancies in use between the research and practice settings. Many authors suggest that the term 'disinvestment' should be avoided due to perceived negative connotations and propose that the concept be considered alongside investment in the context of all resource allocation decisions and approached from the perspective of optimising health care. This may provide motivation for change, reduce disincentives and avoid some of the ethical dilemmas inherent in other disinvestment approaches. The impetus and rationale for disinvestment activities are likely to affect all aspects of the process from identification and prioritisation through to implementation and evaluation but have not been widely discussed. A need for mechanisms, frameworks, methods and tools for disinvestment is reported. However there are several health improvement paradigms with mature frameworks and validated methods and tools that are widely-used and well-accepted in local health services that already undertake disinvestment-type activities and could be expanded and built upon. The nature of disinvestment brings some particular challenges for policy-makers, managers, health professionals and researchers. There is little evidence of successful implementation of 'disinvestment' projects in the local setting, however initiatives to remove or replace technologies and practices have been successfully achieved through evidence-based practice, quality and safety activities, and health service improvement programs. CONCLUSIONS These findings suggest that the construct of 'disinvestment' may be problematic at the local level. A new definition and two potential approaches to disinvestment are proposed to stimulate further research and discussion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Harris
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
- Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Sally Green
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Wayne Ramsey
- Medical Services and Quality, Monash Health, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Kelly Allen
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
- Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Richard King
- Medicine Program, Monash Health, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Harris C, Green S, Elshaug AG. Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 10: operationalising disinvestment in a conceptual framework for resource allocation. BMC Health Serv Res 2017; 17:632. [PMID: 28886740 PMCID: PMC5590199 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-017-2506-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2016] [Accepted: 08/03/2017] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background This is the tenth in a series of papers reporting a program of Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) in a local healthcare setting. After more than a decade of research, there is little published evidence of active and successful disinvestment. The paucity of frameworks, methods and tools is reported to be a factor in the lack of success. However there are clear and consistent messages in the literature that can be used to inform development of a framework for operationalising disinvestment. This paper, along with the conceptual review of disinvestment in Paper 9 of this series, aims to integrate the findings of the SHARE Program with the existing disinvestment literature to address the lack of information regarding systematic organisation-wide approaches to disinvestment at the local health service level. Discussion A framework for disinvestment in a local healthcare setting is proposed. Definitions for essential terms and key concepts underpinning the framework have been made explicit to address the lack of consistent terminology. Given the negative connotations of the word ‘disinvestment’ and the problems inherent in considering disinvestment in isolation, the basis for the proposed framework is ‘resource allocation’ to address the spectrum of decision-making from investment to disinvestment. The focus is positive: optimising healthcare, improving health outcomes, using resources effectively. The framework is based on three components: a program for decision-making, projects to implement decisions and evaluate outcomes, and research to understand and improve the program and project activities. The program consists of principles for decision-making and settings that provide opportunities to introduce systematic prompts and triggers to initiate disinvestment. The projects follow the steps in the disinvestment process. Potential methods and tools are presented, however the framework does not stipulate project design or conduct; allowing application of any theories, methods or tools at each step. Barriers are discussed and examples illustrating constituent elements are provided. Conclusions The framework can be employed at network, institutional, departmental, ward or committee level. It is proposed as an organisation-wide application, embedded within existing systems and processes, which can be responsive to needs and priorities at the level of implementation. It can be used in policy, management or clinical contexts. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2506-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Harris
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. .,Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
| | - Sally Green
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Adam G Elshaug
- Menzies Centre for Health Policy, Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.,Lown Institute, Brookline, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Harris C, Allen K, Waller C, Dyer T, Brooke V, Garrubba M, Melder A, Voutier C, Gust A, Farjou D. Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 7: supporting staff in evidence-based decision-making, implementation and evaluation in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res 2017. [PMID: 28637473 PMCID: PMC5480160 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-017-2388-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/23/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This is the seventh in a series of papers reporting Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) in a local healthcare setting. The SHARE Program was a systematic, integrated, evidence-based program for resource allocation within a large Australian health service. It aimed to facilitate proactive use of evidence from research and local data; evidence-based decision-making for resource allocation including disinvestment; and development, implementation and evaluation of disinvestment projects. From the literature and responses of local stakeholders it was clear that provision of expertise and education, training and support of health service staff would be required to achieve these aims. Four support services were proposed. This paper is a detailed case report of the development, implementation and evaluation of a Data Service, Capacity Building Service and Project Support Service. An Evidence Service is reported separately. METHODS Literature reviews, surveys, interviews, consultation and workshops were used to capture and process the relevant information. Existing theoretical frameworks were adapted for evaluation and explication of processes and outcomes. RESULTS Surveys and interviews identified current practice in use of evidence in decision-making, implementation and evaluation; staff needs for evidence-based practice; nature, type and availability of local health service data; and preferred formats for education and training. The Capacity Building and Project Support Services were successful in achieving short term objectives; but long term outcomes were not evaluated due to reduced funding. The Data Service was not implemented at all. Factors influencing the processes and outcomes are discussed. CONCLUSION Health service staff need access to education, training, expertise and support to enable evidence-based decision-making and to implement and evaluate the changes arising from those decisions. Three support services were proposed based on research evidence and local findings. Local factors, some unanticipated and some unavoidable, were the main barriers to successful implementation. All three proposed support services hold promise as facilitators of EBP in the local healthcare setting. The findings from this study will inform further exploration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Harris
