Managing healthcare budgets in times of austerity: the role of program budgeting and marginal analysis

Given limited resources, priority setting or choice making will remain a reality at all levels of publicly funded healthcare across countries for many years to come. The pressures may well be even more acute as the impact of the economic crisis of 2008 continues to play out but, even as economies begin to turn around, resources within healthcare will be limited, thus some form of rationing will be required. Over the last few decades, research on healthcare priority setting has focused on methods of implementation as well as on the development of approaches related to fairness and legitimacy and on more technical aspects of decision making including the use of multi-criteria decision analysis. Recently, research has led to better understanding of evaluating priority setting activity including defining ‘success’ and articulating key elements for high performance. This body of research, however, often goes untapped by those charged with making challenging decisions and as such, in line with prevailing public sector incentives, decisions are often reliant on historical allocation patterns and/or political negotiation. These archaic and ineffective approaches not only lead to poor decisions in terms of value for money but further do not reflect basic ethical conditions that can lead to fairness in the decision-making process. The purpose of this paper is to outline a comprehensive approach to priority setting and resource allocation that has been used in different contexts across countries. This will provide decision makers with a single point of access for a basic understanding of relevant tools when faced with having to make difficult decisions about what healthcare services to fund and what not to fund. The paper also addresses several key issues related to priority setting including how health technology assessments can be used, how performance can be improved at a practical level, and what ongoing resource management practice should look like. In terms of future research, one of the most important areas of priority setting that needs further attention is how best to engage public members

Priority setting: what constitutes success? A conceptual framework for successful priority setting

BACKGROUND: The sustainability of healthcare systems worldwide is threatened by a growing demand for services and expensive innovative technologies. Decision makers struggle in this environment to set priorities appropriately, particularly because they lack consensus about which values should guide their decisions. One way to approach this problem is to determine what all relevant stakeholders understand successful priority setting to mean. The goal of this research was to develop a conceptual framework for successful priority setting. METHODS: Three separate empirical studies were completed using qualitative data collection methods (one-on-one interviews with healthcare decision makers from across Canada; focus groups with representation of patients, caregivers and policy makers; and Delphi study including scholars and decision makers from five countries). RESULTS: This paper synthesizes the findings from three studies into a framework of ten separate but interconnected elements germane to successful priority setting: stakeholder understanding, shifted priorities/reallocation of resources, decision making quality, stakeholder acceptance and satisfaction, positive externalities, stakeholder engagement, use of explicit process, information management, consideration of values and context, and revision or appeals mechanism. CONCLUSION: The ten elements specify both quantitative and qualitative dimensions of priority setting and relate to both process and outcome components. To our knowledge, this is the first framework that describes successful priority setting. The ten elements identified in this research provide guidance for decision makers and a common language to discuss priority setting success and work toward improving priority setting efforts

‘Real-world’ health care priority setting using explicit decision criteria: a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND: Health care decision making requires making resource allocation decisions among programs, services, and technologies that all compete for a finite resource pool. Methods of priority setting that use explicitly defined criteria can aid health care decision makers in arriving at funding decisions in a transparent and systematic way. The purpose of this paper is to review the published literature and examine the use of criteria-based methods in ‘real-world’ health care allocation decisions. METHODS: A systematic review of the published literature was conducted to find examples of ‘real-world’ priority setting exercises that used explicit criteria to guide decision-making. RESULTS: We found thirty-three examples in the peer-reviewed and grey literature, using a variety of methods and criteria. Program effectiveness, equity, affordability, cost-effectiveness, and the number of beneficiaries emerged as the most frequently-used decision criteria. The relative importance of criteria in the ‘real-world’ trials differed from the frequency in preference elicitation exercises. Neither the decision-making method used, nor the relative economic strength of the country in which the exercise took place, appeared to have a strong effect on the type of criteria chosen. CONCLUSIONS: Health care decisions are made based on criteria related both to the health need of the population and the organizational context of the decision. Following issues related to effectiveness and affordability, ethical issues such as equity and accessibility are commonly identified as important criteria in health care resource allocation decisions. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-015-0814-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Setting priorities in health care organizations: criteria, processes, and parameters of success

BACKGROUND: Hospitals and regional health authorities must set priorities in the face of resource constraints. Decision-makers seek practical ways to set priorities fairly in strategic planning, but find limited guidance from the literature. Very little has been reported from the perspective of Board members and senior managers about what criteria, processes and parameters of success they would use to set priorities fairly. DISCUSSION: We facilitated workshops for board members and senior leadership at three health care organizations to assist them in developing a strategy for fair priority setting. Workshop participants identified 8 priority setting criteria, 10 key priority setting process elements, and 6 parameters of success that they would use to set priorities in their organizations. Decision-makers in other organizations can draw lessons from these findings to enhance the fairness of their priority setting decision-making. SUMMARY: Lessons learned in three workshops fill an important gap in the literature about what criteria, processes, and parameters of success Board members and senior managers would use to set priorities fairly

Axial speed of sound is related to tendon's nonlinear elasticity.

PublishedJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tAxial speed of sound (SOS) measurements have been successfully applied to noninvasively evaluate tendon load, while preliminary studies showed that this technique also has a potential clinical interest in the follow up of tendon injuries. The ultrasound propagation theory predicts that the SOS is determined by the effective stiffness, mass density and Poisson's ratio of the propagating medium. Tendon stiffness characterizes the tissue's mechanical quality, but it is often measured in quasi-static condition and for entire tendon segments, so it might not be the same as the effective stiffness which determines the SOS. The objectives of the present study were to investigate the relationship between axial SOS and tendon's nonlinear elasticity, measured in standard laboratory conditions, and to evaluate if tendon's mass density and cross-sectional area (CSA) affect the SOS level. Axial SOS was measured during in vitro cycling of 9 equine superficial digital tendons. Each tendon's stiffness was characterized with a tangent modulus (the continuous derivative of the true stress/true strain curve) and an elastic modulus (the slope of this curve's linear region). Tendon's SOS was found to linearly vary with the square root of the tangent modulus during loading; tendon's SOS level was found correlated to the elastic modulus's square root and inversely correlated to the tendon's CSA, but it was not affected by tendon's mass density. These results confirm that tendon's tangent and elastic moduli, measured in laboratory conditions, are related to axial SOS and they represent one of its primary determinants.Direction Générale de l’Enseignement et de la Recherche (French Ministry of Agriculture)Région Basse-NormandieInstitut National de la Recherche Agronomiqu

Using economic evidence to set healthcare priorities in low-income and lower-middle-income countries: a systematic review of methodological frameworks

Policy makers in low-income and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) are increasingly looking to develop 'evidence-based' frameworks for identifying priority health interventions. This paper synthesises and appraises the literature on methodological frameworks - which incorporate economic evaluation evidence - for the purpose of setting healthcare priorities in LMICs. A systematic search of Embase, MEDLINE, Econlit and PubMed identified 3968 articles with a further 21 articles identified through manual searching. A total of 36 papers were eligible for inclusion. These covered a wide range of health interventions with only two studies including health systems strengthening interventions related to financing, governance and human resources. A little under half of the studies (39%) included multiple criteria for priority setting, most commonly equity, feasibility and disease severity. Most studies (91%) specified a measure of 'efficiency' defined as cost per disability-adjusted life year averted. Ranking of health interventions using multi-criteria decision analysis and generalised cost-effectiveness were the most common frameworks for identifying priority health interventions. Approximately a third of studies discussed the affordability of priority interventions. Only one study identified priority areas for the release or redeployment of resources. The paper concludes by highlighting the need for local capacity to conduct evaluations (including economic analysis) and empowerment of local decision-makers to act on this evidence

Comparison of small intestinal contrast ultrasound with magnetic resonance enterography in pediatric Crohn's disease

Aim To compare the diagnostic yield of small intestinal contrast ultrasonography (SICUS) with magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) in routine clinical practice in a cohort of pediatric patients investigated for Crohn's disease (CD) attending a UK tertiary center. Methods and Results Patients with suspected or established CD who underwent SICUS were identified retrospectively. SICUS was compared to conventional transabdominal ultrasound (TUS), ileocolonoscopy (IC), and MRE. The accuracy and agreement of SICUS in detecting small bowel lesions and CD‐related complications were assessed using kappa (κ) coefficient statistics. A total of 93 patients (median age 15 years, range 2–17, 49 male) underwent SICUS; 58 had suspected and 35 had established CD. In suspected CD, sensitivity and specificity of SICUS in detecting CD small bowel lesions were 81.8 and 100% and for TUS 85.7 and 87.5%, respectively. In established CD, sensitivity and specificity of SICUS were 98.7 and 100% and TUS 80 and 100%, respectively. Agreement between SICUS and IC was substantial for the presence of lesions (κ = 0.73) but fair in TUS (κ = 0.31). Agreement between SICUS and IC was almost perfect for detecting strictures (κ = 0.84), with a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 97.6%. When comparing SICUS and TUS with MRE, agreement for the presence of lesions was substantial (κ = 0.63) and moderate (κ = 0.53), respectively. Agreement between SICUS and MRE was substantial for detecting strictures (κ = 0.77) and dilatation (κ = 0.68). Conclusions SICUS offers a radiation‐free alternative for assessing pediatric small bowel CD, with diagnostic accuracy that is comparable to MRE and IC, supporting its wider use in routine practice