Communication in disasters to support families with children with medical complexity and special healthcare needs: a rapid scoping review.

Disasters can disrupt normal healthcare processes, with serious effects on children who depend upon regular access to the health care system. Children with medical complexity (CMC) are especially at risk. These children have chronic medical conditions, and may depend on medical technology, like feeding tubes. Without clear, evidence-based processes to connect with healthcare teams, families may struggle to access the services and supports they need during disasters. There is limited research about this topic, which has been pushed forward in importance as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors therefore conducted a rapid scoping review on this topic, with the intention to inform policy processes. Both the peer-reviewed and gray literatures on disaster, CMC, and communication were searched in summer 2020 and spring 2021. Twenty six relevant articles were identified, from which four main themes were extracted: 1. Cooperative and collaborative planning. 2. Proactive outreach, engagement, and response. 3. Use of existing social networks to connect with families. 4. Return to usual routines. Based on this review, good practices appear to involve including families, professionals, other stakeholders, and children themselves in pre-disaster planning; service providers using proactive outreach at the outset of a crisis event; working with existing peer and neighborhood networks for support; employing multiple and two-way communication channels, including social media, to connect with families; re-establishing care processes as soon as possible, which may include virtual connections; addressing mental health issues as well as physical functioning; and prioritizing the resumption of daily routines. Above all, a well-established and ongoing relationship among children, their caregivers, and healthcare teams could reduce disruptions when disaster strikes.

An Economic Analysis of the Association Among Secondary Health Conditions, Health Care Costs, and Quality of Life for Persons With Spinal Cord Injury.

Background: A previous analysis using the Canadian Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) Community Survey data identified that there were individuals with a high number of secondary health conditions, high health care utilization, poor health outcomes, and unmet health care needs. Objectives: The objectives of this study were to estimate the annual health care costs of persons with SCI who report secondary health conditions, and to determine the association between these secondary health conditions with health care utilization and self-reported life satisfaction and quality of life. Methods: The survey respondents were divided into four groups: traumatic SCI (tSCI; those who said they received needed care and those who said they did not) and nontraumatic SCI (ntSCI; those who said they received needed care and those who said they did not). The average annual health care costs per respondent were estimated for each group. Using regression analysis, we estimated the change in average annual health care costs that were associated with an additional secondary health condition for respondents in each group. Results: Participants who reported not receiving needed care had on average 23% more secondary health conditions than those receiving needed care. The increase in average annual health care costs associated with one additional secondary health conditions was between $428 ($37-$820) (ntSCI, receiving needed care) and $1240 ($739-$1741) (tSCI, not receiving needed care). Conclusion: This study provides insight into potential cost savings associated with a reduction of secondary health conditions as well as an estimate of the reduction in health care costs associated with moving from not receiving all needed care to receiving needed care.

Primary care family physicians' experiences with clinical integration in qualitative and mixed reviews: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical (service) integration in primary care settings describes how comprehensive care is coordinated by family physicians (FPs) over time across healthcare contexts to meet patient care needs. To improve care integration and healthcare service planning, a systematic approach to understanding its numerous influencing factors is paramount. The objective of this study is to generate a comprehensive map of FP-perceived factors influencing clinical integration across diseases and patient demographics. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We developed the protocol with the guidance of the Joanna Briggs Institute systematic review methodology framework. An information specialist built search strategies for MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases using keywords and MeSH terms iteratively collected from a multidisciplinary team. Two reviewers will work independently throughout the study process, from article selection to data analysis. The identified records will be screened by title and abstract and reviewed in the full text against the criteria: FP in primary care (population), clinical integration (concept) and qualitative and mixed reviews published in 2011-2021 (context). We will first describe the characteristics of the review studies. Then, we will extract qualitative, FP-perceived factors and group them by content similarities, such as patient factors. Lastly, we will describe the types of extracted factors using a custom framework. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for a systematic review. The identified factors will help generate an item bank for a survey that will be developed in the Phase II study to ascertain high-impact factors for intervention(s), as well as evidence gaps to guide future research. We will share the study findings with various knowledge users to promote awareness of clinical integration issues through multiple channels: publications and conferences for researchers and care providers, an executive summary for clinical leaders and policy-makers, and social media for the public.