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. .,Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
| | - Kelly Allen
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Cara Waller
- Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Tim Dyer
- Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Vanessa Brooke
- Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Marie Garrubba
- Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Angela Melder
- Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Catherine Voutier
- Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Anthony Gust
- Clinical Information Management, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Dina Farjou
- Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Harris C, Allen K, Brooke V, Dyer T, Waller C, King R, Ramsey W, Mortimer D. Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 6: investigating methods to identify, prioritise, implement and evaluate disinvestment projects in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res 2017; 17:370. [PMID: 28545430 PMCID: PMC5445482 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-017-2269-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2016] [Accepted: 04/26/2017] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This is the sixth in a series of papers reporting Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) in a local healthcare setting. The SHARE program was established to investigate a systematic, integrated, evidence-based approach to disinvestment within a large Australian health service. This paper describes the methods employed in undertaking pilot disinvestment projects. It draws a number of lessons regarding the strengths and weaknesses of these methods; particularly regarding the crucial first step of identifying targets for disinvestment. METHODS Literature reviews, survey, interviews, consultation and workshops were used to capture and process the relevant information. A theoretical framework was adapted for evaluation and explication of disinvestment projects, including a taxonomy for the determinants of effectiveness, process of change and outcome measures. Implementation, evaluation and costing plans were developed. RESULTS Four literature reviews were completed, surveys were received from 15 external experts, 65 interviews were conducted, 18 senior decision-makers attended a data gathering workshop, 22 experts and local informants were consulted, and four decision-making workshops were undertaken. Mechanisms to identify disinvestment targets and criteria for prioritisation and decision-making were investigated. A catalogue containing 184 evidence-based opportunities for disinvestment and an algorithm to identify disinvestment projects were developed. An Expression of Interest process identified two potential disinvestment projects. Seventeen additional projects were proposed through a non-systematic nomination process. Four of the 19 proposals were selected as pilot projects but only one reached the implementation stage. Factors with potential influence on the outcomes of disinvestment projects are discussed and barriers and enablers in the pilot projects are summarised. CONCLUSION This study provides an in-depth insight into the experience of disinvestment in one local healthcare service. To our knowledge, this is the first paper to report the process of disinvestment from identification, through prioritisation and decision-making, to implementation and evaluation, and finally explication of the processes and outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Harris
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. .,Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
| | - Kelly Allen
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Vanessa Brooke
- Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Tim Dyer
- Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Cara Waller
- Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Richard King
- Medicine Program, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Wayne Ramsey
- Medical Services and Quality, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Duncan Mortimer
- Centre for Health Economics, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Harris C, Allen K, Waller C, Green S, King R, Ramsey W, Kelly C, Thiagarajan M. Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 5: developing a model for evidence-driven resource allocation in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res 2017; 17:342. [PMID: 28486973 PMCID: PMC5424307 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-017-2208-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2016] [Accepted: 03/31/2017] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background This is the fifth in a series of papers reporting Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) in a local healthcare setting. This paper synthesises the findings from Phase One of the SHARE Program and presents a model to be implemented and evaluated in Phase Two. Monash Health, a large healthcare network in Melbourne Australia, sought to establish an organisation-wide systematic evidence-based program for disinvestment. In the absence of guidance from the literature, the Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, an in-house ‘Evidence Based Practice Support Unit’, was asked to explore concepts and practices related to disinvestment, consider the implications for a local health service and identify potential settings and methods for decision-making. Methods Mixed methods were used to capture the relevant information. These included literature reviews; online questionnaire, interviews and structured workshops with a range of stakeholders; and consultation with experts in disinvestment, health economics and health program evaluation. Using the principles of evidence-based change, the project team worked with health service staff, consumers and external experts to synthesise the findings from published literature and local research and develop proposals, frameworks and plans. Results Multiple influencing factors were extracted from these findings. The implications were both positive and negative and addressed aspects of the internal and external environments, human factors, empirical decision-making, and practical applications. These factors were considered in establishment of the new program; decisions reached through consultation with stakeholders were used to define four program components, their aims and objectives, relationships between components, principles that underpin the program, implementation and evaluation plans, and preconditions for success and sustainability. The components were Systems and processes, Disinvestment projects, Support services, and Program evaluation and research. A model for a systematic approach to evidence-based resource allocation in a local health service was developed. Conclusion A robust evidence-based investigation of the research literature and local knowledge with a range of stakeholders resulted in rich information with strong consistent messages. At the completion of Phase One, synthesis of the findings enabled development of frameworks and plans and all preconditions for exploration of the four main aims in Phase Two were met. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2208-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Harris
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia. .,Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia.
