Building better healthcare facilities through evidence-based design: breaking new ground at Vancouver Island Health Authority.

Many of today's healthcare facilities were constructed at least 50 years ago, and a growing number have outlived their useful lives. Despite renovations and renewals, they often fall short of providing an appropriate care setting. Clinicians and staff develop a mixture of compromises and workarounds simply to make things function. Evidence-based design principles are often absent from new healthcare facilities, perhaps because of lack of awareness of the principles or because implementing them may fall foul of short-term and short-sighted budgetary decisions. In planning a new healthcare facility in 2008, the executive team at Vancouver Island Health Authority decided to adopt the evidence-based design approach. They conducted site visits to newly constructed hospitals across North America and beyond, to determine best practices in terms of design and construction. These engagements resulted in the implementation of 102 evidence-based design principles and attributes in Victoria's Royal Jubilee hospital, a 500-bed Patient Care Centre. This $350M project was completed on time and on budget, showing that using evidence need not result in delays or higher costs. To date, the results of the evidence-based design are promising, with accolades coming from patients, staff and clinical partners, and a number of immediate and practical benefits for patients, families and care teams alike.

Priority-setting in health authorities: moving beyond the barriers. The Calgary experience.

The objective of this study was to identify key issues relevant to the development and implementation of a macro-level priority-setting framework (i.e., across broad service areas) within the Calgary Health Region. We used rigorous qualitative methods, including focus groups, meeting observations and interviews to identify views of decision-makers. Key issues relevant to macro-level priority-setting included: application of evidence, incentives, physician involvement, public involvement and application of values. Detailed insight into each of these issues was derived, including how best to handle related barriers to priority-setting in health organizations and important lessons for framework development. These lessons learned should provide insight for similar activity in other jurisdictions.

The evolution of PBMA: towards a macro-level priority setting framework for health regions.

To date, relatively little work on priority setting has been carried out at a macro-level across major portfolios within integrated health care organizations. This paper describes a macro marginal analysis (MMA) process for setting priorities and allocating resources in health authorities, based on work carried out in a major urban health region in Alberta, Canada. MMA centers around an expert working group of managers and clinicians who are charged with identifying areas for resource re-allocation on an ongoing basis. Trade-offs between services are based on locally defined criteria and are informed by multiple inputs such as evidence from the literature and local expert opinion. The approach is put forth as a significant improvement on historical resource allocation patterns.

Priority setting in health authorities: a novel approach to a historical activity.

As resources in health care are scarce, health authorities and other health organizations are charged with determining how best to spend limited resources. While a number of formal approaches to priority setting within health authorities have been used internationally, there has been limited success with such activity, particularly across major service portfolios. This participatory action research project instituted a novel priority setting framework, coined macro-marginal analysis (MMA), in a fully integrated urban health region in Alberta, Canada. The focus of MMA is on identifying areas for service growth and areas for resource release, then determining, based on pre-defined, locally generated criteria, if actual shifts or re-allocation of resources should occur. For fiscal year 2002/03, the Calgary Health Region identified over 40 M dollars in resource releases (approximately 3% of the total budget), which were made available for servicing the deficit, and more importantly for our purposes, re-investing in service growth areas. The MMA framework is pragmatic in nature and has the ability to incorporate relevant evidence directly into the decision-making process. This work constitutes a significant advancement in health economics, and responds where previous priority setting approaches have failed in that it allows decision-makers to achieve genuine re-allocation of resources with the aim of improving population health or better meeting other important criteria.