Barriers and facilitators influencing the management of academic detailing programs: A descriptive analysis of four programs.

BACKGROUND: Educating prescribers is a key strategy to reduce inappropriate prescribing in selection, dose, type, timing, and duration. Academic detailing (AD) is a form of continuing medical education to educate prescribers. AD programs have been established in Canada, Australia, the United States, and other countries. Each program operates uniquely to reflect its local context and resources. It remains unclear how AD programs in universal health care systems differ from each other in their program components and experiences. OBJECTIVES: To compare AD programs focusing on components of resources, activities, and services and to identify factors influencing program efficiency during the processes of program management, topic development, and service delivery among the selected Canadian and international AD programs. METHODS: We adopted a process evaluation methodology with semistructured interviews and documents. We selected 4 well-established AD programs through an iterative discussion with the BC Ministry of Health: three provincial AD programs in the Canadian provinces of British Columbia, Ontario, and Saskatchewan, and an Australian program based in the State of South Australia. We invited one leader from each program to attend a 1-hour teleconferencing interview. RESULTS: The 4 programs shared similarities of public government funding while differed in their operation models (centralized vs. decentralized), employment of detailers (part-time vs. full-time; hired by AD programs vs. hired by partnered multidisciplinary primary care teams) and staff who developed topics (detailers vs. nondetailers). The most common barriers were funding and reaching new participants, followed by team connection, detailer training resources, summarizing skills, and AD session scheduling. The most common facilitators were participant retention, participant recruitment through partnership, and easy access sessions. CONCLUSION: AD programs can potentially guide a prescriber's choice of drug. A program's operation can be impacted by its access to resources and participants, activities, and service design.

Preparing for future pandemics: A multi-national comparison of health and economic trade-offs.

Government investment in preparing for pandemics has never been more relevant. The COVID-19 pandemic has stimulated debate regarding the trade-offs societies are prepared to make between health and economic activity. What is not known is: (1) how much the public in different countries are prepared to pay in forgone GDP to avoid mortality from future pandemics; and (2) which health and economic policies the public in different countries want their government to invest in to prepare for and respond to the next pandemic. Using a future-focused, multi-national discrete choice experiment, we quantify these trade-offs and find that the tax-paying public is prepared to pay $3.92 million USD (Canada), $4.39 million USD (UK), $5.57 million USD (US) and $7.19 million USD (Australia) in forgone GDP per death avoided in the next pandemic. We find the health policies that taxpayers want to invest in before the next pandemic and the economic policies they want activated once the next pandemic hits are relatively consistent across the countries, with some exceptions. Such results can inform economic policy responses and government investment in health policies to reduce the adverse impacts of the next pandemic.

Mapping the experiences of people with advanced cancer across multiple cancer types-a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Through the introduction of tumor agnostic therapies, people with metastatic cancer and their treating physicians are facing new treatment choices that have differing side effect and efficacy profiles from conventional chemotherapy. OBJECTIVE: The present study undertakes a scoping review of research into the experiences of people with advanced or metastatic cancer across various solid tumor types with the goal of developing a tumor-agnostic conceptual model. DESIGN: Automated queries on three internet search engines were performed to identify qualitative interview studies that focused on people with metastatic cancer. No limits were imposed for dates nor location of studies. RESULTS: Of the 173 hits generated from the searches, 25 peer-reviewed papers were selected for the review with dates that ranged from 2007 to 2022. All papers originated from the USA, Europe, Australia, or Japan. Three major themes emerged that formed the basis for the tumor-agnostic conceptual model: symptoms, loss of autonomy, and adaptation/coping. CONCLUSIONS: The explication of the interplay between the physical and emotional symptoms experienced by those with advanced and metastatic cancer using a multi-tumor approach provides the potential to make generalizations about the needs of this population. An opportunity exists to potentially address these needs through matching patient needs and preferences with the characteristics of novel therapeutics. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: In the era of tumor agnostic therapies, the elicitation of patient preferences across the spectrum of anatomical origins has the potential to enhance shared decision making in the setting of metastatic disease.