| | - Kelly Allen
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.,Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia
| | - Cara Waller
- Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia
| | - Sally Green
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia
| | - Richard King
- Medicine Program, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia
| | - Wayne Ramsey
- Medical Services and Quality, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia
| | - Cate Kelly
- Medical Services, Melbourne Health, Victoria, Australia
| | - Malar Thiagarajan
- Ageing and Aged Care Branch, Department of Health and Human Services, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Harris C, Allen K, Waller C, Brooke V. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 3: examining how resource allocation decisions are made, implemented and evaluated in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res 2017; 17:340. [PMID: 28486953 PMCID: PMC5423420 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-017-2207-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2016] [Accepted: 03/31/2017] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
Background This is the third in a series of papers reporting a program of Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) in a local healthcare setting. Leaders in a large Australian health service planned to establish an organisation-wide, systematic, integrated, evidence-based approach to disinvestment. In order to introduce new systems and processes for disinvestment into existing decision-making infrastructure, we aimed to understand where, how and by whom resource allocation decisions were made, implemented and evaluated. We also sought the knowledge and experience of staff regarding previous disinvestment activities. Methods Structured interviews, workshops and document analysis were used to collect information from multiple sources in an environmental scan of decision-making systems and processes. Findings were synthesised using a theoretical framework. Results Sixty-eight respondents participated in interviews and workshops. Eight components in the process of resource allocation were identified: Governance, Administration, Stakeholder engagement, Resources, Decision-making, Implementation, Evaluation and, where appropriate, Reinvestment of savings. Elements of structure and practice for each component are described and a new framework was developed to capture the relationships between them. A range of decision-makers, decision-making settings, type and scope of decisions, criteria used, and strengths, weaknesses, barriers and enablers are outlined. The term ‘disinvestment’ was not used in health service decision-making. Previous projects that involved removal, reduction or restriction of current practices were driven by quality and safety issues, evidence-based practice or a need to find resource savings and not by initiatives where the primary aim was to disinvest. Measuring resource savings is difficult, in some situations impossible. Savings are often only theoretical as resources released may be utilised immediately by patients waiting for beds, clinic appointments or surgery. Decision-making systems and processes for resource allocation are more complex than assumed in previous studies. Conclusion There is a wide range of decision-makers, settings, scope and type of decisions, and criteria used for allocating resources within a single institution. To our knowledge, this is the first paper to report this level of detail and to introduce eight components of the resource allocation process identified within a local health service. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2207-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Harris
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia. .,Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia.
