Healthcare Resource Allocation Decisions Research Articles

Application of A Framework to Guide Policy on Healthcare Resource Allocation Decisions to Data Linkage Projects

IntroductionData linkage of population data sets often across jurisdictions or linking health data sets or health data with non-health data often involves balancing ethical principles such as privacy with beneficence as represented by the public good. Similar ethical dilemmas occur in health resource allocation decisions. The NHMRC have published a framework to guide policy on health resource allocation decisions that could be applied to ensure the justification of data linkage projects that is defensible as in the interest of the public good.
 Objectives and ApproachThe four main conditions for legitimacy of policy decisions about access to healthcare in a democracy with a public health system and limited resources wereexamined for their relevance to decisions about the use of public data and linking data sets.
 ResultsPublic policy decisions must be defensible and responsive to the interests of those affected. Decision-makers should articulate their reasoning and recommendations so that citizens can judge them. While the context of policy decisions will differ, their legitimacy depends upon (1) the transparency of the reasoning which should be free from conflicts of interest, the basis for decisions recorded and report widely, (2) the accountability of the decision-makers to the wider community, (3) the testability of the evidence used to inform the decision-making, which usually means that it will stand up to independent review and(4) the inclusive recognition of those the decision affects which often requires that the implications for disadvantaged groups are considered, even if they can’t always be accommodated. These conditions are interrelated but ensure that the good of society in general and not just specific dominant groups are accommodated.
 Conclusion / ImplicationsIt these principles are applied to decisions about data linkage projects they have clear applicability in society accepting data linkage projects having balanced the good against the ethical risks involved.

Conducting a Cost-Benefit Analysis of Transitional Care Programmes: The Key Challenges and Recommendations

Transitional care encompasses a range of services designed to promote care integration as patients transfer between different locations or different levels of care. Transitional care programmes have been proven to produce positive outcomes in reducing hospital readmissions and improving patients’ health outcomes. However, little is known about the benefits of the programmes on healthcare cost and the published results have been inconsistent. With increasing healthcare expenditures and limited public healthcare resources, cost-benefit analyses become paramount in informing healthcare resource allocation decisions. This perspective paper describes the approaches used in estimating the total costs of a bundle of transitional care services from an academic medical centre, identifies the key methodological challenges encountered in the process of cost-benefit analysis, and recommends potential solutions to tackle these challenges. By providing a comprehensive perspective on the methodological challenges, this paper encourages program evaluators to take these possible challenges into consideration for future cost-benefit analyses.

A novel healthcare resource allocation decision support tool: A forecasting-simulation-optimization approach

The increasing pressures on the healthcare system in the UK are well documented. The solution lies in making best use of existing resources (e.g. beds), as additional funding is not available. Increasing demand and capacity shortages are experienced across all specialties and services in hospitals. Modelling at this level of detail is a necessity, as all the services are interconnected, and cannot be assumed to be independent of each other. Our review of the literature revealed two facts; First an entire hospital model is rare, and second, use of multiple OR techniques are applied more frequently in recent years. Hybrid models which combine forecasting, simulation and optimization are becoming more popular. We developed a model that linked each and every service and specialty including A&E, and outpatient and inpatient services, with the aim of, (1) forecasting demand for all the specialties, (2) capturing all the uncertainties of patient pathway within a hospital setting using discrete event simulation, and (3) developing a linear optimization model to estimate the required bed capacity and staff needs of a mid-size hospital in England (using essential outputs from simulation). These results will bring a different perspective to key decision makers with a decision support tool for short and long term strategic planning to make rational and realistic plans, and highlight the benefits of hybrid models.

Value of Information Analysis for Research Decisions—An Introduction: Report 1 of the ISPOR Value of Information Analysis Emerging Good Practices Task Force

Healthcare resource allocation decisions made under conditions of uncertainty may turn out to be suboptimal. In a resource constrained system in which there is a fixed budget, these suboptimal decisions will result in health loss. Consequently, there may be value in reducing uncertainty, through the collection of new evidence, to make better resource allocation decisions. This value can be quantified using a value of information (VOI) analysis. This report, from the ISPOR VOI Task Force, introduces VOI analysis, defines key concepts and terminology, and outlines the role of VOI for supporting decision making, including the steps involved in undertaking and interpreting VOI analyses. The report is specifically aimed at those tasked with making decisions about the adoption of healthcare or the funding of healthcare research. The report provides a number of recommendations for good practice when planning, undertaking, or reviewing the results of VOI analyses.