Cancer Patients' Experiences with Telehealth before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic in British Columbia.

BACKGROUND: Patients have had their cancer care either postponed or changed to telehealth visits to reduce exposure to COVID-19. However, it is unclear how these changes may have affected their experiences. We aim to identify patient characteristics that affect telehealth experiences and evaluate their preferences for using telehealth in the future. METHODS: Patients who completed the Outpatient Cancer Care (OCC) Patient Experience Survey were invited to participate. They comepleted the modified OCC Survey, which focused on telehealth during the pandemic. Linear and logistic regression analyses were used to identify patient characteristics that influenced telehealth experiences and preferences for future telehealth use. RESULTS: Perceived ease of participation in telehealth is a significant predictor of the change in patients' ratings of their telehealth experience. We found that cancer patients had lower preferences for using telehealth in the future if they were older, female, or non-white; resided in an urban area; had no previous telehealth experience; had lower education; and had poorer mental health. CONCLUSIONS: To optimize cancer care and improve equitable access to high-quality telehealth care during the pandemic and beyond, clinicians and policymakers will need to consider patients' self-reported experiences and their personal characteristics.

Home Telemonitoring Technology for Patients With Heart Failure: Cost-Consequence Analysis of a Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) is a costly health condition and a major public health problem. It is estimated that 2%-3% of the population in developed countries has HF, and the prevalence increases to 8% among patients aged ≥75 years. Home telemonitoring is a form of noninvasive, remote patient monitoring that aims to improve the care and management of patients with chronic HF. Telehealth for Emergency-Community Continuity of Care Connectivity via Home-Telemonitoring (TEC4Home) is a project that implements and evaluates a comprehensive home monitoring protocol designed to support patients with HF as they transition from the emergency department to home. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess the cost of using the home monitoring platform (TEC4Home) relative to usual care for patients with HF. METHODS: This study is a cost-consequence analysis of the TEC4Home pilot study. The analysis was conducted from a partial societal perspective, including direct and indirect health care costs. The aim is to assess the costs of the home monitoring platform relative to usual care and track costs related to health care utilization during the 90-day postdischarge period. RESULTS: Economic analysis of the TEC4Home pilot study showed a positive trend in cost savings for patients using TEC4Home. From both the health system perspective (Pre TEC4Home cost per patient: CAD $2924 vs post TEC4Home cost per patient: CAD $1293; P=.01) and partial societal perspective (Pre TEC4Home cost per patient: CAD $2411 vs post TEC4Home cost per patient: CAD $1108; P=.01), we observed a statistically significant cost saving per patient. CONCLUSIONS: In line with the advantages of conducting an economic analysis alongside a feasibility study, the economic analysis of the TEC4Home pilot study facilitated the piloting of patient questionnaires and informed the methodology for a full clinical trial.

Health economics and emergence from COVID-19 lockdown: the great big marginal analysis.

Despite denials of politicians and other advisors, trade-offs have already been apparent in many policy decisions addressing the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and its social and economic consequences. Here, we illustrate why it is important, from a wellbeing perspective, to recognise such trade-offs, and provide a framework, based on the economic concept of 'marginal analysis', for doing so. We illustrate its potential through consideration of optimising the balance between reducing the reproductive rate (R) of the virus and further opening of the economy. The framework accommodates both perspectives in the health-vs-economy debate whereby, depending on where we are within the marginal analysis framework, either health issues are allowed to dominate or, below some threshold of R and/or background level of infection, health and economic considerations can be traded off against each other. Given the inevitability of such trade-offs, the framework exposes crucial questions to be addressed, such as: the critical value of R and/or background infection, above which health considerations predominate, and which may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction; and the value of lives forgone resulting from the small increases in R and/or background infection levels that may have to be tolerated as the economy is gradually opened.

