Value-Based Health Care

基于价值的医疗保健
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目标:基于价值的医疗保健(VBHC)将患者结果置于医疗保健流程的中心,同时优化跨多个利益相关者的医院资源使用。这次范围审查是为了总结VBHC在理论和实践中的表现,它是如何应用于评估医院绩效的,以及它最终得到了多好的实施。
    方法:对于这篇综述,我们遵循了PRISMA-ScR协议,并在5个主要的在线数据库中搜索了2006年1月至2022年7月期间发表的文章.我们纳入了使用VBHC概念对医疗机构进行绩效评估的原创文章。我们提取并分析了VBHC维度的关键概念和信息,在绩效评估中使用VBHC的具体策略和方法,以及评估的有效性。
    结果:我们从7866篇文章中确定了48项符合条件的研究。19项非经验研究集中在VBHC绩效评估指标体系的开发上,29项实证研究报告了将VBHC引入绩效评估及其有效性的方法和要点。最终,我们总结了关键维度,进程,以及引入VBHC后的绩效评估效果。
    结论:当前的医疗保健绩效评估已开始将重点放在实施VBHC作为一项综合战略上,未来的工作应进一步阐明指标的可靠性及其与评估结果的关联,并考虑临床结果和患者报告结果的有效整合.
    OBJECTIVE: Value-based healthcare (VBHC) puts patient outcomes at the center of the healthcare process while optimizing the use of hospital resources across multiple stakeholders. This scoping review was conducted to summarize how VBHC had been represented in theory and in practice, how it had been applied to assess hospital performance, and how well it had been ultimately implemented.
    METHODS: For this review, we followed the PRISMA-ScR protocol and searched five major online databases for articles published between January 2006 and July 2022. We included original articles that used the concept of VBHC to conduct performance assessments of healthcare organizations. We extracted and analyzed key concepts and information on the dimensions of VBHC, specific strategies and methods for using VBHC in performance assessment, and the effectiveness of the assessment.
    RESULTS: We identified 48 eligible studies from 7866 articles. Nineteen nonempirical studies focused on the development of a VBHC performance assessment indicator system, and 29 empirical studies reported on the ways and points of introducing VBHC into performance assessment and its effectiveness. Ultimately, we summarized the key dimensions, processes, and effects of performance assessment after introducing VBHC.
    CONCLUSIONS: Current healthcare performance assessment has begun to focus on implementing VBHC as an integrated strategy, and future work should further clarify the reliability of metrics and their association with evaluation outcomes and consider the effective integration of clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    Long-term care insurance (LTCI) is a significant approach in the effort to actively manage aging and the currently unmet need for aged care in China. Based on data from the 2011, 2013, 2015, and 2018 phases of the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study, we used the propensity score matching-difference in difference (PSM-DID) approach to explore the impact of LTCI on out-of-pocket medical expenses and self-rated health. Results showed that LTCI can significantly reduce out-of-pocket medical expenses by 37.16% (p < 0.01) per year and improve self-rated health by 5.73% (p < 0.01), which conforms to the spirit of “value-based health care”. The results were found to be stable in the robustness tests conducted. Currently, China is at the intersection of “low-value-based health care” and “value-based health care”. Improving the health level of aged individuals while keeping medical costs under reasonable control is crucial for formulating and implementing a new round of healthcare reform in China.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    成骨不全症(OI)是一种遗传性疾病,也称为“脆性骨病”。OI的临床表现表现出广泛的差异。因此,OI患者的护理需要跨学科的方法。由于患者结局的非标准化和广泛差异,因此难以比较文献中可用的结局指标,因此尚不清楚跨学科团队的特定干预措施和治疗方案的有效性。只有达成共识,综合评估OI的标准结果指标集,将来可以跨跨学科治疗中心进行OI的比较。由27名成员组成的Key4OI国际跨学科工作组使用共识驱动的改良Delphi方法为OI患者制定了一套全球结局指标。国际功能分类,残疾与健康(ICF)用于定义域和组织文献检索结果。在回顾了从文献中提取的结果后,审判和登记处,工作组就最终选择领域及其定义(ICF定义以及非专业描述)达成一致。然后将这些域呈现给焦点小组,这些焦点小组通过考虑对OI社区重要的项目来优先考虑结果域。收集并分析所有内容物,并确定最终结构域。通过Delphi轮达成了每个领域适当测量仪器的共识。整个方法与国际健康结果测量协会ICHOM方法一致。
    在我们的文献检索中确定了超过400种不同的结局指标。经过三轮德尔福,选择了24个结构域。在焦点小组会议之后,结构域的数量减少到15个。就涵盖儿童和成人这些领域的测量仪器达成了共识。
    Key4OI项目产生了一套标准的结果衡量标准,侧重于OI个人及其家人的需求和愿望。该结果集将使医疗保健团队和系统能够比较并改善其全球护理途径和护理质量。需要进一步的研究来评估这一标准化结果集的实施。
    Osteogenesis Imperfecta (OI) is a genetic disorder also known as \'brittle bone disease\'. The clinical manifestation of OI shows a wide variation. Therefore, care for patients with OI requires an interdisciplinary approach. The effectiveness of particular interventions and treatment protocols of interdisciplinary teams is not clear due to a non-standardized and wide variation of patient outcomes thus making the comparison of outcome measures available in the literature difficult. It is only by agreeing on a common, standard set of outcome measures for the comprehensive appraisal of OI that comparisons across interdisciplinary treatment centers for OI will be possible in the future.
