Correction to: Intellectual capital-based performance improvement: a study in healthcare sector
1
Citation
1
Reference
10
Related Paper
Citation Trend
Abstract:
An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.Keywords:
Health administration
Health Economics
Health Services Research
Capital (architecture)
Material and methods All presentations made during scientific meetings from June 2011 to December 2013 were reviewed and their domains of study (research) were identified. Scientific meetings at a Military Teaching Hospital were organized, in order to promote research within Benin Armed Forces Health Services, through monthly meetings. Semester and annual planning was done for presentations as each department was asked to propose 2 research conclusions per year. Research conclusions were programmed and presented as well as their perspectives.
Health administration
Health Services Research
Limited resources
Cite
Citations (0)
NSW Health is undertaking the community health and outpatient care information project (CHOCIP), which will develop a patient level data collection across all community health and outpatient care services in NSW. It is the largest project of its type ever attempted in Australia and, when complete, will result in the collection of some 25 million unit records describing the services provided in community health and outpatient care settings. A key CHOCIP sub-project is to develop short lists, in consultation with clinicians, that represent the 10–20 most common values in the data domain for the data elements diagnosis, intervention and presenting issue for each of the defined 130 service types in community health and outpatient care. The reason for the development of these short lists is to avoid the use of clinical coders to retrospectively code the three data elements.
Health administration
Community Health
Health Services Research
Outpatient clinic
Cite
Citations (0)
Health Economics
Health Services Research
Health administration
Population Health
Cite
Citations (8)
Abstract Background Countries around the world are increasingly rethinking the design of their health benefit package to achieve universal health coverage. Countries can periodically revise their packages on the basis of sectoral cost-effectiveness analyses, i.e. by evaluating a broad set of services against a ‘doing nothing’ scenario using a budget constraint. Alternatively, they can use incremental cost-effectiveness analyses, i.e. to evaluate specific services against current practice using a threshold. In addition, countries may employ hybrid approaches which combines elements of sectoral and incremental cost-effectiveness analysis - a country may e.g. not evaluate the comprehensive set of all services but rather relatively small sets of services targeting a certain condition. However, there is little practical guidance for countries as to which kind of approach they should follow. Methods The present study was based on expert consultation. We refined the typology of approaches of cost-effectiveness analysis for benefit package design, identified factors that should be considered in the choice of approach, and developed recommendations. We reached consensus among experts over the course of several review rounds. Results Sectoral cost-effectiveness analysis is especially suited in contexts with large allocative inefficiencies in current service provision and can, in theory, realize large efficiency gains. However, it may be challenging to implement a comprehensive redesign of the package in practice. Incremental cost-effectiveness analysis is especially relevant in contexts where specific new services may impact the sustainability of the health system. It may potentially support efficiency improvement, but its focus has typically been on new services while existing inefficiencies remain unchallenged. The use of hybrid approach may be a way forward to address the strengths and weaknesses of sectoral and incremental analysis areas. Such analysis may be especially useful to target disease areas with suspected high inefficiencies in service provision, and would then make good use of the available research capacity and be politically rewarding. However, disease-specific analyses bear the risk of not addressing resource allocation inefficiencies across disease areas. Conclusions Countries should carefully select their approach of cost-effectiveness analyses for benefit package design, based on their decision-making context.
Health administration
Health Economics
Health Services Research
Cite
Citations (6)
Background Some currently provided health services have an absence of evidence for effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and/or safety. These are candidates for disinvestment. It is possible that such services would prove valuable if trials were to be conducted however, making disinvestment a clear risk. Provision of these services in the context of usual care is a considerable barrier to conducting a conventional trial of these interventions. Our team has recently developed a novel research approach to conduct a trial in this context [1]. In this paper, we describe the first application of this design. Allied health services include those provided by a range of health professional groups. Weekend allied health services on acute medical or surgical wards are widely provided internationally but are inconsistent in their composition and focus. There is no direct evidence of efficacy for these weekend services, and higher rates of pay on the weekend make their likely cost-effectiveness questionable. This research examines the efficacy, cost-effectiveness and safety of disinvesting from weekend allied health services on acute medical or surgical wards.
Health administration
Disinvestment
Health Economics
Health Services Research
Cite
Citations (4)
Abstract Background While significant strides have been made in health research, the incorporation of research evidence into healthcare decision-making has been marginal. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of how the utility of health services research can be improved through the use of theory. Integrating theory into health services research can improve research methodology and encourage stronger collaboration with decision-makers. Discussion Recognizing the importance of theory calls for new expectations in the practice of health services research. These include: the formation of interdisciplinary research teams; broadening the training for those who will practice health services research; and supportive organizational conditions that promote collaboration between researchers and decision makers. Further, funding bodies can provide a significant role in guiding and supporting the use of theory in the practice of health services research. Summary Institutions and researchers should incorporate the use of theory if health services research is to fulfill its potential for improving the delivery of health care.
Health administration
Health Services Research
Health Economics
Cite
Citations (195)
An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.
Health administration
Health Services Research
Health Economics
Healthcare service
Child Health
Cite
Citations (0)
Background Multi-disciplinary team (MDT)-working is recognized as a key modality for providing cancer services in the province of Quebec (Canada) and elsewhere [1]. Evidence suggests that the quality of teamworking varies across cancer teams and this may impact on care-providing process, and ultimately on patient care experience [2]. The objective of the study is to evaluate the effects of MDT-working on cancer patients’ perceived experience of care.
Health administration
Health Services Research
Cross-sectional study
Patient Experience
Cite
Citations (2)
Abstract Background In health services research, there is a growing view that partnerships between researchers and decision-makers (i.e., collaborative research teams) will enhance the effective translation and use of research results into policy and practice. For this reason, there is an increasing expectation by health research funding agencies that health system managers, policy-makers, practitioners and clinicians will be members of funded research teams. While this view has merit to improve the uptake of research findings, the practical challenges of building and sustaining collaborative research teams with members from both inside and outside the research setting requires consideration. A small body of literature has discussed issues that may arise when conducting research in one’s own setting; however, there is a lack of clear guidance to deal with practical challenges that may arise in research teams that include team members who have links with the organization/community being studied (i.e., are “insiders”). Discussion In this article, we discuss a researcher-decision-maker partnership that investigated practice in primary care networks in Alberta. Specifically, we report on processes to guide the role clarification of insider team members where research activities may pose potential risk to participants or the team members (e.g., access to raw data). Summary These guiding principles could provide a useful discussion point for researchers and decision-makers engaged in health services research.
Health administration
Health Services Research
Health Economics
Cite
Citations (49)