1
|
de Waure C, Calabrò GE, Ricciardi W. Recommendations to drive a value-based decision-making on vaccination. Expert Rev Vaccines 2022; 21:289-296. [PMID: 34931919 DOI: 10.1080/14760584.2022.2021880] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Health systems worldwide need to pay attention to both sustainability and quality. The explosion of health technologies represents a challenge for health systems' sustainability, and evidence-based tools should support resources allocation to guarantee a continuous quality improvement. The value-based approach could disentangle the full benefit of a health technology, and this is of utmost importance in the vaccination field because of several obstacles still existing in reaching optimal vaccination uptake. AREAS COVERED The paper conveys the evidence on the full value of vaccine(s)/vaccination based on the framework suggested by the Expert Panel on Effective Ways of Investing in Health of the European Commission. Indeed, evidence on the personal, technical, allocative, and societal value of vaccine(s)/vaccination published in the last decade was described as foundation of a following consultation with international experts of the field. The result was the issuing of recommendations for research, decision-making, and public engagement that aimed to drive a value-based decision-making on vaccination. EXPERT OPINION The development of vaccination programs based on the recognition of the full value of vaccine(s)/vaccination is essential. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to launch intersectoral and multidisciplinary research and implementation initiatives involving all relevant stakeholders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chiara de Waure
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
| | - Giovanna Elisa Calabrò
- Section of Hygiene, University Department of Life Sciences and Public Health, Università Cattolica Del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.,VIHTALI (Value in Health Technology and Academy for Leadership & Innovation), Spin-Off of Università Cattolica Del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Walter Ricciardi
- Section of Hygiene, University Department of Life Sciences and Public Health, Università Cattolica Del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Anderson M, Pitchforth E, Asaria M, Brayne C, Casadei B, Charlesworth A, Coulter A, Franklin BD, Donaldson C, Drummond M, Dunnell K, Foster M, Hussey R, Johnson P, Johnston-Webber C, Knapp M, Lavery G, Longley M, Clark JM, Majeed A, McKee M, Newton JN, O'Neill C, Raine R, Richards M, Sheikh A, Smith P, Street A, Taylor D, Watt RG, Whyte M, Woods M, McGuire A, Mossialos E. LSE-Lancet Commission on the future of the NHS: re-laying the foundations for an equitable and efficient health and care service after COVID-19. Lancet 2021; 397:1915-1978. [PMID: 33965070 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(21)00232-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/07/2020] [Revised: 12/10/2020] [Accepted: 01/07/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Anderson
- Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| | - Emma Pitchforth
- College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Miqdad Asaria
- Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| | - Carol Brayne
- Cambridge Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Barbara Casadei
- Radcliffe Department of Medicine, BHF Centre of Research Excellence, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Anita Charlesworth
- The Health Foundation, London, UK; College of Social Sciences, Health Services Management Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Angela Coulter
- Green Templeton College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Department of Regional Health Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Bryony Dean Franklin
- UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK; NIHR Imperial Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Cam Donaldson
- Yunus Centre for Social Business and Health, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK
| | | | | | - Margaret Foster
- National Health Service Wales Shared Services Partnership, Cardiff, UK
| | | | | | | | - Martin Knapp
- Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| | - Gavin Lavery
- Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, UK
| | - Marcus Longley
- Welsh Institute for Health and Social Care, University of South Wales, Pontypridd, UK
| | | | - Azeem Majeed
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Martin McKee
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | | | - Ciaran O'Neill
- School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Rosalind Raine
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Mike Richards
- Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK; The Health Foundation, London, UK
| | - Aziz Sheikh
- Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Peter Smith
- Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK; Centre for Health Economics and Policy Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Andrew Street
- Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| | - David Taylor
- UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK
| | - Richard G Watt
- Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Moira Whyte
- College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Michael Woods
- Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| | - Alistair McGuire
- Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| | - Elias Mossialos
- Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK; Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Rotteveel AH, Lambooij MS, van de Rijt JJA, van Exel J, Moons KGM, de Wit GA. What influences the outcome of active disinvestment processes in healthcare? A qualitative interview study on five recent cases of active disinvestment. BMC Health Serv Res 2021; 21:298. [PMID: 33794869 PMCID: PMC8017606 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-021-06298-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/13/2020] [Accepted: 03/19/2021] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recent attempts of active disinvestment (i.e. withdrawal of reimbursement by means of a policy decision) of reimbursed healthcare interventions in the Netherlands have differed in their outcome: some attempts were successful, with interventions actually being disinvested. Other attempts were terminated at some point, implying unsuccessful disinvestment. This study aimed to obtain insight into recent active disinvestment processes, and to explore what aspects affect their outcome. METHODS Semi-structured interviews were conducted from January to December 2018 with stakeholders (e.g. patients, policymakers, physicians) who were involved in the policy process of five cases for which the full or partial withdrawal of reimbursement was considered in the Netherlands between 2007 and 2017: benzodiazepines, medication for Fabry disease, quit smoking programme, psychoanalytic therapy and maternity care assistance. These cases covered both interventions that were eventually disinvested and interventions for which reimbursement was maintained after consideration. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, double coded and analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS The 37 interviews showed that support for disinvestment from stakeholders, especially from healthcare providers and policymakers, strongly affected the outcome of the disinvestment process. Furthermore, the institutional role of stakeholders as legitimized by the Dutch health insurance system, their financial interests in maintaining or discontinuing reimbursement, and the possibility to relieve the consequences of disinvestment for current patients affected the outcome of the disinvestment process as well. A poor organization of patient groups may make it difficult for patients to exert pressure, which may contribute to successful disinvestment. No evidence was found of a consistent role of the formal Dutch package criteria (i.e. effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, necessity and feasibility) in active disinvestment processes. CONCLUSIONS Contextual factors as well as the possibility to relieve the consequences of disinvestment for current patients are important determinants of the outcome of active disinvestment processes. These results provide insight into active disinvestment processes and their determinants, and provide guidance to policymakers for a potentially more successful approach for future active disinvestment processes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adriënne H Rotteveel
- Centre for Nutrition, Prevention and Health Services, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), PO Box 1, 3720, BA, Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000, DR, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, PO Box 85500, 3508, GA, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
| | - Mattijs S Lambooij
- Centre for Nutrition, Prevention and Health Services, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), PO Box 1, 3720, BA, Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Joline J A van de Rijt
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000, DR, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Job van Exel
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000, DR, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
- Erasmus School of Economics, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000, DR, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Karel G M Moons
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, PO Box 85500, 3508, GA, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - G Ardine de Wit
- Centre for Nutrition, Prevention and Health Services, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), PO Box 1, 3720, BA, Bilthoven, the Netherlands
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, PO Box 85500, 3508, GA, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Embrett M, Randall GE, Lavis JN, Dion ML. Conceptualising characteristics of resources withdrawal from medical services: a systematic qualitative synthesis. Health Res Policy Syst 2020; 18:123. [PMID: 33115486 PMCID: PMC7592573 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-020-00630-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2020] [Accepted: 09/07/2020] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Terms used to describe government-led resource withdrawal from ineffective and unsafe medical services, including 'rationing' and 'disinvestment', have tended to be used interchangeably, despite having distinct characteristics. This lack of descriptive precision for arguably distinct terms contributes to the obscurity that hinders effective communication and the achievement of evidence-based decision-making. The objectives of this study are to (1) identify the various terms used to describe resource withdrawal and (2) propose definitions for the key or foundational terms, which includes a clear description of the unique characteristics of each. METHODS This is a systematic qualitative synthesis of characteristics and terms found through a search of the academic and grey literature. This approach involved identifying commonly used resource withdrawal terms, extracting data about resource withdrawal characteristics associated with each term and conducting a comparative analysis by categorising elements as antecedents, attributes or outcomes. RESULTS Findings from an analysis of 106 documents demonstrated that terms used to describe resource withdrawal are inconsistently defined and applied. The characteristics associated with these terms, mainly antecedents and attributes, are used interchangeably by many authors but are differentiated by others. Our analysis resulted in the development of a framework that organises these characteristics to demonstrate the unique attributes associated with each term. To enhance precision, these terms were classified as either policy options or patient health outcomes and refined definitions for rationing and disinvestment were developed. Rationing was defined as resource withdrawal that denies, on average, patient health benefits. Disinvestment was defined as resource withdrawal that results in, on average, improved or no change in health benefits. CONCLUSION Agreement on the definition of various resource withdrawal terms and their key characteristics is required for transparent government decision-making regarding medical service withdrawal. This systematic qualitative synthesis presents the proposed definitions of resource withdrawal terms that will promote consistency, benefit public policy dialogue and enhance the policy-making process for health systems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark Embrett
- Faculty of Health, School of Nursing, Dalhouise University, 5869 University Avenue, PO BOX 15000, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 4R2, Canada. .,St. Francis Xavier University, 4130 University Avenue, Antigonish, Nova Scotia, B2G2W5, Canada.