    The Key4OI international interdisciplinary working group of 27 members used a consensus-driven modified Delphi approach to develop a set of global outcome measures for patients with OI. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), was used to define domains and organize the outcomes from the literature search. After reviewing the outcomes extracted from the literature, trials and registries, the working group agreed on a final selection of domains and their definition (ICF definition as well as a lay description). These domains were then presented to the focus groups who prioritized the outcome domains by taking into account the items important to the OI community. All content was collected and analyzed and final domains were determined. A consensus of appropriate measuring instruments for each domain was reached with Delphi rounds. The entire approach was in line with the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement ICHOM methodology.
    More than 400 different outcome measures were identified in our literature search. After three Delphi rounds, 24 domains were selected. After the focus group sessions, the number of domains were reduced to 15. A consensus was reached on the measuring instruments to cover these domains for both children and adults.
    The Key4OI project resulted in standard set of outcome measures focused on the needs and wishes of individuals with OI and their families. This outcome set will enable healthcare teams and systems to compare and to improve their care pathways and quality of care worldwide. Further studies are needed to evaluate the implementation of this standardized outcome set.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    随着世界各地的卫生系统越来越多地寻求衡量和提高他们为患者提供的护理价值,能够衡量对患者最重要的结果是至关重要的。为了支持房颤(AF)向基于价值的医疗保健的转变,国际健康结果测量联盟(ICHOM)组建了一个由30名志愿者组成的国际工作组(WG),包括卫生专业人员和患者代表,为临床环境中的基准护理提供制定标准化的最低结果集。
    使用在线修改的Delphi流程,选择对患者和卫生专业人员重要的结局,并将其分类为(i)疾病结局的长期后果,(ii)治疗结果的并发症,和(iii)患者报告的结果。工作组确定了人口统计学和临床变量,用作病例混合风险调整器。这些包括基线人口统计,合并症,认知功能,诊断日期,疾病持续时间,规定的药物和AF程序,除了吸烟,体重指数(BMI),酒精摄入量,和身体活动。在适当的情况下,为了便于实施,使用ICD代码实现了结果和病例组合变量的标准化。标准集进行了一个开放的审查过程,其中超过80%的接受调查的患者同意标准集捕获的结果。
    实施这些共识建议可以帮助机构监督,比较和改善慢性房颤护理的质量和交付。它们一致的定义和收集,在适用的情况下使用ICD代码,还可以扩大房颤中更多以患者为中心的临床结局研究的实施。
    As health systems around the world increasingly look to measure and improve the value of care that they provide to patients, being able to measure the outcomes that matter most to patients is vital. To support the shift towards value-based health care in atrial fibrillation (AF), the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) assembled an international Working Group (WG) of 30 volunteers, including health professionals and patient representatives to develop a standardized minimum set of outcomes for benchmarking care delivery in clinical settings.
    Using an online-modified Delphi process, outcomes important to patients and health professionals were selected and categorized into (i) long-term consequences of disease outcomes, (ii) complications of treatment outcomes, and (iii) patient-reported outcomes. The WG identified demographic and clinical variables for use as case-mix risk adjusters. These included baseline demographics, comorbidities, cognitive function, date of diagnosis, disease duration, medications prescribed and AF procedures, as well as smoking, body mass index (BMI), alcohol intake, and physical activity. Where appropriate, and for ease of implementation, standardization of outcomes and case-mix variables was achieved using ICD codes. The standard set underwent an open review process in which over 80% of patients surveyed agreed with the outcomes captured by the standard set.
    Implementation of these consensus recommendations could help institutions to monitor, compare and improve the quality and delivery of chronic AF care. Their consistent definition and collection, using ICD codes where applicable, could also broaden the implementation of more patient-centric clinical outcomes research in AF.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号