Developing a combined framework for priority setting in integrated health and social care systems

被引:2
|
作者
Collins, Marissa [1 ]
Mazzei, Micaela [1 ]
Baker, Rachel [1 ]
Morton, Alec [2 ]
Frith, Lucy [3 ]
Syrett, Keith [4 ]
Leak, Paul [5 ]
Donaldson, Cam [1 ]
机构
[1] Glasgow Caledonian Univ, Yunus Ctr Social Business & Hlth, Glasgow, Scotland
[2] Univ Strathclyde, Dept Management Sci, Glasgow, Scotland
[3] Univ Manchester, Ctr Social Eth & Policy, Manchester, England
[4] Univ Bristol, Law Sch, Bristol, England
[5] Scottish Govt, Directorate Hlth & Social Care, Edinburgh, Scotland
关键词
Priority setting; Resource allocation; Integration; Economics; Decision science; Ethics; Law; MULTICRITERIA DECISION-ANALYSIS; RESOURCE-ALLOCATION; ACCOUNTABILITY; ECONOMICS;
D O I
10.1186/s12913-023-09866-x
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
BackgroundThere is an international move towards greater integration of health and social care to cope with the increasing demand on services.. In Scotland, legislation was passed in 2014 to integrate adult health and social care services resulting in the formation of 31 Health and Social Care Partnerships (HSCPs). Greater integration does not eliminate resource scarcity and the requirement to make (resource) allocation decisions to meet the needs of local populations. There are different perspectives on how to facilitate and improve priority setting in health and social care organisations with limited resources, but structured processes at the local level are still not widely implemented. This paper reports on work with new HSCPs in Scotland to develop a combined multi-disciplinary priority setting and resource allocation framework.MethodsTo develop the combined framework, a scoping review of the literature was conducted to determine the key principles and approaches to priority setting from economics, decision-analysis, ethics and law, and attempts to combine such approaches. Co-production of the combined framework involved a multi-disciplinary workshop including local, and national-level stakeholders and academics to discuss and gather their views.ResultsThe key findings from the literature review and the stakeholder workshop were taken to produce a final combined framework for priority setting and resource allocation. This is underpinned by principles from economics (opportunity cost), decision science (good decisions), ethics (justice) and law (fair procedures). It outlines key stages in the priority setting process, including: framing the question, looking at current use of resources, defining options and criteria, evaluating options and criteria, and reviewing each stage. Each of these has further sub-stages and includes a focus on how the combined framework interacts with the consultation and involvement of patients, public and the wider staff.ConclusionsThe integration agenda for health and social care is an opportunity to develop and implement a combined framework for setting priorities and allocating resources fairly to meet the needs of the population. A key aim of both integration and the combined framework is to facilitate the shifting of resources from acute services to the community.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Priority setting, justice, and health care: Conceptual analysis
    Nilstun, T
    CROATIAN MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 41 (04) : 375 - 377
  • [22] Health care priority setting: Principles, practice and challenges
    Mitton C.
    Donaldson C.
    Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 2 (1)
  • [23] Priority Setting in Health Care with Disease and Treatment Risks
    Yuqing TAO
    Wen CHENG
    Sijie ZOU
    JournalofSystemsScienceandInformation, 2018, 6 (06) : 552 - 562
  • [24] Priority-Setting on the Path to Universal Health Care
    Rand, Leah Z.
    JOURNAL OF LAW MEDICINE & ETHICS, 2023, 51 (01): : 150 - 152
  • [25] Social values and health priority setting in Australia: An analysis applied to the context of health technology assessment
    Whitty, Jennifer A.
    Littlejohns, Peter
    HEALTH POLICY, 2015, 119 (02) : 127 - 136
  • [26] Priority setting in primary health care - dilemmas and opportunities: a focus group study
    Arvidsson, Eva
    Andre, Malin
    Borgquist, Lars
    Carlsson, Per
    BMC FAMILY PRACTICE, 2010, 11
  • [27] Guidance on priority setting in health care (GPS-Health): the inclusion of equity criteria not captured by cost-effectiveness analysis
    Norheim, Ole F.
    Baltussen, Rob
    Johri, Mira
    Chisholm, Dan
    Nord, Erik
    Brock, Dan W.
    Carlsson, Per
    Cookson, Richard
    Daniels, Norman
    Danis, Marion
    Fleurbaey, Marc
    Johansson, Kjell A.
    Kapiriri, Lydia
    Littlejohns, Peter
    Mbeeli, Thomas
    Rao, Krishna D.
    Edejer, Tessa Tan-Torres
    Wikler, Dan
    COST EFFECTIVENESS AND RESOURCE ALLOCATION, 2014, 12
  • [28] Guidance on priority setting in health care (GPS-Health): the inclusion of equity criteria not captured by cost-effectiveness analysis
    Ole F Norheim
    Rob Baltussen
    Mira Johri
    Dan Chisholm
    Erik Nord
    DanW Brock
    Per Carlsson
    Richard Cookson
    Norman Daniels
    Marion Danis
    Marc Fleurbaey
    Kjell A Johansson
    Lydia Kapiriri
    Peter Littlejohns
    Thomas Mbeeli
    Krishna D Rao
    Tessa Tan-Torres Edejer
    Dan Wikler
    Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 12
  • [29] Integrated working: developing our role in adult health and social care teams
    Mason, M.
    Hurst, H.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY, 2016, 79 : 133 - 133
  • [30] Health care priority setting in Norway a multicriteria decision analysis
    Defechereux, Thierry
    Paolucci, Francesco
    Mirelman, Andrew
    Youngkong, Sitaporn
    Botten, Grete
    Hagen, Terje P.
    Niessen, Louis W.
    BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2012, 12