The Return on Investment of a Province-Wide Quality Improvement Initiative for Reducing In-Hospital Sepsis Rates and Mortality in British Columbia, Canada.

OBJECTIVES: Sepsis is a life-threatening medical emergency. There is a paucity of information on whether quality improvement approaches reduce the in-hospital sepsis caseload or save lives and decrease the healthcare system and society's cost at the provincial/national levels. This study aimed to assess the outcomes and economic impact of a province-wide quality improvement initiative in Canada. DESIGN: Retrospective population-based study with interrupted time series and return on investment analyses. SETTING: The sepsis cases and deaths averted over time for British Columbia were calculated and compared with the rest of Canada (excluding Quebec and three territories). PATIENTS: Aggregate data were obtained from the Canadian Institute for Health Information on risk-adjusted in-hospital sepsis rates and sepsis mortality in acute care sites across Canada. INTERVENTIONS: In 2012, the British Columbia Sepsis Network was formed to reduce sepsis occurrence and mortality through education, knowledge translation, and quality improvement. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A return on investment analysis compared the financial investment for the British Columbia Sepsis Network with the savings from averted sepsis occurrence and mortality. An estimated 981 sepsis cases and 172 deaths were averted in the post-British Columbia Sepsis Network period (2014-2018). The total cost, including the development and implementation of British Columbia Sepsis Network, was $449,962. Net savings due to cases averted after program costs were considered were $50.6 million in 2018. This translates into a return of $112.5 for every dollar invested. CONCLUSIONS: British Columbia Sepsis Network appears to have averted a greater number of sepsis cases and deaths in British Columbia than the national average and yielded a positive return on investment. Our findings strengthen the policy argument for targeted quality improvement initiatives for sepsis care and provide a model of care for other provinces in Canada and elsewhere globally.

Cost-effectiveness analysis protocol of the Smart Triage program: A point-of-care digital triage platform for pediatric sepsis in Eastern Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a clinical syndrome characterized by organ dysfunction due to presumed or proven infection. Severe cases can have case fatality ratio 25% or higher in low-middle income countries, but early diagnosis and timely treatment have a proven benefit. The Smart Triage program in Jinja Regional Referral Hospital in Uganda will provide expedited sepsis treatment in children through a data-driven electronic patient triage system. To complement the ongoing Smart Triage interventional trial, we propose methods for a concurrent cost-effectiveness analysis of the Smart Triage platform. METHODS: We will use a decision-analytic model taking a societal perspective, combining government and out-of-pocket costs, as patients bear a sizeable portion of healthcare costs in Uganda due to the lack of universal health coverage. Previously published secondary data will be used to link healthcare utilization with costs and intermediate outcomes with mortality. We will model uncertainty via probabilistic sensitivity analysis and present findings at various willingness-to-pay thresholds using a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve. DISCUSSION: Our proposed analysis represents a first step in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of an innovative digital triage platform designed to improve clinical outcomes in pediatric sepsis through expediting care in low-resource settings. Our use of a decision analytic model to link secondary costing data, incorporate post-discharge healthcare utilization, and model clinical endpoints is also novel in the pediatric sepsis triage literature for low-middle income countries. Our analysis, together with subsequent analyses modelling budget impact and scale up, will inform future modifications to the Smart Triage platform, as well as motivate scale-up to the district and national levels. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration of parent clinical trial: NCT04304235, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04304235. Registered 11 March 2020.

Describing Sources of Uncertainty in Cancer Drug Formulary Priority Setting across Canada.