| | - Glen E Randall
- Health Policy and Management, DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S4M4, Canada.,McMaster University, DSB-229, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4M4, Canada
| | - John N Lavis
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S4L6, Canada.,McMaster Health Forum, MML-417, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S4L6, Canada
| | - Michelle L Dion
- Department of Political Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S4L6, Canada.,Kenneth Taylor Hall (KTH) 533, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S4L6, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Moberg L, Fredriksson M. Decommissioning in a local healthcare system in Sweden: responses to fiscal stress. BMC Health Serv Res 2020; 20:501. [PMID: 32493285 PMCID: PMC7271393 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-020-05328-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2020] [Accepted: 05/17/2020] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Drawing on the literature on cutback management, this article deals with healthcare decommissioning in times of austerity. Politicians and decision-makers are typically reluctant to decommission healthcare, and if they do, the public generally reacts strongly towards reductions in service supply. Despite this, comprehensive decommissioning does take place, though empirical knowledge about its effects and economic sustainability is limited. To further the understanding of healthcare decommissioning, this paper aims to introduce the concepts of cutback management into the research on healthcare decommissioning, and apply its components to an empirical case of comprehensive decommissioning. In doing so, the study analyses whether decommissioning measures can be expected to generate long- or short-term economic payoff, and considers what other effects they might have on the healthcare system. METHOD We developed a theoretical framework that enabled us to investigate the measures through which a local healthcare system in Sweden, region Dalarna, responded to an acute fiscal crisis in 2014, and what effects these measures are likely to generate. The method used was a deductive content analysis of Dalarna's decommissioning program, containing 122 austerity measures for saving 700 million Swedish Krona (SEK). RESULTS Dalarna's local decision-makers responded to the fiscal crisis through a combination of operational cuts (20% of undertaken measures), programme cuts (42% of undertaken measures), and structural reforms (38% of undertaken measures). The instruments most commonly used were increased patient fees and the merger of service facilities. By relying foremost on programme cuts and structural reforms, Dalarna adopted the measures most plausible to have moderate or long-term economic payoffs. Successful implementation, however, may be challenging and difficult to evaluate. CONCLUSIONS Healthcare politicians and decision makers have better potential to stabilize their long-term economic situation if they rely on responses such as operational cuts, programme cuts and structural reforms, as opposed to across-the-board cuts and cuts in investment and capital expenditures. However, with economics being only one important factor for sustainable healthcare systems, further studies should investigate how these measures affect important principles, such as equal healthcare distribution and access. TRIAL REGISTRATION Not applicable.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Linda Moberg
- Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Health Services Research, Uppsala University, Box 564, 751 22 Uppsala, Sweden. .,Department of Government, Uppsala University, Box 514, 751 20 Uppsala, Sweden.
| | - Mio Fredriksson
- Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Health Services Research, Uppsala University, Box 564, 751 22 Uppsala, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
An evidence-based framework for identifying technologies of no or low-added value (NLVT). Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2019; 36:50-57. [PMID: 31831086 DOI: 10.1017/s0266462319000734] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To synthetize the state of the art of methods for identifying candidate technologies for disinvestment and propose an evidence-based framework for executing this task. METHODS An interpretative review was conducted. A systematic literature search was performed to identify secondary or tertiary research related to disinvestment initiatives and/or any type of research that specifically described one or more methods for identifying potential candidates technologies, services, or practices for disinvestment. An iterative and critical analysis of the methods described alongside the disinvestment initiatives was performed. RESULTS Seventeen systematic reviews on disinvestment or related terms (health technology reassessment or medical reversal) were retrieved and methods of 45 disinvestment initiatives were compared. On the basis of this evidence, we proposed a new framework for identifying these technologies based on the wide definition of evidence provided by Lomas et al. The framework comprises seven basic approaches, eleven triggers and thirteen methods for applying these triggers, which were grouped in embedded and ad hoc methods. CONCLUSIONS Although identification methods have been described in the literature and tested in different contexts, the proliferation of terms and concepts used to describe this process creates considerable confusion. The proposed framework is a rigorous and flexible tool that could guide the implementation of strategies for identifying potential candidates for disinvestment.
Collapse
|
7
|
Fredriksson M, Gustafsson IB, Winblad U. Cuts without conflict: The use of political strategy in local health system retrenchment in Sweden. Soc Sci Med 2019; 237:112464. [PMID: 31430657 DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112464] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/26/2018] [Revised: 07/16/2019] [Accepted: 07/30/2019] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Disinvestment in health services is seen as challenging by decision-makers as the public usually reacts strongly to rationing and retrenchments. Drawing on the literature on welfare state retrenchment - the reduction of public expenditure by cutting costs or spending - this article explores the development and implementation of a comprehensive retrenchment programme in one local health system in Sweden (a so-called region). According to theory, retrenchments are both electorally risky and institutionally difficult. Nonetheless, they take place and in the local health system we investigate, without too extensive public protest and without decision-makers having to resign. The main question in this qualitative study is: why and how was it possible to make such comprehensive retrenchments despite being unpopular and facing many political and institutional barriers? Interviews with 18 local politicians and public servants were carried out between January 18 and April 3, 2017, and analysed from the perspective of political strategy. They showed that the serious budget deficit, and a shared understanding of what the region's problems were, are important explanations for why the retrenchment programme was possible to develop and implement. Based on a thorough internal review of the health system, a crisis discourse developed which partly depoliticized the retrenchment programme. Justification and framing are keys to how it was possible. The retrenchment programme was justified by arguing that current service provision exceeded that in comparable regions, and framed as necessary saving the local health system and enhancing quality. Important strategies were thus to redefine the retrenchments and to blame-share, the latter through politicians and public servants claiming responsibility together after involving the clinic managers. In sum, our study shows that the retrenchment literature and theories on political strategy may be fruitfully applied to the health-care sector as well. By studying the local level, our findings contribute to the retrenchment literature, indicating that political strategy at the local level is more about justification and blame sharing, than blame avoidance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mio Fredriksson
- Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, Box 564, 751 22 Uppsala, Sweden.