Ethical considerations relating to healthcare resource allocation decisions.

Public policy decisions about patients' access to limited healthcare resources must be defensible and responsive to the interests of those affected. Decision-makers should articulate their reasoning and recommendations so that citizens can judge them. While the context of policy decisions will differ, their legitimacy depends upon the transparency of the reasoning, the accountability of the decision-makers, the testability of the evidence used to inform the decision-making and the inclusive recognition of those the decision affects. An example of applying this framework to resource allocation is that of approving effective high-cost anticancer drugs in a timely fashion.

Precision QALYs, Precisely Unjust.

Warwick Heale has recently defended the notion of individualized and personalized Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) in connection with health care resource allocation decisions. Ordinarily, QALYs are used to make allocation decisions at the population level. If a health care intervention costs £100,000 and generally yields only two years of survival, the cost per QALY gained will be £50,000, far in excess of the £30,000 limit per QALY judged an acceptable use of resources within the National Health Service in the United Kingdom. However, if we know with medical certainty that a patient will gain four extra years of life from that intervention, the cost per QALY will be £25,000. Heale argues fairness and social utility require such a patient to receive that treatment, even though all others in the cohort of that patient might be denied that treatment (and lose two years of potential life). Likewise, Heale argues that personal commitments of an individual (religious or otherwise), that determine how they value a life-year with some medical intervention, ought to be used to determine the value of a QALY for them. I argue that if Heale's proposals were put into practice, the result would often be greater injustice. In brief, requirements for the just allocation of health care resources are more complex than pure cost-effectiveness analysis would allow.

Novel Approaches to Value Assessment Within the Cost-Effectiveness Framework

Novel Approaches to Value Assessment Within the Cost-Effectiveness Framework

PMU43 DISEASE PRIORITISATION MCDA MODEL FOR INFORMING HEALTHCARE PRIORITIES SETTING IN UKRAINE

The study aim was to develop the diseases prioritisation model to inform new public health programmes development and healthcare resource allocation decisions in Ukraine. The MCDA (multiple criteria decision analysis ) model accounted for the following 5 criteria: diseases burden expressed in DALY (data from IHME GBD Compare, 2017 year), clinical value based on ASMR criteria, availability of treatment guidelines, public health impact and social solidarity. Disease scores and respective criteria weights were obtained from members of EC (n=12). Methods and model structure were based on published MCDA methodology (ISPOR Task Force 1,2; LSE). The results were presented for 293 diseases and 5 age groups (<5, 5-19, 20-39, 40-64, >65 years). Detailed results were presented as ranked lists of diseases representing 90% of DALY burden. Model estimated top-3 high priority diseases: neonatal preterm death, lower respiratory infections, neonatal sepsis causing 21.9% of death burden in <5 age group; gastritis and duodenitis, acute and myeloid leukemia and encephalitis causing 4.8% of DALY burden in 5-19 years age group; ischemic heart disease, ischemic stroke, major depressive disorder causing 27.3% of DALY burden in >20 years age group. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to explore parametric uncertainty of the the results. MCDA methodology utilising IHME disease burden data inputs can provide useful information for creating a public dialog required to establish healthcare system priorities in countries with limited availability of nationwide epidemiology data. The use of MCDA results should be interpreted with care, as they are subject to bias and subjectivity in assigning the weights and scores in a Delphi panel setting. The scoring criteria have to be methodologically robust, externally validated and assigned by experts trained in MCDA. Sensitivity analysis indicated that resulting disease ranking order was highly sensitive to criteria weights and scores inputs.

PMD136 - THE FEASIBILITY OF APPLYING THE MULTIPLE CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS FOR THE EVALUATION OF MEDICAL DEVICES IN THE CONTEXT OF HOSPITAL-BASED HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN TURKEY

Health technology assessment (HTA), which draws from medical, social and economic studies, has become an integral part of healthcare resource allocation decisions in many countries. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) has been proposed for use in HTA due to the failure of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) capturing all dimensions of the health benefits of medical technologies. The objective of this study, therefore, is to assess the applicability of MCDA in the context of hospital-based HTA (HB-HTA) for the evaluation of medical devices in Turkey. The EU funded AdHopHTA (Adopting Hospital Based Health Technology Assessment) project, conducted a case study at the Ankara Numune Training and Research Hospital in Turkey to examine the dynamics of the decision-making process of hospital managers on the uptake of health technologies. The survey results, based on the interviews with hospital managers, were further analysed for the purpose of this study. The Multi Attribute Value Theory (MAVT) is used as an MCDA technique here. The methodological stages of MAVT are applied to the current economic evaluation part of the HB-HTA processes in Turkey. The survey results demonstrated two needs of hospital managers in the decision-making process: 1) reaching a high level of consensus on the final HTA decision and 2) making a comparative analysis that captures the medical, social and economic benefits of medical devices in a scientific way. This study showed that the methodological stages of MAVT are very similar to the overall processes of HB-HTA in Turkey, with an addition of a formal mathematical approach that considers all relevant criteria transparently with the involvement of various stakeholders. MCDA has the great potential to support the decision-making process of HB-HTA bodies and hospital managers in evaluating the value of medical devices in Turkey, although further discussions and pilots are needed.

