» Articles » PMID: 28486973

Sustainability in Health Care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 5: Developing a Model for Evidence-driven Resource Allocation in a Local Healthcare Setting

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Health Services
Date 2017 May 11
PMID 28486973
Citations 19
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: This is the fifth in a series of papers reporting Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) in a local healthcare setting. This paper synthesises the findings from Phase One of the SHARE Program and presents a model to be implemented and evaluated in Phase Two. Monash Health, a large healthcare network in Melbourne Australia, sought to establish an organisation-wide systematic evidence-based program for disinvestment. In the absence of guidance from the literature, the Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, an in-house 'Evidence Based Practice Support Unit', was asked to explore concepts and practices related to disinvestment, consider the implications for a local health service and identify potential settings and methods for decision-making.

Methods: Mixed methods were used to capture the relevant information. These included literature reviews; online questionnaire, interviews and structured workshops with a range of stakeholders; and consultation with experts in disinvestment, health economics and health program evaluation. Using the principles of evidence-based change, the project team worked with health service staff, consumers and external experts to synthesise the findings from published literature and local research and develop proposals, frameworks and plans.

Results: Multiple influencing factors were extracted from these findings. The implications were both positive and negative and addressed aspects of the internal and external environments, human factors, empirical decision-making, and practical applications. These factors were considered in establishment of the new program; decisions reached through consultation with stakeholders were used to define four program components, their aims and objectives, relationships between components, principles that underpin the program, implementation and evaluation plans, and preconditions for success and sustainability. The components were Systems and processes, Disinvestment projects, Support services, and Program evaluation and research. A model for a systematic approach to evidence-based resource allocation in a local health service was developed.

Conclusion: A robust evidence-based investigation of the research literature and local knowledge with a range of stakeholders resulted in rich information with strong consistent messages. At the completion of Phase One, synthesis of the findings enabled development of frameworks and plans and all preconditions for exploration of the four main aims in Phase Two were met.

Citing Articles

The optimal co-insurance rate for outpatient drug expenses of Iranian health insured based on the data mining method.

Momahhed S, Emamgholipour Sefiddashti S, Minaei B, Arab M Int J Equity Health. 2024; 23(1):25.

PMID: 38331790 PMC: 10854021. DOI: 10.1186/s12939-023-02065-4.


Developing an organizational capacity assessment tool and capacity-building package for the National Center for Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases in Iran.

Bakhtiari A, Takian A, Ostovar A, Behzadifar M, Mohamadi E, Ramezani M PLoS One. 2023; 18(6):e0287743.

PMID: 37384743 PMC: 10309984. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287743.


Theories, models, and frameworks for de-implementation of low-value care: A scoping review of the literature.

Nilsen P, Ingvarsson S, Hasson H, von Thiele Schwarz U, Augustsson H Implement Res Pract. 2023; 1:2633489520953762.

PMID: 37089121 PMC: 9978702. DOI: 10.1177/2633489520953762.


Driving Efficiency Improvement (EI): Exploratory Analysis of a Centralised Model in New South Wales.

Walters J, Sharma A, Harrison R Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2022; 15:1887-1894.

PMID: 36254223 PMC: 9569157. DOI: 10.2147/RMHP.S383107.


A framework of evidence-based decision-making in health system management: a best-fit framework synthesis.

Shafaghat T, Bastani P, Imani Nasab M, Bahrami M, Roozrokh Arshadi Montazer M, Rahimi Zarchi M Arch Public Health. 2022; 80(1):96.

PMID: 35351210 PMC: 8961960. DOI: 10.1186/s13690-022-00843-0.


References
1.
Meyer J . Qualitative research in health care. Using qualitative methods in health related action research. BMJ. 2000; 320(7228):178-81. PMC: 1128751. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.320.7228.178. View

2.
Meyer J . Evaluating action research. Age Ageing. 2000; 29 Suppl 2:8-10. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.ageing.a008104. View

3.
Mitton C, Donaldson C . Setting priorities in Canadian regional health authorities: a survey of key decision makers. Health Policy. 2002; 60(1):39-58. DOI: 10.1016/s0168-8510(01)00190-7. View

4.
Innvaer S, Vist G, Trommald M, Oxman A . Health policy-makers' perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2002; 7(4):239-44. DOI: 10.1258/135581902320432778. View

5.
Grol R, Grimshaw J . From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients' care. Lancet. 2003; 362(9391):1225-30. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14546-1. View