| | - Inga-Britt Gustafsson
- Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, Box 564, 751 22 Uppsala, Sweden.
| | - Ulrika Winblad
- Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, Box 564, 751 22 Uppsala, Sweden.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Specchia ML, La Torre G, Calabrò GE, Villari P, Grilli R, Federici A, Ricciardi W, de Waure C. Disinvestment in cancer care: a survey investigating European countries' opinions and views. Eur J Public Health 2019. [PMID: 29538676 DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/cky033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The current economic context calls for rationalizing health resources that can be pursued through disinvestment from low value health technologies to invest in the best performing ones, ensuring high healthcare quality. Oncology is a field where, because of high costs of health technologies and rapid innovation, disinvestment is crucial. Methods On this basis, the research team investigated through a survey, based on a questionnaire, opinions and views of representatives of European countries about disinvestment, in terms of fields of application, potential advocates and barriers, specifically focusing on cancer care. Results A total of 17 questionnaires were filled in (response rate: 32.1%). The survey showed disinvestment is applied in several countries as a tool for containing health care expenditures and identifying obsolete technologies/ineffective interventions. Clinicians' resistance to change and industries' opposition are recognized as the most important barriers to the implementation of disinvestment policies. Potential targets of disinvestment in cancer are seen in diagnostic and therapeutic areas. Conclusion Despite the agreement on fields of waste and of disinvestment policies, operational methods to put disinvestment in place are lacking. Since they should rely on an inclusive assessment of the technology, Health Technology Assessment may represent a good approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Lucia Specchia
- Section of Hygiene - Institute of Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, IRCCS Fondazione Policlinico "Agostino Gemelli", Rome, Italy
| | - Giuseppe La Torre
- Department of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza Università di Roma, Rome, Italy
| | - Giovanna Elisa Calabrò
- Section of Hygiene - Institute of Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, IRCCS Fondazione Policlinico "Agostino Gemelli", Rome, Italy
| | - Paolo Villari
- Department of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza Università di Roma, Rome, Italy
| | - Roberto Grilli
- Department of Clinical Governance, Local Health Authority of Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - Antonio Federici
- General Directorate for Health Prevention, Ministry of Health, Rome, Italy
| | - Walter Ricciardi
- Section of Hygiene - Institute of Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, IRCCS Fondazione Policlinico "Agostino Gemelli", Rome, Italy
| | - Chiara de Waure
- Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Ellen ME, Wilson MG, Vélez M, Shach R, Lavis JN, Grimshaw JM, Moat KA. Addressing overuse of health services in health systems: a critical interpretive synthesis. Health Res Policy Syst 2018; 16:48. [PMID: 29907158 PMCID: PMC6003114 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-018-0325-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2017] [Accepted: 05/08/2018] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Health systems are increasingly focusing on the issue of ‘overuse’ of health services and how to address it. We developed a framework focused on (1) the rationale and context for health systems prioritising addressing overuse, (2) elements of a comprehensive process and approach to reduce overuse and (3) implementation considerations for addressing overuse. Methods We conducted a critical interpretive synthesis informed by a stakeholder-engagement process. The synthesis identified relevant empirical and non-empirical articles about system-level overuse. Two reviewers independently screened records, assessed for inclusion and conceptually mapped included articles. From these, we selected a purposive sample, created structured summaries of key findings and thematically synthesised the results. Results Our search identified 3545 references, from which we included 251. Most articles (76%; n = 192) were published within 5 years of conducting the review and addressed processes for addressing overuse (63%; n = 158) or political and health system context (60%; n = 151). Besides negative outcomes at the patient, system and global level, there were various contextual factors to addressing service overuse that seem to be key issue drivers. Processes for addressing overuse can be grouped into three elements comprising a comprehensive approach, including (1) approaches to identify overused health services, (2) stakeholder- or patient-led approaches and (3) government-led initiatives. Key implementation considerations include the need to develop ‘buy in’ from stakeholders and citizens. Conclusions Health systems want to ensure the use of high-value services to keep citizens healthy and avoid harm. Our synthesis can be used by policy-makers, stakeholders and researchers to understand how the issue has been prioritised, what approaches have been used to address it and implementation considerations. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42014013204.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Moriah E Ellen
- Department of Health Systems Management, Guilford Glazer Faculty of Business and Management and Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, PO Box 653, 84105, Beer-Sheva, Israel.,Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, 4th Floor, 155 College St, Toronto, ON, M5T 3M6, Canada.,McMaster Health Forum, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, MML-417, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L6, Canada
| | - Michael G Wilson
- McMaster Health Forum, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, MML-417, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L6, Canada. .,Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada. .,Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada.
| | - Marcela Vélez
- McMaster Health Forum, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, MML-417, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L6, Canada.,Health Policy PhD Program, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada.,Faculty of Medicine, University of Antioquia, Cra. 51d #62-29, Medellín, Antioquia, Colombia
| | - Ruth Shach
- Brown School of Social Work, Washington University in St Louis, 1 Brookings Dr, St Louis, MO, 63130, United States of America
| | - John N Lavis
- McMaster Health Forum, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, MML-417, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L6, Canada.,Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada.,Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada.,Department of Political Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.,Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard School of Public Health, Cambridge, MA, United States of America
| | - Jeremy M Grimshaw
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada.,Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Kaelan A Moat
- McMaster Health Forum, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, MML-417, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L6, Canada.,Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada.,Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Reeves BC, Scott LJ, Taylor J, Hogg R, Rogers CA, Wordsworth S, Townsend D, Muldrew A, Peto T, Violato M, Dakin H, Cappel-Porter H, Mills N, O'Reilly D, Harding SP, Chakravarthy U. The Effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of Community versus Hospital Eye Service follow-up for patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration with quiescent disease (ECHoES): a virtual randomised balanced incomplete block trial. Health Technol Assess 2018; 20:1-120. [PMID: 27809956 DOI: 10.3310/hta20800] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) usually attend regular reviews, even when the disease is quiescent. Reviews are burdensome to health services, patients and carers. OBJECTIVES To compare the proportion of correct lesion classifications made by community-based optometrists and ophthalmologists from vignettes of patients; to estimate the cost-effectiveness of community follow-up by optometrists compared with follow-up by ophthalmologists in the Hospital Eye Service (HES); to ascertain views of patients, their representatives, optometrists, ophthalmologists and clinical commissioners on the proposed shared care model. DESIGN Community-based optometrists and ophthalmologists in the HES classified lesions from vignettes comprising clinical information, colour fundus photographs and optical coherence tomography images. Participants' classifications were validated against experts' classifications (reference standard). SETTING Internet-based application. PARTICIPANTS Ophthalmologists had to have ≥ 3 years post-registration experience in ophthalmology, have passed part 1 of the Royal College of Ophthalmologists, Diploma in Ophthalmology or equivalent examination, and have experience in the age-related macular degeneration service. Optometrists had to be fully