Over the years, there have been significant advances in oncology. However, the rate that therapeutics come to market has increased, while the strength of evidence has decreased. Currently, there is limited understanding about how these uncertainties are managed in provincial funding decisions for cancer therapeutics. We conducted qualitative interviews with six senior officials from four different Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Quebec, and Ontario) and a document review of the uncertainties found in submissions to the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR). Participants reported considerable uncertainty related to a lack of solid clinical evidence (early-phase clinical trials: generalizability, immature data, and the use of unvalidated surrogate outcomes). Proposed strategies to deal with the uncertainty included risk-sharing agreements, collection of real-world evidence (RWE), and ongoing collaboration between federal groups and provinces. The document review added to the reported uncertainties by classifying them into five main categories: trial validity, population, comparators, outcomes, and intervention. This study highlights how decision makers must deal with significant amounts of uncertainty in funding decisions for cancer drugs, most of which stems from methodological limitations in clinical trials. There is a critical need for transparent priority-setting processes and mechanisms to reevaluate drugs to ensure benefit given the high level of uncertainty of novel therapeutics.

Testing the Feasibility of Sensor-Based Home Health Monitoring (TEC4Home) to Support the Convalescence of Patients With Heart Failure: Pre-Post Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with heart failure (HF) can be affected by disabling symptoms and low quality of life. Furthermore, they may frequently need to visit the emergency department or be hospitalized due to their condition deteriorating. Home telemonitoring can play a role in tracking symptoms, reducing hospital visits, and improving quality of life. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to conduct a feasibility study of a home health monitoring (HHM) solution for patients with HF in British Columbia, Canada, to prepare for conducting a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Patients with HF were recruited from 3 urban hospitals and provided with HHM technology for 60 days of monitoring postdischarge. Participants were asked to monitor their weight, blood pressure, and heart rate and to answer symptomology questions via Bluetooth sensors and a tablet computer each day. A monitoring nurse received this data and monitored the patient's condition. In our evaluation, the primary outcome was the combination of unscheduled emergency department revisits of discharged participants or death within 90 days. Secondary outcomes included 90-day hospital readmissions, patient quality of life (as measured by Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Survey and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Scale), self-efficacy (as measured by European Heart Failure Self-Care Behaviour Scale 9), end-user experience, and health system cost-effectiveness including cost reduction and hospital bed capacity. In this feasibility study, we also tested the recruitment strategy, clinical protocols, evaluation framework, and data collection methods. RESULTS: Seventy participants were enrolled into this trial. Participant engagement to monitoring was measured at 94% (N=70; ie, data submitted 56/60 days on average). Our evaluation framework allowed us to collect sound data, which also showed encouraging trends: a 79% reduction of emergency department revisits post monitoring, an 87% reduction in hospital readmissions, and a 60% reduction in the median hospital length of stay (n=36). Cost of hospitalization for participants decreased by 71%, and emergency department visit costs decreased by 58% (n=30). Overall health system costs for our participants showed a 56% reduction post monitoring (n=30). HF-specific quality of life (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Scale) scores showed a significant increase of 101% (n=35) post monitoring (P<.001). General quality of life (Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Survey) improved by 19% (n=35) on the mental component score (P<.001) and 19% (n=35) on the physical component score (P=.02). Self-efficacy improved by 6% (n=35). Interviews with participants revealed that they were satisfied overall with the monitoring program and its usability, and participants reported being more engaged, educated, and involved in their self-management. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this small-sample feasibility study suggested that our HHM intervention can be beneficial in supporting patients post discharge. Additionally, key insights from the trial allowed us to refine our methods and procedures, such as shifting our recruitment methods to in-patient wards and increasing our scope of data collection. Although these findings are promising, a more rigorous trial design is required to test the true efficacy of the intervention. The results from this feasibility trial will inform our next step as we proceed with a randomized controlled trial across British Columbia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03439384; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03439384.

Economic and cost-effectiveness analysis of the Community-Level Interventions for Pre-eclampsia (CLIP) trials in India, Pakistan and Mozambique.