Understanding and Identifying Key Issues with the Involvement of Clinicians in the Development of Decision-Analytic Model Structures: A Qualitative Study.

Decision-analytic models play an essential role in informing healthcare resource allocation decisions; however, their value to decision makers will depend on model structures being clinically valid to determine cost-effectiveness recommendations. Clinician involvement can help modellers to develop clinically valid but straightforward structures; however, there is little guidance available on methods for clinician input to model structure. This study aims to provide an in-depth exploration of clinician involvement in structural development, highlighting key issues and generating recommendations to optimise practices. A qualitative study was undertaken with a range of modellers and clinicians working in different modelling contexts. In-depth interviews and case studies using observations were carried out to understand how clinicians are involved in model structural development and to identify problems and optimal approaches from informants' perspectives. Twenty-four interviews and two case studies were undertaken with modellers and modelling teams. Key issues included the number and diversity of clinicians contributing to structural development, potentially impacting the generalisability of structures, and problems with clinician understanding of important information to contribute to model pathways. Modellers and clinicians suggested that clinician training in modelling could enhance structural processes. Recommendations to optimise current practices include recruiting clinicians from a variety of backgrounds and using discussions between experts to develop valid and generalisable structures. Future research should focus on developing training materials for clinicians and finding ways to help modellers recruit clinicians from different settings.

Economic Evaluation of Healthcare Programmes and Interventions in Low and Middle Income Countries: Directions for Future Methods Research

In countries across the globe, difficult decisions have to be made (whether implicitly or explicitly) as to how healthcare is financed, organized and provided to meet the needs of populations. The range of interventions that could generate health gains for patients invariably exceeds what can be provided from available budgets. These decisions have to be made in all countries –from Switzerland to Swaziland – but the levels of available resources and healthcare needs differ widely across settings. It is estimated that, somewhat incongruously, only fifteen percent of global healthcare expenditure is in low-and middle-income countries, where eighty five percent of people live and which suffer from ninety-two percent of the world’s disease burden. We explore the tools and approaches available to inform healthcare resource allocation decisions in different kinds of healthcare systems. The paper focuses on identifying opportunities to improve the methods of economic evaluation in LMICs. Other barriers to the useful application of economic evaluation such as local research capacity and decision-context barriers (e.g. understanding of methods by policy makers, as well as social, political, institutional and ethical factors) are acknowledged but are beyond the scope ofthis paper.

How Qualitative Methods Can be Used to Inform Model Development.

Decision-analytic models play a key role in informing healthcare resource allocation decisions. However, there are ongoing concerns with the credibility of models. Modelling methods guidance can encourage good practice within model development, but its value is dependent on its ability to address the areas that modellers find most challenging. Further, it is important that modelling methods and related guidance are continually updated in light of any new approaches that could potentially enhance model credibility. The objective of this article was to highlight the ways in which qualitative methods have been used and recommended to inform decision-analytic model development and enhance modelling practices. With reference to the literature, the article discusses two key ways in which qualitative methods can be, and have been, applied. The first approach involves using qualitative methods to understand and inform general and future processes of model development, and the second, using qualitative techniques to directly inform the development of individual models. The literature suggests that qualitative methods can improve the validity and credibility of modelling processes by providing a means to understand existing modelling approaches that identifies where problems are occurring and further guidance is needed. It can also be applied within model development to facilitate the input of experts to structural development. We recommend that current and future model development would benefit from the greater integration of qualitative methods, specifically by studying 'real' modelling processes, and by developing recommendations around how qualitative methods can be adopted within everyday modelling practice.