qualified, be registered with the General Optical Council for ≥ 3 years and not be participating in nAMD shared care. INTERVENTIONS The trial sought to emulate a conventional trial in comparing optometrists' and ophthalmologists' decision-making, but vignettes, not patients, were assessed; therefore, there were no interventions. Participants received training prior to assessing vignettes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Primary outcome - correct classification of the activity status of a lesion based on a vignette, compared with a reference standard. Secondary outcomes - frequencies of potentially sight-threatening errors, participants' judgements about specific lesion components, participant-rated confidence in their decisions and cost-effectiveness of follow-up by community-based optometrists compared with HES ophthalmologists. RESULTS In total, 155 participants registered for the trial; 96 (48 in each professional group) completed training and main assessments and formed the analysis population. Optometrists and ophthalmologists achieved 1702 out of 2016 (84.4%) and 1722 out of 2016 (85.4%) correct classifications, respectively [odds ratio (OR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 1.25; p = 0.543]. Optometrists' decision-making was non-inferior to ophthalmologists' with respect to the pre-specified limit of 10% absolute difference (0.298 on the odds scale). Frequencies of sight-threatening errors were similar for optometrists and ophthalmologists [57/994 (5.7%) vs. 62/994 (6.2%), OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.57; p = 0.789]. Ophthalmologists assessed lesion components as present less often than optometrists and were more confident about their lesion classifications than optometrists. The mean care-pathway cost for assessment was very similar by group, namely £397.33 for ophthalmologists and £410.78 for optometrists. The optometrist-led monitoring reviews were slightly more costly and less effective than ophthalmologist-led reviews, although the differences were extremely small. There was consensus that optometrist-led monitoring has the potential to reduce clinical workload and be more patient-centred. However, potential barriers are ophthalmologists' perceptions of optometrists' competence, the need for clinical training, the ability of the professions to work collaboratively and the financial feasibility of shared care for Clinical Commissioning Groups. CONCLUSIONS The ability of optometrists to make nAMD retreatment decisions from vignettes is non-inferior to that of ophthalmologists. Various barriers to implementing shared cared for nAMD were identified. FUTURE WORK RECOMMENDATIONS The Effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of Community versus Hospital Eye Service follow-up for patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration with quiescent disease (ECHoES) study web application was robust and could be used for future training or research. The benefit of reducing HES workload was not considered in the economic evaluation. A framework of programme budgeting and marginal analysis could explicitly explore the resource implications of shifting resources within a given health service area, as the benefit of reducing HES workload was not considered in the economic evaluation. Future qualitative research could investigate professional differences of opinion that were identified in multidisciplinary focus groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN07479761. FUNDING This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 80. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Barnaby C Reeves
- Clinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Lauren J Scott
- Clinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Jodi Taylor
- Clinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Ruth Hogg
- Institute of Clinical Science, Centre for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Chris A Rogers
- Clinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Sarah Wordsworth
- Health Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Daisy Townsend
- School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Alyson Muldrew
- Institute of Clinical Science, Centre for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Tunde Peto
- National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, London, UK
| | - Mara Violato
- Health Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.,National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit in Gastrointestinal Infections, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Helen Dakin
- Health Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Heike Cappel-Porter
- Clinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Nicola Mills
- School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Dermot O'Reilly
- School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Simon P Harding
- Department of Eye and Vision Science, Institute of Ageing and Chronic Disease, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Usha Chakravarthy
- Institute of Clinical Science, Centre for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
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
|
12
|
Williams I, Harlock J, Robert G, Mannion R, Brearley S, Hall K. Decommissioning health care: identifying best practice through primary and secondary research – a prospective mixed-methods study. HEALTH SERVICES AND DELIVERY RESEARCH 2017. [DOI: 10.3310/hsdr05220] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BackgroundDecommissioning – defined as the planned process of removing, reducing or replacing health-care services – is an important component of current reforms in the NHS. However, the evidence base on which to guide policy and practice in this area is weak.AimThis study aims to formulate theoretically grounded, evidence-informed guidance to support best practice in effective decommissioning of NHS services.DesignThe overall approach is a sequential, multimethod research design. The study involves (1) a literature synthesis summarising what is known about decommissioning, an international expert Delphi study, 12 interviews with national/regional bodies and seven narrative vignettes from NHS leaders; (2) a survey of Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) in England (n = 56/211, 27%); (3) longitudinal, prospective case studies of four purposively sampled decommissioning projects comprising 59 semistructured interviews, 18 non-participant observations and documentary analysis; and (4) research with citizens, patient/service user representatives, carers, third-sector organisations and local community groups, including three focus groups (30 participants) and a second Delphi study (26 participants). The study took place over the period 2013–16.SettingThe English NHS.ResultsThere is a lack of robust evidence to guide decommissioning, but among experts there is a high level of consensus for the following good-practice principles: establish a strong leadership team, engage clinical leaders from an early stage and establish a clear rationale for change. The most common type of CCG decommissioning activity was ‘relocation or replacement of a service from an acute to a community setting’ (28% of all activities) and the majority of responding CCGs (77%) were planning to decommission services. Case studies demonstrate the need to (1) draw on evidence, reviews and policies to frame the problem; (2) build alliances in order to legitimise decommissioning as a solution; (3) seek wider acceptance, including among patients and community groups, of decommissioning; and (4) devise implementation plans that recognise the additional challenges of removal and replacement. Citizens, patient/service user representatives, carers, third-sector organisations and local community groups were more likely to believe that decommissioning is driven by financial and political concerns than by considerations of service quality and efficiency, and to distrust and/or resent decision-makers. Overall, the study suggests that failure rates in decommissioning are likely to be higher than in other forms of service change, suggesting the need for tailored design and implementation approaches.LimitationsThere were few opportunities for patient and public engagement in early phases of the research; however, this was mitigated by the addition of work package 4. We were unable to track outcomes of decommissioning activities within the time scales of the project and the survey response rate was lower than anticipated.ConclusionsDecommissioning is shaped by change management and implementation, evidence and information, and relationships and politics. We propose an expanded understanding, encompassing organisational and political factors, of how avoidance of loss affects the delivery of decommissioning programmes. Future work should explore the relationships between contexts, mechanisms and outcomes in decommissioning, develop the understanding of how loss affects decisions and explore the long-term impact of decommissioning and its impact on patient care and outcomes.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iestyn Williams
- Health Services Management Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Jenny Harlock
- Health Services Management Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Glenn Robert
- Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing & Midwifery, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Russell Mannion