BACKGROUND: The Community-Level Interventions for Pre-eclampsia (CLIP) trials (NCT01911494) in India, Pakistan and Mozambique (February 2014-2017) involved community engagement and task sharing with community health workers for triage and initial treatment of pregnancy hypertension. Maternal and perinatal mortality was less frequent among women who received ≥8 CLIP contacts. The aim of this analysis was to assess the incremental costs and cost-effectiveness of the CLIP intervention overall in comparison to standard of care, and by PIERS (Pre-eclampsia Integrated Estimate of RiSk) On the Move (POM) mobile health application visit frequency. METHODS: Included were all women enrolled in the three CLIP trials who had delivered with known outcomes by trial end. According to the number of POM-guided home contacts received (0, 1-3, 4-7, ≥8), costs were collected from annual budgets and spending receipts, with inclusion of family opportunity costs in Pakistan. A decision tree model was built to determine the cost-effectiveness of the intervention (vs usual care), based on the primary clinical endpoint of years of life lost (YLL) for mothers and infants. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to assess uncertainty in the cost and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: The incremental per pregnancy cost of the intervention was US$12.66 (India), US$11.51 (Pakistan) and US$13.26 (Mozambique). As implemented, the intervention was not cost-effective due largely to minimal differences in YLL between arms. However, among women who received ≥8 CLIP contacts (four in Pakistan), the probability of health system and family (Pakistan) cost-effectiveness was ≥80% (all countries). CONCLUSION: The intervention was likely to be cost-effective for women receiving ≥8 contacts in Mozambique and India, and ≥4 in Pakistan, supporting WHO guidance on antenatal contact frequency. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01911494.

Cost-effectiveness of a Province-wide Quality Improvement Initiative for Reducing Potentially Inappropriate Use of Antipsychotics in Long-Term Care in British Columbia, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Potentially inappropriate use of antipsychotics (PIUA) raises serious concerns about safety, quality, and cost of care for residents in long-term care (LTC). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the Call for Less Antipsychotics in Long-Term Care (Clear) initiative compared with the status quo (pre-Clear, baseline). METHODS: A model-based cost-utility analysis, from a public-payer perspective in British Columbia, was conducted using secondary data of residents in LTC homes from 2013 to 2019. Residents' health resource utilization and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) measures were extracted from multiple administrative databases. Six Markov states were modelled for post-antipsychotic progression representing PIUA, appropriate use of antipsychotic, complete withdrawal, and death. The primary outcome was the incremental cost per QALY gained. RESULTS: A cohort of 35,669 residents was included in the primary analysis. The Clear initiative, over 10 years, was estimated to have an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CA$26,055 (2020 Canadian dollars) per QALY gained at an incremental cost of CA$5211 per resident and a QALY gain of 0.20. In the subgroup analyses, our findings were even more favourable for Clear wave 2 (ICER of CA$24,447 per QALY gained) and Clear wave 3 (ICER of CA$25,933 per QALY gained). At a willingness-to-pay of CA$50,000 per QALY gained, the probabilities of Clear waves 2 and 3 were 82% cost-effective. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated incremental costs and yielded favourable ICERs for Clear compared with the baseline. More research is needed to understand the level of support for individual care homes to sustain the Clear initiative in the long run.

Addressing prioritization in healthcare amidst a global pandemic.

Trade-offs abound in healthcare yet depending on where one stands relative to the stages of a pandemic, choice making may be more or less constrained. During the early stages of COVID-19 when there was much uncertainty, healthcare systems faced greater constraints and focused on the singular criterion of "flattening the curve." As COVID-19 progressed and the first wave diminished (relatively speaking depending on the jurisdiction), more opportunities presented for making explicit choices between COVID and non-COVID patients. Then, as the second wave surged, again decision makers were more constrained even as more information and greater understanding developed. Moving out of the pandemic to recovery, choice making becomes paramount as there are no set rules to lean back into historical patterns of resource allocation. In fact, the opportunity at hand, when using explicit tools for priority setting based on economic and ethical principles, is significant.