| | - Kelly Allen
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.,Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia
| | - Cara Waller
- Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia
| | - Vanessa Brooke
- Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Harris C, Allen K, King R, Ramsey W, Kelly C, Thiagarajan M. Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 2: identifying opportunities for disinvestment in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res 2017; 17:328. [PMID: 28476159 PMCID: PMC5420107 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-017-2211-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2016] [Accepted: 03/31/2017] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background This is the second in a series of papers reporting a program of Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) in a local healthcare setting. Rising healthcare costs, continuing advances in health technologies and recognition of ineffective practices and systematic waste are driving disinvestment of health technologies and clinical practices that offer little or no benefit in order to maximise outcomes from existing resources. However there is little information to guide regional health services or individual facilities in how they might approach disinvestment locally. This paper outlines the investigation of potential settings and methods for decision-making about disinvestment in the context of an Australian health service. Methods Methods include a literature review on the concepts and terminology relating to disinvestment, a survey of national and international researchers, and interviews and workshops with local informants. A conceptual framework was drafted and refined with stakeholder feedback. Results There is a lack of common terminology regarding definitions and concepts related to disinvestment and no guidance for an organisation-wide systematic approach to disinvestment in a local healthcare service. A summary of issues from the literature and respondents highlight the lack of theoretical knowledge and practical experience and provide a guide to the information required to develop future models or methods for disinvestment in the local context. A conceptual framework was developed. Three mechanisms that provide opportunities to introduce disinvestment decisions into health service systems and processes were identified. Presented in order of complexity, time to achieve outcomes and resources required they include 1) Explicit consideration of potential disinvestment in routine decision-making, 2) Proactive decision-making about disinvestment driven by available evidence from published research and local data, and 3) Specific exercises in priority setting and system redesign. Conclusion This framework identifies potential opportunities to initiate disinvestment activities in a systematic integrated approach that can be applied across a whole organisation using transparent, evidence-based methods. Incorporating considerations for disinvestment into existing decision-making systems and processes might be achieved quickly with minimal cost; however establishment of new systems requires research into appropriate methods and provision of appropriate skills and resources to deliver them. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2211-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Harris
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia. .,Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia.
| | - Kelly Allen
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.,Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia
| | - Richard King
- Medicine Program, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia
| | - Wayne Ramsey
- Medical Services and Quality, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia
| | - Cate Kelly
- Medical Services, Melbourne Health, Victoria, Australia
| | - Malar Thiagarajan
- Ageing and Aged Care Branch, Department of Health and Human Services, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Harris C, Ko H, Waller C, Sloss P, Williams P. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 4: exploring opportunities and methods for consumer engagement in resource allocation in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res 2017; 17:329. [PMID: 28476155 PMCID: PMC5420096 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-017-2212-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2016] [Accepted: 03/31/2017] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This is the fourth in a series of papers reporting a program of Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) in a local healthcare setting. Healthcare decision-makers have sought to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of services through removal or restriction of practices that are unsafe or of little benefit, often referred to as 'disinvestment'. A systematic, integrated, evidence-based program for disinvestment was being established within a large Australian health service network. Consumer engagement was acknowledged as integral to this process. This paper reports the process of developing a model to integrate consumer views and preferences into an organisation-wide approach to resource allocation. METHODS A literature search was conducted and interviews and workshops were undertaken with health service consumers and staff. Findings were drafted into a model for consumer engagement in resource allocation which was workshopped and refined. RESULTS Although consumer engagement is increasingly becoming a requirement of publicly-funded health services and documented in standards and policies, participation in organisational decision-making is not widespread. Several consistent messages for consumer engagement in this context emerged from the literature and consumer responses. Opportunities, settings and activities for consumer engagement through communication, consultation and participation were identified within the resource allocation process. Sources of information regarding consumer values and perspectives in publications and locally-collected data, and methods to use them in health service decision-making, were identified. A model bringing these elements together was developed. CONCLUSION The proposed model presents potential opportunities and activities for consumer engagement in the context of resource allocation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Harris
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia. .,Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Clayton, VIC, Australia.
| | - Henry Ko
- Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Clayton, VIC, Australia.,NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Cara Waller
- Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Clayton, VIC, Australia
| | - Pamela Sloss
- Consumer Representative, Monash Health, Clayton, VIC, Australia
| | - Pamela Williams
- Consumer Representative, Monash Health, Clayton, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Harris C, Green S, Ramsey W, Allen K, King R. Sustainability in Health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 1: introducing a series of papers reporting an investigation of disinvestment in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res 2017; 17:323. [PMID: 28472962 PMCID: PMC5418706 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-017-2210-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2016] [Accepted: 03/31/2017] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
This is the first in a series of papers reporting Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE). The SHARE Program is an investigation of concepts, opportunities, methods and implications for evidence-based investment and disinvestment in health technologies and clinical practices in a local healthcare setting. The papers in this series are targeted at clinicians, managers, policy makers, health service researchers and implementation scientists working in this context. This paper presents an overview of the organisation-wide, systematic, integrated, evidence-based approach taken by one Australian healthcare network and provides an introduction and guide to the suite of papers reporting the experiences and outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Harris
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia. .,Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia.
| | - Sally Green
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia
| | - Wayne Ramsey
- Medical Services and Quality, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia
| | - Kelly Allen
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.,Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia
| | - Richard King
- Medicine Program, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|