- Health Services Management Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Sally Brearley
- Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing & Midwifery, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Kelly Hall
- Department of Social Policy and Social Work, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
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
|
14
|
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
|
15
|
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: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [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
|
16
|
Charles JM, Brown G, Thomas K, Johnstone F, Vandenblink V, Pethers B, Jones A, Edwards RT. Use of programme budgeting and marginal analysis as a framework for resource reallocation in respiratory care in North Wales, UK. J Public Health (Oxf) 2016; 38:e352-e361. [PMID: 26377991 PMCID: PMC5072164 DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdv128] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Since the global financial crisis, UK NHS spending has reduced considerably. Respiratory care is a large cost driver for Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, the largest health board in Wales. Under the remit of ‘prudent healthcare’ championed by the Welsh Health Minister, a Programme Budgeting Marginal Analysis (PBMA) of the North Wales respiratory care pathway was conducted. Methods A PBMA panel of directors of medicines management, therapies finance, planning, public health and healthcare professionals used electronic voting to establish criteria for decision-making and vote on candidate interventions in which to disinvest and invest. Results A sum of £86.9 million was spent on respiratory care in 2012–13. Following extensive discussion of 13 proposed candidate interventions facilitated by a chairperson, 4 candidates received recommendations to disinvest, 7 to invest and 2 to maintain current activity. Marginal analysis prioritized mucolytics and high antibiotic prescribing as areas for disinvestment, and medicines waste management and pulmonary rehabilitation for investment. Conclusions This exercise demonstrates the potential for health boards to use evidence-based approaches to reach potentially controversial disinvestment and investment decisions. Initial progress has begun with communication from the Medical Director in relation to the disinvestment in mucolytics prescribing and possible redirection of funding options being explored.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J M Charles
- Centre for Health Economics & Medicines Evaluation, Bangor University, Ardudwy, Normal Site, Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 2PZ, UK
| | - G Brown
- Public Health Wales, Preswylfa. Hendy Road, Mold, Flintshire CH7 1PZ, UK
| | - K Thomas
- Public Health Wales, Unit 10, Llys Castan, Parc Menai, Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 4DF, UK
| | - F Johnstone
- Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, Ysbyty Gwynedd, Penrhosgarnedd, Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 2PW, UK
| | - V Vandenblink
- Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, Ysbyty Gwynedd, Penrhosgarnedd, Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 2PW, UK
| | - B Pethers
- Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, Ysbyty Gwynedd, Penrhosgarnedd, Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 2PW, UK
| | - A Jones
- Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, Ysbyty Gwynedd, Penrhosgarnedd, Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 2PW, UK
| | - R T Edwards
- Centre for Health Economics & Medicines Evaluation, Bangor University, Ardudwy, Normal Site, Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 2PZ, UK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Smith N, Mitton C, Hiltz MA, Campbell M, Dowling L, Magee JF, Gujar SA. A Qualitative Evaluation of Program Budgeting and Marginal Analysis in a Canadian Pediatric Tertiary Care Institution. APPLIED HEALTH ECONOMICS AND HEALTH POLICY 2016; 14:559-568. [PMID: 27289589 DOI: 10.1007/s40258-016-0250-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Hospitals in Canada are being asked by governments to improve efficiency and do more with fewer resources. Healthcare decision makers are thus driven to find better ways to manage budgets and deliver on their mission. Formal processes of priority setting and resource allocation (PSRA) are one means to this end. OBJECTIVE This paper reports an evaluation of one such approach, Program Budgeting and Marginal Analysis (PBMA), as applied at a children and women's tertiary care facility in Nova Scotia, Canada. A brief evaluation conducted immediately after the conclusion of the PBMA process was supplemented with a larger retrospective evaluation. METHODS The retrospective evaluation included 26 face-to-face individual interviews with senior and middle managers who took part in PBMA. Interview transcripts were analyzed against a template consisting of 19 elements of structure, process, attitudes, and outcomes associated with high performance in PSRA. RESULTS Respondents had a good experience with the implementation of PBMA, and considered it an improvement over past practice. Success was attributed to effective leadership, and substantial efforts to engage staff members. Understanding of economic and ethical principles of decision making was reportedly increased. Areas for improvement included ensuring that everyone participated in good faith, better communication of final results, and stronger follow-through to determine if anticipated changes and benefits in fact occurred. CONCLUSION The evaluation framework employed here proved useful in assessing the quality of this resource allocation exercise. The results are directly useful to local decision makers, and the identified strengths and weaknesses are broadly consistent with those reported in studies of other organizations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neale Smith
- Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, University of British Columbia, 7th floor, 828 W 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z1M9, Canada.
| | - Craig Mitton
- Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, University of British Columbia, 7th floor, 828 W 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z1M9, Canada
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, V5Z1M9, Canada
| | - Mary-Ann Hiltz
- Quality and System Performance, IWK Health Centre, Halifax, NS, B3K6R8, Canada
| | - Matthew Campbell
- Quality and System Performance, IWK Health Centre, Halifax, NS, B3K6R8, Canada
| | - Laura Dowling
- Nova Scotia Health Authority, Halifax, NS, B3H1V7, Canada
| | - J Fergall Magee
- Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Saskatchewan and Saskatoon Health Region, 103 Hospital Dr, Saskatoon, Sk, SK S7N0W8, Canada
| | - Shashi Ashok Gujar
- Quality and System Performance, IWK Health Centre, Halifax, NS, B3K6R8, Canada
- Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, B3H1X5, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Smith N, Mitton C, Hall W, Bryan S, Donaldson C, Peacock S, Gibson JL, Urquhart B. High performance in healthcare priority setting and resource allocation: A literature- and case study-based framework in the Canadian context. Soc Sci Med 2016; 162:185-92. [PMID: 27367899 DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.06.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2013] [Revised: 03/04/2016] [Accepted: 06/15/2016] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
Priority setting and resource allocation, or PSRA, are key functions of executive teams in healthcare organizations. Yet decision-makers often base their choices on historical patterns of resource distribution or political pressures. Our aim was to provide leaders with guidance on how to improve PSRA practice, by creating organizational contexts which enable high performance. We carried out in-depth case studies of six Canadian healthcare organizations to obtain from healthcare leaders their understanding of the concept of high performance in PSRA and the factors which contribute to its achievement. Individual and group interviews were carried out (n = 62) with senior managers, middle managers and Board members. Site observations and document review were used to assist researchers in interpreting the interview data. Qualitative data were analyzed iteratively with the literature on empirical examples of PSRA practice, in order to develop a framework of high performance in PSRA. The framework consists of four domains - structures, processes, attitudes and behaviours, and outcomes - within which are 19 specific elements. The emergent themes derive from case studies in different kinds of health organizations (urban/rural, small/large) across Canada. The elements can serve as a checklist for 'high performance' in PSRA. This framework provides a means by which decision-makers in healthcare might assess their practice and identify key areas for improvement. The findings are likely generalizable, certainly within Canada but also across countries. This work constitutes, to our knowledge, the first attempt to present a full package of elements comprising high performance in health care PSRA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neale Smith
- Centre for Clinical Epidemiology & Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, University of British Columbia, 7th floor, 828 W 10th Avenue Vancouver, BC V5Z1M9, Canada.