Describing practices of priority setting and resource allocation in publicly funded health care systems of high-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare spending has grown over the last decades in all developed countries. Making hard choices for investments in a rational, evidence-informed, systematic, transparent and legitimate manner constitutes an important objective. Yet, most scientific work in this area has focused on developing/improving prescriptive approaches for decision making and presenting case studies. The present work aimed to describe existing practices of priority setting and resource allocation (PSRA) within the context of publicly funded health care systems of high-income countries and inform areas for further improvement and research. METHODS: An online qualitative survey, developed from a theoretical framework, was administered with decision-makers and academics from 18 countries. 450 individuals were invited and 58 participated (13% of response rate). RESULTS: We found evidence that resource allocation is still largely carried out based on historical patterns and through ad hoc decisions, despite the widely held understanding that decisions should be based on multiple explicit criteria. Health technology assessment (HTA) was the tool most commonly indicated by respondents as a formal priority setting strategy. Several approaches were reported to have been used, with special emphasis on Program Budgeting and Marginal Analysis (PBMA), but limited evidence exists on their evaluation and routine use. Disinvestment frameworks are still very rare. There is increasing convergence on the use of multiple types of evidence to judge the value of investment options. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to establish formal and explicit processes and rationales for decision-making in priority setting and resource allocation have been still rare outside the HTA realm. Our work indicates the need of development/improvement of decision-making frameworks in PSRA that: 1) have well-defined steps; 2) are based on multiple criteria; 3) are capable of assessing the opportunity costs involved; 4) focus on achieving higher value and not just on adoption; 5) engage involved stakeholders and the general public; 6) make good use and appraisal of all evidence available; and 6) emphasize transparency, legitimacy, and fairness.

Practices of decision making in priority setting and resource allocation: a scoping review and narrative synthesis of existing frameworks.

BACKGROUND: Due to growing expenditures, health systems have been pushed to improve decision-making practices on resource allocation. This study aimed to identify which practices of priority setting and resource allocation (PSRA) have been used in healthcare systems of high-income countries. METHODS: A scoping literature review (2007-2019) was conducted to map empirical PSRA activities. A two-stage screening process was utilized to identify existing approaches and cluster similar frameworks. That was complemented with a gray literature and horizontal scanning. A narrative synthesis was carried out to make sense of the existing literature and current state of PSRA practices in healthcare. RESULTS: One thousand five hundred eighty five references were found in the peer-reviewed literature and 25 papers were selected for full-review. We identified three major types of decision-making framework in PSRA: 1) Program Budgeting and Marginal Analysis (PBMA); 2) Health Technology Assessment (HTA); and 3) Multiple-criteria value assessment. Our narrative synthesis indicates these formal frameworks of priority setting and resource allocation have been mostly implemented in episodic exercises with poor follow-up and evaluation. There seems to be growing interest for explicit robust rationales and ample stakeholder involvement, but that has not been the norm in the process of allocating resources within healthcare systems of high-income countries. CONCLUSIONS: No single dominate framework for PSRA appeared as the preferred approach across jurisdictions, but common elements exist both in terms of process and structure. Decision-makers worldwide can draw on our work in designing and implementing PSRA processes in their contexts.

Using a Formal Strategy of Priority Setting to Mitigate Austerity Effects Through Gains in Value: The Role of Program Budgeting and Marginal Analysis (PBMA) in the Brazilian Public Healthcare System.

The fiscal regime implemented in Brazil with the constitutional amendment 95 (EC-95) of December 2016 froze primary expenditures for 20 years, including healthcare spending. Previous studies have estimated strong negative effects of this policy on the health of Brazilians. Although there has been a constant pressure to repeal EC-95, this policy is unlikely to be changed in the near future. Thus, there is also a need to take actions within its own terms in order to mitigate its harmful consequences on population health. Shedding light on the existing evidence about the impact of austerity on health, the present work discusses how decision-makers can use a formal framework of decision making in priority setting and resource allocation to tackle the amplified budgetary strain. Drawing on principles of Program Budgeting and Marginal Analysis (PBMA), efficiency can be improved by shifting spending from low-value to higher-value areas, avoiding the "across-the-board cut" caused by non-differential consideration of expenditures in a context of mismatched growth of demand and supply of healthcare. By evaluating opportunity costs of investment and disinvestment proposals on the basis of multiple criteria and marginal analysis, the Brazilian public healthcare system could obtain gains in value, achieving better performance and attenuating the relative decline in spending on health brought by an austerity scenario.