What do end-users want to know about managing the performance of healthcare delivery systems? Co-designing a context-specific and practice-relevant research agenda.

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing interest in joint research priority-setting, few studies engage end-user groups in setting research priorities at the intersection of the healthcare and management disciplines. With health systems increasingly establishing performance management programmes to account for and incentivize performance, it is important to conduct research that is actionable by the end-users involved with or impacted by these programmes. The aim of this study was to co-design a research agenda on healthcare performance management with and for end-users in a specific jurisdictional and policy context. METHODS: We undertook a rapid review of the literature on healthcare performance management (n = 115) and conducted end-user interviews (n = 156) that included a quantitative ranking exercise to prioritize five directions for future research. The quantitative rankings were analysed using four methods: mean, median, frequency ranked first or second, and frequency ranked fifth. The interview transcripts were coded inductively and analysed thematically to identify common patterns across participant responses. RESULTS: Seventy-three individual and group interviews were conducted with 156 end-users representing diverse end-user groups, including administrators, clinicians and patients, among others. End-user groups prioritized different research directions based on their experiences and information needs. Despite this variation, the research direction on motivating performance improvement had the highest overall mean ranking and was most often ranked first or second and least often ranked fifth. The research direction was modified based on end-user feedback to include an explicit behaviour change lens and stronger consideration for the influence of context. CONCLUSIONS: Joint research priority-setting resulted in a practice-driven research agenda capable of generating results to inform policy and management practice in healthcare as well as contribute to the literature. The results suggest that end-users are keen to open the "black box" of performance management to explore more nuanced questions beyond "does performance management work?" End-users want to know how, when and why performance management contributes to behaviour change (or fails to) among front-line care providers.

From Measurement to Improvement in Ontario's Cancer System: Analyzing the Performance of 28 Provincial Indicators over 15 Years.

Over the past 15 years, Cancer Care Ontario has used a robust performance management approach to drive improvements in care. Each year, priority indicators and targets are selected or retained, and performance is reviewed quarterly with each of Ontario's Regional Cancer Programs. Improvement support and encouragement are provided, such as data analysis, program ranking, communities of practice, consultations, action plan requests and certificates. This article analyzes data on 28 indicators prioritized over these years and demonstrates that 25 have shown sustained improvement over time. The performance management approach, lessons learned and gaps in knowledge are described to inform future research and practice.

Integrating cancer care beyond the hospital and across the cancer pathway: a patient-centred approach.

Cancer patients constitute one of the most complex, diverse and growing patient populations in Canada. Like other high-needs patient groups, cancer patients desire a more integrated approach to care delivery that spans organizational and professional boundaries. This article provides an overview of Cancer Care Ontario's experience in fostering a more integrated cancer system, and describes the organization's emerging focus on patient-centred models of integrated care through the whole cancer pathway, from prevention to end-of-life care and survivorship.

The Capital Investment Strategy for Radiation therapy in Ontario: A Framework to Ensure Access to Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), formerly known as CCO, is the provincial governmental agency in Ontario, Canada responsible for developing radiation therapy-specific capital investment strategies, updated every 5 years, to ensure equitable access and to gain the highest value from these investments in infrastructure. These plans are informed by the changing landscape of health care delivery, technologic advancements affecting radiation therapy care, patient desire for care closer to home, and expected increases in utilization of radiation therapy services. In this article, we describe the development, model, and final recommendations of CCO's fifth radiation therapy capital investment strategy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A panel of multidisciplinary provincial experts, in combination with 2 patient and family advisors, developed planning principles to guide the development of a patient-centered strategy. Adaption of the previously used model for radiation therapy planning was used. RESULTS: The development of the capital investment strategy took place from fall 2017 to fall 2018. The model included 3 main factors: patient demand (including utilization targets), machine throughput, and machine demand and supply. The final recommendation is for an investment of 26 new radiation therapy machines in the province by 2028. CONCLUSIONS: The strategy plans for continued province-wide access to quality radiation therapy care and ensures machines are added to the system at the right place and in the right time. Ongoing data collection throughout this period is necessary to ensure the strategy achieves its goals and to allow for planning of future strategies.