| | - Craig Mitton
- Centre for Clinical Epidemiology & Evaluation, UBC, Canada; School of Population and Public Health, UBC, Canada
| | - William Hall
- School of Population and Public Health, UBC, Canada
| | - Stirling Bryan
- Centre for Clinical Epidemiology & Evaluation, UBC, Canada; School of Population and Public Health, UBC, Canada
| | - Cam Donaldson
- Yunus Centre for Social & Business Health, Glasgow Caledonian University, United Kingdom
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (ARCC), Canada; BC Cancer Agency, Canada
| | - Jennifer L Gibson
- Joint Centre for Bioethics, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Niven DJ, Mrklas KJ, Holodinsky JK, Straus SE, Hemmelgarn BR, Jeffs LP, Stelfox HT. Towards understanding the de-adoption of low-value clinical practices: a scoping review. BMC Med 2015; 13:255. [PMID: 26444862 PMCID: PMC4596285 DOI: 10.1186/s12916-015-0488-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 206] [Impact Index Per Article: 22.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2015] [Accepted: 09/15/2015] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Low-value clinical practices are common in healthcare, yet the optimal approach to de-adopting these practices is unknown. The objective of this study was to systematically review the literature on de-adoption, document current terminology and frameworks, map the literature to a proposed framework, identify gaps in our understanding of de-adoption, and identify opportunities for additional research. METHODS MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Database of Abstracts and Reviews of Effects, and CINAHL Plus were searched from 1 January 1990 to 5 March 2014. Additional citations were identified from bibliographies of included citations, relevant websites, the PubMed 'related articles' function, and contacting experts in implementation science. English-language citations that referred to de-adoption of clinical practices in adults with medical, surgical, or psychiatric illnesses were included. Citation selection and data extraction were performed independently and in duplicate. RESULTS From 26,608 citations, 109 were included in the final review. Most citations (65%) were original research with the majority (59%) published since 2010. There were 43 unique terms referring to the process of de-adoption-the most frequently cited was "disinvest" (39% of citations). The focus of most citations was evaluating the outcomes of de-adoption (50%), followed by identifying low-value practices (47%), and/or facilitating de-adoption (40%). The prevalence of low-value practices ranged from 16% to 46%, with two studies each identifying more than 100 low-value practices. Most articles cited randomized clinical trials (41%) that demonstrate harm (73%) and/or lack of efficacy (63%) as the reason to de-adopt an existing clinical practice. Eleven citations described 13 frameworks to guide the de-adoption process, from which we developed a model for facilitating de-adoption. Active change interventions were associated with the greatest likelihood of de-adoption. CONCLUSIONS This review identified a large body of literature that describes current approaches and challenges to de-adoption of low-value clinical practices. Additional research is needed to determine an ideal strategy for identifying low-value practices, and facilitating and sustaining de-adoption. In the meantime, this study proposes a model that providers and decision-makers can use to guide efforts to de-adopt ineffective and harmful practices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel J Niven
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T1Y 6J4, Canada. .,Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.
| | - Kelly J Mrklas
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.
| | - Jessalyn K Holodinsky
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.
| | - Sharon E Straus
- Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, M5B 1T8, Canada.
| | - Brenda R Hemmelgarn
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada. .,Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.
| | - Lianne P Jeffs
- Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, M5B 1T8, Canada.
| | - Henry Thomas Stelfox
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T1Y 6J4, Canada. .,Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada. .,Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Analysis of evidence supporting the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina reimbursement medicines lists: role of the WHO Essential Medicines List, Cochrane systematic reviews and technology assessment reports. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2015; 71:825-33. [PMID: 25956715 DOI: 10.1007/s00228-015-1861-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2015] [Accepted: 04/30/2015] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE We compared recently introduced Basic Medicines Lists of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BH) (FBH Basic Lists (FBLs)) with the World Health Organization (WHO) Essential Medicines List (EML) and the evidence supporting the inclusion of additional medicines on FBLs. METHODS The sources of data included the 18th edition of the EML and the following FBLs: 2013 Hospital List, 2013 A List in Outpatient Setting, and 2012 List financed by the Federal Solidarity Fund. For medicines found on FBLs but not on EML, we searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CSR) and public health technology assessment (HTA) reports for evidence. RESULTS FBLs had 134 medicines and 17 combinations that were not on EML, as well as 9 medicines deleted and 4 rejected from EML. EML had 82 medicines and 10 combinations of medicines not included in FBLs. Out of 125 medicines on FBLs but not on EML, 52 (42%) had good CSR evidence supporting their inclusion (n = 38) or exclusion (n = 14). For the rest (n = 74), we found 24 favourable HTA reports. For the total of 89 medicines (27%) listed on FBLs, we found no evidence (EML, CSR, HTA reports) good enough to justify their inclusion in FBLs. CONCLUSIONS In circumstances of scarce financial resources, greater reliance on well-established, proven list is crucial. Independent, unbiased, high-quality evidence such as WHO EML, CSR and HTA reports (national or international with local adaptations) should be used when deciding on medicine reimbursement.
Collapse
|
21
|
On the margins of health economics: a response to 'resolving NICE'S nasty dilemma'. HEALTH ECONOMICS, POLICY, AND LAW 2015; 10:183-93. [PMID: 25747196 DOI: 10.1017/s1744133114000462] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
Abstract
In a 2011 article published in this journal, Baker et al. set out to resolve a nasty dilemma for NICE by reconciling two approaches for determining whether adopting a new intervention would increase total health gains produced from available resources and hence increase system efficiency. In this response we show how the proposed reconciliation, as well as the two approaches on which it is based, fail to inform decision makers about the efficiency of a new intervention. We show how this arises from the misuse of incremental costs and effects of between-intervention comparisons as measures of changes in costs and effects associated with marginal adjustments to the scale of an intervention. Ironically, incremental data represent the choices faced by decision makers and we illustrate a method for determining unambiguously whether a new intervention represents an improvement in efficiency.
Collapse
|
22
|
Hollingworth W, Rooshenas L, Busby J, Hine CE, Badrinath P, Whiting PF, Moore THM, Owen-Smith A, Sterne JAC, Jones HE, Beynon C, Donovan JL. Using clinical practice variations as a method for commissioners and clinicians to identify and prioritise opportunities for disinvestment in health care: a cross-sectional study, systematic reviews and qualitative study. HEALTH SERVICES AND DELIVERY RESEARCH 2015. [DOI: 10.3310/hsdr03130] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BackgroundNHS expenditure has stagnated since the economic crisis of 2007, resulting in financial pressures. One response is for policy-makers to regulate use of existing health-care technologies and disinvest from inefficiently used health technologies. A key challenge to disinvestment is to identify existing health technologies with uncertain cost-effectiveness.ObjectivesWe aimed to explore if geographical variation in procedure rates is a marker of clinical uncertainty and might be used by local commissioners to identify procedures that are potential candidates for disinvestment. We also explore obstacles and solutions to local commissioners achieving disinvestment, and patient and clinician perspectives on regulating access to procedures.MethodsWe used Hospital Episode Statistics to measure geographical variation in procedure rates from 2007/8 to 2011/12. Expected procedure numbers for each primary care trust (PCT) were calculated adjusting for proxies of need. Random effects Poisson regression quantified the residual inter-PCT procedure rate variability. We benchmarked local procedure rates in two PCTs against national rates. We conducted rapid systematic reviews of two high-use procedures selected by the PCTs [carpal tunnel release (CTR) and laser capsulotomy], searching