5 results
Search Results
2. Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 5: developing a model for evidence-driven resource allocation in a local healthcare setting.
- Author
-
Harris, Claire, Allen, Kelly, Waller, Cara, Green, Sally, King, Richard, Ramsey, Wayne, Kelly, Cate, and Thiagarajan, Malar
- Subjects
MEDICAL technology ,SUSTAINABILITY ,DISINVESTMENT ,RESOURCE allocation ,DECISION making ,HEALTH care rationing ,HEALTH services administration ,EVIDENCE-based medicine ,PROFESSIONAL practice ,EVALUATION of human services programs - 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]- Published
- 2017
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 3: examining how resource allocation decisions are made, implemented and evaluated in a local healthcare setting.
- Author
-
Harris, Claire, Allen, Kelly, Waller, Cara, and Brooke, Vanessa
- Subjects
RESOURCE allocation ,MEDICAL care ,HEALTH services administration ,MEDICAL technology ,DISINVESTMENT ,DECISION making ,HEALTH care rationing ,INTERVIEWING ,LEADERSHIP ,MEDICAL care research ,TECHNOLOGY ,EVIDENCE-based medicine ,PROFESSIONAL practice - Abstract
Background: This is the third in a series of papers reporting a program of Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) in a local healthcare setting. Leaders in a large Australian health service planned to establish an organisation-wide, systematic, integrated, evidence-based approach to disinvestment. In order to introduce new systems and processes for disinvestment into existing decision-making infrastructure, we aimed to understand where, how and by whom resource allocation decisions were made, implemented and evaluated. We also sought the knowledge and experience of staff regarding previous disinvestment activities.Methods: Structured interviews, workshops and document analysis were used to collect information from multiple sources in an environmental scan of decision-making systems and processes. Findings were synthesised using a theoretical framework.Results: Sixty-eight respondents participated in interviews and workshops. Eight components in the process of resource allocation were identified: Governance, Administration, Stakeholder engagement, Resources, Decision-making, Implementation, Evaluation and, where appropriate, Reinvestment of savings. Elements of structure and practice for each component are described and a new framework was developed to capture the relationships between them. A range of decision-makers, decision-making settings, type and scope of decisions, criteria used, and strengths, weaknesses, barriers and enablers are outlined. The term 'disinvestment' was not used in health service decision-making. Previous projects that involved removal, reduction or restriction of current practices were driven by quality and safety issues, evidence-based practice or a need to find resource savings and not by initiatives where the primary aim was to disinvest. Measuring resource savings is difficult, in some situations impossible. Savings are often only theoretical as resources released may be utilised immediately by patients waiting for beds, clinic appointments or surgery. Decision-making systems and processes for resource allocation are more complex than assumed in previous studies.Conclusion: There is a wide range of decision-makers, settings, scope and type of decisions, and criteria used for allocating resources within a single institution. To our knowledge, this is the first paper to report this level of detail and to introduce eight components of the resource allocation process identified within a local health service. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]- Published
- 2017
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. 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.
- Author
-
Harris, Claire, Allen, Kelly, Waller, Cara, Dyer, Tim, Brooke, Vanessa, Garrubba, Marie, Melder, Angela, Voutier, Catherine, Gust, Anthony, and Farjou, Dina
- Subjects
- *
SUSTAINABILITY , *MEDICAL care , *DECISION making , *DISINVESTMENT , *PUBLIC health , *HEALTH care rationing , *HEALTH services administration , *MEDICAL care research , *ORGANIZATIONAL change , *RESOURCE allocation , *EVIDENCE-based medicine , *PROFESSIONAL practice - 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]- Published
- 2017
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
5. Implementing decision aids for cardiovascular disease prevention: stakeholder interviews and case studies in Australian primary care.
- Author
-
Bonner, Carissa, Cornell, Samuel, Pickles, Kristen, Batcup, Carys, de Wet, Carl, Morgan, Mark, Greaves, Kim, O'Connor, Denise, Hawkes, Anna L, Crosland, Paul, Chapman, Niamh, and Doust, Jenny
- Subjects
CARDIOVASCULAR disease prevention ,CARDIOVASCULAR diseases risk factors ,PILOT projects ,AUDITING ,COMPUTER software ,DISCUSSION ,STAKEHOLDER analysis ,RESEARCH methodology ,INTERVIEWING ,CONFERENCES & conventions ,RISK assessment ,HUMAN services programs ,PRIMARY health care ,PREVENTIVE health services ,MEDICAL protocols ,DECISION making ,CASE studies ,QUALITY assurance ,DATA analytics ,INTEGRATED health care delivery ,ELECTRONIC health records ,COVID-19 pandemic - Abstract
Background: Australian cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention guidelines recommend absolute CVD risk assessment, but less than half of eligible patients have the required risk factors recorded due to fragmented implementation over the last decade. Co-designed decision aids for general practitioners (GPs) and consumers have been developed that improve knowledge barriers to guideline-recommended CVD risk assessment and management. This study used a stakeholder consultation process to identify and pilot test the feasibility of implementation strategies for these decision aids in Australian primary care. Methods: This mixed methods study included: (1) stakeholder consultation to map existing implementation strategies (2018-20); (2) interviews with 29 Primary Health Network (PHN) staff from all Australian states and territories to identify new implementation opportunities (2021); (3) pilot testing the feasibility of low, medium, and high resource implementation strategies (2019-21). Framework Analysis was used for qualitative data and Google analytics provided decision support usage data over time. Results: Informal stakeholder discussions indicated a need to partner with existing programs delivered by the Heart Foundation and PHNs. PHN interviews identified the importance of linking decision aids with GP education resources, quality improvement activities, and consumer-focused prevention programs. Participants highlighted the importance of integration with general practice processes, such as business models, workflows, medical records and clinical audit software. Specific implementation strategies were identified as feasible to pilot during COVID-19: (1) low resource: adding website links to local health area guidelines for clinicians and a Heart Foundation toolkit for primary care providers; (2) medium resource: presenting at GP education conferences and integrating the resources into audit and feedback reports; (3) high resource: auto-populate the risk assessment and decision aids from patient records via clinical audit software. Conclusions: This research identified a wide range of feasible strategies to implement decision aids for CVD risk assessment and management. The findings will inform the translation of new CVD guidelines in primary care. Future research will use economic evaluation to explore the added value of higher versus lower resource implementation strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.