Evaluating priority setting success in healthcare: a pilot study

被引:26
|
作者
Sibbald, Shannon L. [1 ]
Gibson, Jennifer L. [2 ]
Singer, Peter A. [3 ,4 ]
Upshur, Ross [2 ,5 ]
Martin, Douglas K. [2 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Western Ontario, Sch Hlth Studies, London, ON N6A 5B9, Canada
[2] Univ Toronto, Joint Ctr Bioeth, Toronto, ON M5G 1L4, Canada
[3] Univ Hlth Network, McLaughlin Rotman Ctr Global Hlth, Toronto, ON M5G 1L7, Canada
[4] Univ Toronto, Fac Med, MaRS Ctr, Toronto, ON M5G 1L7, Canada
[5] Univ Toronto, Sch Publ Hlth, Sunnybrook Hlth Sci Ctr, Toronto, ON M5G 1L4, Canada
[6] Univ Toronto, Dept Hlth Policy Management & Evaluat, Toronto, ON M5G 1L4, Canada
关键词
CANCER DRUGS; DECISIONS; RESOURCES; ECONOMICS;
D O I
10.1186/1472-6963-10-131
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: In healthcare today, decisions are made in the face of serious resource constraints. Healthcare managers are struggling to provide high quality care, manage resources effectively, and meet changing patient needs. Healthcare managers who are constantly making difficult resource decisions desire a way to improve their priority setting processes. Despite the wealth of existing priority setting literature (for example, program budgeting and marginal analysis, accountability for reasonableness, the 'describe-evaluate-improve' strategy) there are still no tools to evaluate how healthcare resources are prioritised. This paper describes the development and piloting of a process to evaluate priority setting in health institutions. The evaluation process was designed to examine the procedural and substantive dimensions of priority setting using a multi-methods approach, including a staff survey, decision-maker interviews, and document analysis. Methods: The evaluation process was piloted in a mid-size community hospital in Ontario, Canada while its leaders worked through their annual budgeting process. Both qualitative and quantitative methods were used to analyze the data. Results: The evaluation process was both applicable to the context and it captured the budgeting process. In general, the pilot test provided support for our evaluation process and our definition of success, (i.e., our conceptual framework). Conclusions: The purpose of the evaluation process is to provide a simple, practical way for an organization to better understand what it means to achieve success in its priority setting activities and identify areas for improvement. In order for the process to be used by healthcare managers today, modification and contextualization of the process are anticipated. As the evaluation process is applied in more health care organizations or applied repeatedly in an organization, it may become more streamlined.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Pilot study evaluating the effects of an intervention to enhance culturally appropriate hypertension education among healthcare providers in a primary care setting
    Erik JAJ Beune
    Patrick JE Bindels
    Jacob Mohrs
    Karien Stronks
    Joke A Haafkens
    Implementation Science, 5
  • [22] Pilot study evaluating the effects of an intervention to enhance culturally appropriate hypertension education among healthcare providers in a primary care setting
    Beune, Erik J. A. J.
    Bindels, Patrick J. E.
    Mohrs, Jacob
    Stronks, Karien
    Haafkens, Joke A.
    IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE, 2010, 5
  • [23] Innovation as a value in healthcare priority-setting: the UK experience
    Victoria Charlton
    Annette Rid
    Social Justice Research, 2019, 32 : 208 - 238
  • [24] On the role of cost-effectiveness thresholds in healthcare priority setting
    Siverskog, Jonathan
    Henriksson, Martin
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2021, 37 (01)
  • [25] Rare diseases in healthcare priority setting: should rarity matter?
    Albertsen, Andreas
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 2022, 48 (09) : 624 - 628
  • [26] Integrating public input into healthcare priority-setting decisions
    Mitton, Craig
    Smith, Neale
    Peacock, Stuart
    Evoy, Brian
    Abelson, Julia
    EVIDENCE & POLICY, 2011, 7 (03): : 327 - 343
  • [27] Innovation as a value in healthcare priority-setting: the UK experience
    Charlton, Victoria
    Rid, Annette
    SOCIAL JUSTICE RESEARCH, 2019, 32 (02) : 208 - 238
  • [28] Healthcare Resource Allocation and Priority-setting. A European Challenge
    Di Costanzo, Caterina
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH LAW, 2020, 27 (02) : 93 - 114
  • [29] Understanding and using patient experiences as evidence in healthcare priority setting
    Rand, Leah
    Dunn, Michael
    Slade, Ingrid
    Upadhyaya, Sheela
    Sheehan, Mark
    COST EFFECTIVENESS AND RESOURCE ALLOCATION, 2019, 17 (01)
  • [30] Priority-setting in healthcare: a framework for reasonable clinical judgements
    Baeroe, K.
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 2009, 35 (08) : 488 - 496