What is a hospital bed day worth? A contingent valuation study of hospital Chief Executive Officers

BackgroundDecreasing hospital length of stay, and so freeing up hospital beds, represents an important cost saving which is often used in economic evaluations. The savings need to be accurately quantified in order to make optimal health care resource allocation decisions. Traditionally the accounting cost of a bed is used. We argue instead that the economic cost of a bed day is the better value for making resource decisions, and we describe our valuation method and estimations for costing this important resource.MethodsWe performed a contingent valuation using 37 Australian Chief Executive Officers’ (CEOs) willingness to pay (WTP) to release bed days in their hospitals, both generally and using specific cases. We provide a succinct thematic analysis from qualitative interviews post survey completion, which provide insight into the decision making process.ResultsOn average CEOs are willing to pay a marginal rate of $216 for a ward bed day and $436 for an Intensive Care Unit (ICU) bed day, with estimates of uncertainty being greater for ICU beds. These estimates are significantly lower (four times for ward beds and seven times for ICU beds) than the traditional accounting costs often used. Key themes to emerge from the interviews include the importance of national funding and targets, and their associated incentive structures, as well as the aversion to discuss bed days as an economic resource.ConclusionsThis study highlights the importance for valuing bed days as an economic resource to inform cost effectiveness models and thus improve hospital decision making and resource allocation. Significantly under or over valuing the resource is very likely to result in sub-optimal decision making. We discuss the importance of recognising the opportunity costs of this resource and highlight areas for future research.

EVALUATION CRITERIA OF PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN RESOURCE ALLOCATION DECISIONS: A LITERATURE REVIEW AND QUALITATIVE STUDY.

We developed specific evaluation criteria to assess patient and public involvement in resource allocation decisions in health care. We reviewed the literature from health and other sectors relevant to stakeholder involvement and conducted twenty-seven key informant interviews with stakeholders knowledgeable about patient and public involvement in Canadian drug resource allocation decisions. We used an inductive qualitative thematic approach to analyze the interviews with codes and categories developed directly from individuals' interview transcripts. Integrating respondents' comments and the literature review, we identified nine evaluation criteria of patient and the public involvement in healthcare resource allocation decision making: clarity regarding rationale and roles of patient and public members, sufficient support, adequate representation of relevant views, fair decision-making processes, legitimacy of committee processes, adequate opportunity for participation, meaningful degree of participation, noticeable effect on decisions, and considerations of the efficiency of patient and public involvement. Our results will help to develop methods to evaluate patient and public involvement in healthcare decision making.

Healthcare resource allocation decisions affecting uninsured services.

Purpose Using the example of community access programs (CAPs), the purpose of this paper is to describe resource allocation and policy decisions related to providing health services for the uninsured in the USA and the organizational values affecting these decisions. Design/methodology/approach The study used comparative case study methodology at two geographically diverse sites. Researchers collected data from program documents, meeting observations, and interviews with program stakeholders. Findings Five resource allocation or policy decisions relevant to providing healthcare services were described at each site across three categories: designing the health plan, reacting to funding changes, and revising policies. Organizational values of access to care and stewardship most frequently affected resource allocation and policy decisions, while economic and political pressures affect the relative prioritization of values. Research limitations/implications Small sample size, the potential for social desirability or recall bias, and the exclusion of provider, member or community perspectives beyond those represented among participating board members. Practical implications Program directors or researchers can use this study to assess the extent to which resource allocation and policy decisions align with organizational values and mission statements. Social implications The description of how healthcare decisions are actually made can be matched with literature that describes how healthcare resource decisions ought to be made, in order to provide a normative grounding for future decisions. Originality/value This study addresses a gap in literature regarding how CAPs actually make resource allocation decisions that affect access to healthcare services.

Implementing priority setting frameworks: Insights from leading researchers

In spite of a substantial literature developing frameworks for policymakers to use in resource allocation decisions in healthcare, there remains limited published work reporting on the implementation or evaluation of such frameworks in practice. This paper presents findings of a targeted survey of 18 leading researchers around the implementation and evaluation of priority-setting exercises. Approximately one third of respondents knew of situations where recommendations of priority-setting exercises had been implemented, one third knew that recommendations had not been implemented and the final third responded that they did not know whether recommendations had been adopted. The lack of evidence linking the implementation of priority-setting recommendations to equity and efficiency outcomes was highlighted by all respondents. Features identified as facilitating successful implementation of priority-setting recommendations included having a climate ready to accept priority-setting, good leadership or a ‘champion’ for the priority-setting process and having a health economist to guide the process. Successful disinvestment was very uncommon in the experience of the researchers surveyed. Recommendations emerging from Program Budgeting and Marginal Analysis exercises appeared to be more widely implemented than those coming from alternative processes. Identifying if the process was repeated following the initial process was suggested as a means to measure success.