bibliographical databases to identify systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We conducted non-participant overt observations of commissioning meetings and semistructured interviews with stakeholders about disinvestment in general and with clinicians and patients about one disinvestment case study. Transcripts were analysed thematically using constant comparison methods derived from grounded theory.ResultsThere was large inter-PCT variability in procedure rates for many common NHS procedures. Variation in procedure rates was highest where the diffusion or discontinuance was rapidly evolving and where substitute procedures were available, suggesting that variation is a proxy for clinical uncertainty about appropriate use. In both PCTs we identified procedures where high local use might represent an opportunity for disinvestment. However, there were barriers to achieving disinvestment in both procedure case studies. RCTs comparing CTR with conservative care indicated that surgery was clinically effective and cost-effective on average but provided limited evidence on patient subgroups to inform commissioning criteria and achieve savings. We found no RCTs of laser capsulotomy. The apparently high rate of capsulotomy was probably due to the coding inaccuracy; some savings might be achieved by greater use of outpatient procedures. Commissioning meetings were dominated by new funding requests. Benchmarking did not appear to be routinely carried out because of capacity issues and concerns about data reliability. Perceived barriers to disinvestment included lack of collaboration, central support and tools for disinvestment. Clinicians felt threshold criteria had little impact on their practice and that prior approval systems would not be cost-effective. Most patients were unaware of rationing.ConclusionsPolicy-makers could use geographical variation as a starting point to identify procedures where health technology reassessment or RCTs might be needed to inform policy. Commissioners can use benchmarking to identify procedures with high local use, possibly indicating overtreatment. However, coding inconsistency and limited evidence are major barriers to achieving disinvestment through benchmarking. Increased central support for commissioners to tackle disinvestment is needed, including tools, accurate data and relevant evidence. Early engagement with patients and clinicians is essential for successful local disinvestment.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Leila Rooshenas
- School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - John Busby
- School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | | | | | | | - Theresa HM Moore
- School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Amanda Owen-Smith
- School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Jonathan AC Sterne
- School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Hayley E Jones
- School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | | | - Jenny L Donovan
- School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Rooshenas L, Owen-Smith A, Hollingworth W, Badrinath P, Beynon C, Donovan JL. “I won't call it rationing…”: An ethnographic study of healthcare disinvestment in theory and practice. Soc Sci Med 2015; 128:273-81. [DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.01.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
|
24
|
Wilson MG, Ellen ME, Lavis JN, Grimshaw JM, Moat KA, Shemer J, Sullivan T, Garner S, Goeree R, Grilli R, Peffer J, Samra K. Processes, contexts, and rationale for disinvestment: a protocol for a critical interpretive synthesis. Syst Rev 2014; 3:143. [PMID: 25495034 PMCID: PMC4273322 DOI: 10.1186/2046-4053-3-143] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/15/2014] [Accepted: 11/12/2014] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Practical solutions are needed to support the appropriate use of available health system resources as countries are continually pressured to 'do more with less' in health care. Increasingly, health systems and organizations are exploring the reassessment of possibly obsolete, inefficient, or ineffective health system resources and potentially redirecting funds to those that are more effective and efficient. Such processes are often referred to as 'disinvestment'. Our objective is to gain further understanding about: 1) whether how and under what conditions health systems decide to pursue disinvestment; 2) how health systems have chosen to undertake disinvestment; and 3) how health systems have implemented their disinvestment approach. METHODS/DESIGN We will use a critical interpretive synthesis (CIS) approach, to develop a theoretical framework based on insights drawn from a range of relevant sources. We will conduct systematic searches of databases as well as purposive searches to identify literature to fill conceptual gaps that may emerge during our inductive process of synthesis and analysis. Two independent reviewers will assess search results for relevance and conceptually map included references. We will include all empirical and non-empirical articles that focus on disinvestment at a system level. We will then extract key findings from a purposive sample of articles using frameworks related to government agendas, policy development and implementation, and health system contextual factors and then synthesize and integrate the findings to develop a framework about our core areas of interest. Lastly, we will convene a stakeholder dialogue with Canadian and international policymakers and other stakeholders to solicit targeted feedback about the framework (e.g., by identifying any gaps in the literature that we may want to revisit before finalizing it) and deliberating about barriers for developing and implementing approaches to disinvestment, strategies to address these barriers and about next steps that could be taken by different constituencies. DISCUSSION Disinvestment is an emerging field and there is a need for evidence to inform the prioritization, development, and implementation of strategies in different contexts. Our CIS and the framework developed through it will support the actions of those involved in the prioritization, development, and implementation of disinvestment initiatives. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION PROSPERO CRD42014013204.
Collapse
|
25
|
Robert G, Harlock J, Williams I. Disentangling rhetoric and reality: an international Delphi study of factors and processes that facilitate the successful implementation of decisions to decommission healthcare services. Implement Sci 2014; 9:123. [PMID: 25204900 PMCID: PMC4172895 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-014-0123-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2014] [Accepted: 09/01/2014] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The need to better understand processes of removing, reducing, or replacing healthcare services that are no longer deemed essential or effective is common across publicly funded healthcare systems. This paper explores expert international opinion regarding, first, the factors and processes that shape the successful implementation of decommissioning decisions and, second, consensus as to current best practice. Methods A three round Delphi study of 30 international experts was undertaken. In round one, participants identified factors that shape the outcome of decommissioning processes; responses were analysed using conventional content analysis. In round two, responses to 88 Likert scale statements derived from round one were analysed using measures of the degree of consensus. In round three the statements that achieved low consensus were then repeated but presented alongside the overall results from round two. The responses were re-analysed to observe whether the degree of consensus had changed. Any open comments provided during the Delphi study were analysed thematically. Results Participants strongly agreed that three considerations should ideally inform decommissioning decisions: quality and patient safety, clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Although there was less consensus as to which considerations informed such decisions in practice, those that drew the most agreement were: cost/budgetary pressures, government intervention and capital costs/condition. Important factors in shaping decommissioning were: strength of executive leadership, strength of clinical leadership, quality of communications, demonstrable benefits and clarity of rationale/case for change. Amongst the 19 best practice recommendations high consensus was achieved for: establishing a strong leadership team, engaging clinical leaders from an early stage, and establishing a clear rationale for change. Conclusions There was a stark contrast between what experts thought should determine decommissioning decisions and what does so in practice; a contrast mirrored in the distinction the participants drew between the technical and political aspects of decommissioning processes. The best practice recommendations which we grouped into three categories—change management and implementation; evidence and information; and relationships and political dimensions—can be seen as contemporary responses or strategies to manage the tensions that emerged between the rhetoric and reality of implementing decommissioning decisions.
Collapse
|
26
|
Edwards RT, Charles JM, Thomas S, Bishop J, Cohen D, Groves S, Humphreys C, Howson H, Bradley P. A national Programme Budgeting and Marginal Analysis (PBMA) of health improvement spending across Wales: disinvestment and reinvestment across the life course. BMC Public Health 2014; 14:837. [PMID: 25118054 PMCID: PMC4246570 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-837] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2014] [Accepted: 07/29/2014] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Wales faces serious public health challenges, with relatively low life expectancies and wide inequalities in life expectancy with associated pressures on the National Health Service (NHS) at a time of financial recession. This has led to growing recognition of the need to better understand the range of health improvement and prevention programmes across Welsh Government, NHS, local government and voluntary sector agencies. METHODS The Minister for Health and Social Care commissioned Public Health Wales, the single national public health organisation, to establish a Health Improvement Advisory Group, to oversee a Programme Budgeting and Marginal Analysis (PBMA) expert panel. The panel drew on evidence from a range of sources to explore potential alternative modes of health improvement initiative delivery across Wales. Electronic voting was used to agree an appropriate time horizon for health improvement programme outcomes, main objective of the health improvement review and criteria for evaluating candidate services for disinvestment and investment. The panel also used electronic voting to state whether they wished to disinvest or invest in a candidate service. RESULTS The review identified a budget of £15.1 million, spanning 10 Welsh Government priority areas, and 6 life course stages. Due to lack of evidence the panel recommended total disinvestment in 7 out of 25 initiatives releasing £1.5 million of resources, and partial disinvestment in a further 3 interventions releasing £7.3 million of resources. The panel did not recommend increasing investment in any of the 25 initiatives under review. Marginal analyses prioritised child health, mental health and wellbeing and tobacco control as key areas for investment. CONCLUSIONS Wales is championing a concept of "prudent healthcare". The PBMA exercise undertaken here was a transparent evidence-based tool to reach decisions about potential for disinvestment and reinvestment in health improvement strategies. It also demonstrates the potential wider application at a national level across government public health functions, to ensure resources are most cost-effectively deployed, with due consideration for equity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rhiannon Tudor Edwards
- Centre for Health Economics & Medicines Evaluation, Ardudwy, Normal Site, Bangor University, Bangor, Gwynedd, UK.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Bryan S, Mitton C, Donaldson C. Breaking the addiction to technology adoption. HEALTH ECONOMICS 2014; 23:379-83. [PMID: 24590701 DOI: 10.1002/hec.3034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2013] [Revised: 11/27/2013] [Accepted: 01/05/2014] [Indexed: 05/24/2023]
Abstract
A major driver of cost growth in health care is the rapid increase in the utilisation of existing technology and not simply the adoption of new technology. Health economists and their health technology assessment colleagues have become obsessed by technology adoption questions and have largely ignored 'technology management' questions. Technology management would include the life-cycle assessment of technologies in use, to assess their real-world performance; and monitoring of technology indication creep. A rebalancing of focus might serve to encourage a more self-critical and learning culture amongst those involved in technology evaluation analysis. Further, health economists and health technology assessment analysts could make a more significant contribution to system efficiency through rebalancing their efforts away from technology adoption questions towards technology management issues.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stirling Bryan
- School of Population & Public Health, University of British Columbia, Canada; Centre for Clinical Epidemiology & Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Canada; Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, UK
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
28
|
|
29
|
Elshaug AG, Watt AM, Mundy L, Willis CD. Over 150 potentially low-value health care practices: an Australian study. Med J Aust 2013; 197:556-60. [PMID: 23163685 DOI: 10.5694/mja12.11083] [Citation(s) in RCA: 141] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To develop and apply a novel method for scanning a range of sources to identify existing health care services (excluding pharmaceuticals) that have questionable benefit, and produce a list of services that warrant further investigation. DESIGN AND SETTING A multiplatform approach to identifying services listed on the Australian Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS; fee-for-service) that comprised: (i) a broad search of peer-reviewed literature on the PubMed search platform; (ii) a targeted analysis of databases such as the Cochrane Library and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) "do not do" recommendations; and (iii) opportunistic sampling, drawing on our previous and ongoing work in this area, and including nominations from clinical and non-clinical stakeholder groups. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Non-pharmaceutical, MBS-listed health care services that were flagged as potentially unsafe, ineffective or otherwise inappropriately applied. RESULTS A total of 5209 articles were screened for eligibility, resulting in 156 potentially ineffective and/or unsafe services being identified for consideration. The list includes examples where practice optimisation (ie, assessing relative value of a service against comparators) might be required. CONCLUSION The list of health care services produced provides a launchpad for expert clinical detailing. Exploring the dimensions of how, and under what circumstances, the appropriateness of certain services has fallen into question, will allow prioritisation within health technology reassessment initiatives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam G Elshaug
- Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
30
|
Teoh PJ, Camm CF. Test, Learn, Adapt. Ann Med Surg (Lond) 2013; 2:22-5. [PMID: 25973186 PMCID: PMC4326125 DOI: 10.1016/s2049-0801(13)70023-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2012] [Accepted: 12/02/2012] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
|
31
|
Robinson S, Dickinson H, Freeman T, Rumbold B, Williams I. Structures and processes for priority-setting by health-care funders: a national survey of primary care trusts in England. Health Serv Manage Res 2012; 25:113-20. [DOI: 10.1258/hsmr.2012.012007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
Although explicit priority-setting is advocated in the health services literature and supported by the policies of many governments, relatively little is known about the extent and ways in which this is carried out at local decision-making levels. Our objective was to undertake a survey of local resource allocaters in the English National Health Services in order to map and explore current priority-setting activity. A national survey was sent to Directors of Commissioning in English Primary Care Trusts (PCTs). The survey was designed to provide a picture of the types of priority-setting activities and techniques that are in place and offer some assessment of their perceived effectiveness. There is variation in the scale, aims and methods of priority-setting functions across PCTs. A perceived strength of priority-setting processes is in relation to the use of particular tools and/or development of formal processes that are felt to increase transparency. Perceived weaknesses tended to lie in the inability to sufficiently engage with a range of stakeholders. Although a number of formal priority-setting processes have been developed, there are a series of remaining challenges such as ensuring priority-setting goes beyond the margins and is embedded in budget management, and the development of disinvestment as well as investment strategies. Furthermore, if we are genuinely interested in a more explicit approach to priority-setting, then fostering a more inclusive and transparent process will be required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Suzanne Robinson
- University of Birmingham – Health Services Management Centre, Birmingham, UK
| | - Helen Dickinson
- University of Birmingham – Health Services Management Centre, Birmingham, UK
| | - Tim Freeman
- University of Birmingham – Health Services Management Centre, Birmingham, UK
| | | | - Iestyn Williams
- University of Birmingham – Health Services Management Centre, Birmingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
[Practical taxonomy of health care containment/disinvestment in non-value-added care in order to have a sustainable NHS]. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2012; 27:130-8. [PMID: 22541241 DOI: 10.1016/j.cali.2012.02.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2012] [Accepted: 02/26/2012] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
The environment of severe cost containment has led to the active search of "internal sustainability" of health systems; the disinvestment in all non-value added services is one of the tools used. This article provides the taxonomy to identify ineffective, unsafe, unnecessary, unsuccessful, unkind and unwise care practices and discusses their implications in relation to patients ordered according to their severity, as well as the expected health gains of the intervention. Finally, the feasibility of those disinvestment policies is analysed according to macro-, middle, and micro-management scenarios.
Collapse
|
33
|
Mitton C, Dionne F, Damji R, Campbell D, Bryan S. Difficult decisions in times of constraint: criteria based resource allocation in the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority. BMC Health Serv Res 2011; 11:169. [PMID: 21756357 PMCID: PMC3155484 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-11-169] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/28/2010] [Accepted: 07/14/2011] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The aim of the project was to develop a plan to address a forecasted deficit of approximately $4.65 million for fiscal year 2010/11 in the Vancouver Communities division of the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority. For disinvestment opportunities identified beyond the forecasted deficit, a commitment was made to consider options for resource re-allocation within the Vancouver Communities division. METHODS A standard approach to program budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA) was taken with a priority setting working committee and a broader advisory panel. An experienced, non-vested internal project manager worked closely with the two-member external research team throughout the process. Face to face evaluation interviews were held with 10 decision makers immediately following the process. RESULTS The recommendations of the working committee included the implementation of 44 disinvestment initiatives with an annualized value of CAD $4.9 million, as well as consideration of possible investments if the realized savings match expectations. Overall, decision makers viewed the process favorably and the primary aim of addressing the deficit gap was met. DISCUSSION A key challenge was the tight timeline which likely lead to less evidence informed decision making then one would hope for. Despite this, decision makers felt that better decisions were made then had the process not been in place. In the end, this project adds value in finding that PBMA can be used to cover a deficit and minimize opportunity cost through systematic application of criteria whilst ensuring process fairness through focusing on communication, transparency and decision maker engagement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Craig Mitton
- Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, Canada.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|