From representing views to representativeness of views: Illustrating a new (Q2S) approach in the context of health care priority setting in nine European countries

Governments across Europe are required to make decisions about how best to allocate scarce health care resources. There are legitimate arguments for eliciting societal vales in relation to health care resource allocation given the roles of the general public as payers and potential patients. However, relatively little is known about the views of the general public on general principles which could guide these decisions. In this paper we present five societal viewpoints on principles for health care resources allocation and develop a new approach, Q2S, designed to investigate the extent to which these views are held across a range of European countries.An online survey was developed, based on a previously completed study Q methodology, and delivered between November 2009 and February 2010 across nine countries to 33,515 respondents.The largest proportion of our respondents (44%), were found to most associate themselves with an egalitarian perspective. Differences in views were more strongly associated with countries than with socio-demographic characteristics. These results provide information which could be useful for decision makers in understanding the pluralistic context in which they are making health care resource allocation decisions and how different groups in society may respond to such decisions.

Diverse approaches to the health economic evaluation of bariatric surgery: a comprehensive systematic review.

Health economic evaluations inform healthcare resource allocation decisions for treatment options for obesity including bariatric/metabolic surgery. As an important advance on existing systematic reviews, we aimed to capture, summarize and synthesize a diverse range of economic evaluations on bariatric surgery. Studies were identified by electronic screening of all major biomedical/economic databases. Studies included if they reported any quantified health economic cost and/or consequence with a measure of effect for any type of bariatric surgery from 1995 to September 2015. Study screening, data extraction and synthesis followed international guidelines for systematic reviews. Six thousand one hundred eighty-seven studies were initially identified. After two levels of screening, 77 studies representing 17 countries (56% USA) were included. Despite study heterogeneity, common themes emerged, and important gaps were identified. Most studies adopted the healthcare system/third-party payer perspective; reported costs were generally healthcare resource use (inpatient/shorter-term outpatient). Out-of-pocket costs to individuals, family members (travel time, caregiving) and indirect costs due to lost productivity were largely ignored. Costs due to reoperations/complications were not included in one-third of studies. Body-contouring surgery included in only 14%. One study evaluated long-term waitlisted patients. Surgery was cost-effective/cost-saving for severely obese with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Study quality was inconsistent. There is a need for studies that assume a broader societal perspective (including out-of-pocket costs, costs to family and productivity losses) and longer-term costs (capture reoperations/complications, waiting, body contouring), and consequences (health-related quality-of-life). Full economic evaluation underpinned by reporting standards should inform prioritization of patients (e.g. type 2 diabetes mellitus with body mass index 30 to 34.9 kg/m(2) or long-term waitlisted) for surgery. © 2016 World Obesity.

Measuring needs for priority setting in healthcare planning and policy

Much research aimed at developing measures for normative criteria to guide the assessment of healthcare resource allocation decisions has focused on health maximization, equity concerns and more recently approaches based on health capabilities. However, a widely embraced idea is that health resources should be allocated to meet health needs. Little attention has been given to the principle of need which is often mentioned as an alternative independent criteria that could be used to guide healthcare evaluations. This paper develops a model and indicator of need satisfaction that aggregates the health needs of a population in a particular time period into a single measure that weights individual health needs by the severity of their ill health. The paper provides a first step towards formalizing the principle of need as a measurable objective for healthcare policy and we discuss some challenges for future research, including incorporating the duration of time into need-based health evaluations.

Assessing value of innovative molecular diagnostic tests in the concept of predictive, preventive, and personalized medicine.

Molecular diagnostic tests drive the scientific and technological uplift in the field of predictive, preventive, and personalized medicine offering invaluable clinical and socioeconomic benefits to the key stakeholders. Although the results of diagnostic tests are immensely influential, molecular diagnostic tests (MDx) are still grudgingly reimbursed by payers and amount for less than 5 % of the overall healthcare costs. This paper aims at defining the value of molecular diagnostic test and outlining the most important components of “value” from miscellaneous assessment frameworks, which go beyond accuracy and feasibility and impact the clinical adoption, informing healthcare resource allocation decisions. The authors suggest that the industry should facilitate discussions with various stakeholders throughout the entire assessment process in order to arrive at a consensus about the depth of evidence required for positive marketing authorization or reimbursement decisions. In light of the evolving “value-based healthcare” delivery practices, it is also recommended to account for social and ethical parameters of value, since these are anticipated to become as critical for reimbursement decisions and test acceptance as economic and clinical criteria.