Value-based care

基于价值的护理
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    南非的康复需求在1990年至2017年之间翻了一番,预计未来几年还会增加。然而,南非人(以及全球)的康复需求在很大程度上仍未得到满足。建立对康复价值的共识可以为临床实践和政策制定提供信息,以实现全民健康覆盖(UHC)。
    本研究旨在通过收集利益相关者的观点来探索南非公共医疗保健部门康复服务的价值。目标是为与在南非实施国家健康保险(NHI)有关的政策决定提供信息。
    这项研究采用了现象学方法和解释主义范式。半结构化访谈是面对面进行的,在线,或与来自各个康复部门的12个利益相关者进行电话联系。对康复的价值进行了分析,并将其分为五大类:背景,服务交付,患者结果,经济和金融组成部分,以及部门内部和部门之间的合作。
    发现康复的价值是多方面的,由于健康状况的不同,经济,以及许多南非人面临的社会挑战。
    该研究确定了基于价值的康复的组成部分,这些组成部分应在拟议的南非NHI中优先考虑。未来的研究应该探索所有利益相关者的观点,包括患者,并为康复的经济和社会价值提供经验证据。
    我们强调对南非和其他中低收入国家(LMICs)的康复价值至关重要的优先领域。根据患者和社区需求量身定制康复服务对于实现基于价值的护理至关重要。鉴于南非对《联合国残疾人权利公约》的承诺,优先考虑康复仍然至关重要。
    UNASSIGNED: The need for rehabilitation in South Africa has doubled between 1990 and 2017 and is expected to increase in the coming years. However, the rehabilitation needs of South Africans (and globally) remain largely unmet. Establishing a common understanding of the value of rehabilitation can inform clinical practice and policymaking to achieve Universal Health Coverage (UHC).
    UNASSIGNED: This study aims to explore the value of rehabilitation services in South Africa\'s public healthcare sector by gathering perspectives from stakeholders. The goal is to inform policy decisions related to the implementation of National Health Insurance (NHI) in South Africa.
    UNASSIGNED: The study used a phenomenological approach and interpretivist paradigm. Semi-structured interviews were conducted face-to-face, online, or telephonically with 12 stakeholders from various rehabilitation sectors. The value of rehabilitation was analysed and categorised into five main categories: context, service delivery, patient outcomes, economic and financial components, and collaboration within and between sectors.
    UNASSIGNED: The value of rehabilitation was found to be multifaceted, because of the varying health, economic, and social challenges faced by many South Africans.
    UNASSIGNED: The study identified components of value-based rehabilitation that should be prioritised in the proposed NHI of South Africa. Future research should explore all stakeholder perspectives, including patients, and provide empirical evidence of rehabilitation\'s economic and societal value.
    UNASSIGNED: We highlight priority areas that are central to the value of rehabilitation in South Africa and other low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Tailoring rehabilitation services to patient and community needs is crucial for achieving value-based care. Given South Africa\'s commitment to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, prioritising rehabilitation remains essential.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    基于价值的护理(VBC)支付模式作为传统的收费服务范式的替代方案变得越来越普遍。本研究使用美国医学院协会“2022年全国医师抽样调查”量化了医师特征与参与VBC支付模式之间的关系。我们使用医生级别的变量指定了逻辑回归,以评估与当前和新参与责任护理组织的关联。初级保健第一模式,capitation,和捆绑付款。我们的结果表明,大多数受访者从事至少1个VBC。参与根据几个特点而有所不同,和医师专业高度预测总体参与。与初级保健医生(PCP)相比,医院医生(比值比[OR]=0.6,P<.001),医学专家(OR=0.5,P<.001),精神科医生(OR=0.4,P<.001),和外科医生(OR=0.5,P<.001)不太可能参与VBC模型。与PCP相比,医学专家和外科医生参与商业人头任务的可能性较小,虽然医学专家和产科医生/妇科医生比PCP更有可能参与某些捆绑。我们建议采取一些政策,通过包括专家并吸引提供者和患者来缩小跨专业参与差距。
    Value-based care (VBC) payment models are becoming increasingly prevalent as alternatives to the traditional fee-for-service paradigm. This research quantifies the relationship between physician characteristics and participation in VBC payment models using the Association of American Medical Colleges\' 2022 National Sample Survey of Physicians. We specified logistic regressions using physician-level variables to assess associations with current and new participation in Accountable Care Organizations, Primary Care First model, capitation, and bundled payments. Our results indicate that most respondents engaged in at least 1 VBC. Participation varied based on several characteristics, and physician specialty was highly predictive of overall participation. Compared with primary care physicians (PCPs), hospital-based physicians (odds ratio [OR] = 0.6, P < .001), medical specialists (OR = 0.5, P < .001), psychiatrists (OR = 0.4, P < .001), and surgeons (OR = 0.5, P < .001) were less likely to participate in VBC models. Medical specialists and surgeons were less likely to participate in commercial capitation than PCPs, while medical specialists and obstetricians/gynecologists were more likely to participate in certain bundles than PCPs. We suggest several policies to close the cross-specialty participation gap by including specialists and appealing to providers and patients.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Editorial
    暂无摘要。
    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
    人们越来越认识到IBD对患者健康的相关双向影响,以及多学科团队解决这些独特需求的潜在好处。在某些IBD中心,已经朝着以患者为中心的方向发展,整体护理,以增进福祉并改善与健康相关的结果。多个模型,结合各种学科,护理方式,数字工具和护理交付,和资源支持已经出现在IBD。虽然大多数IBD卓越中心现在都采用了这种多学科护理模式,许多实践仍在实践IBD有限的专科护理,限制对IBD本身及其直接后果的评估和干预(例如肠外表现)。在这篇文章中,我们试图回顾IBD护理向以患者为中心的演变,整体模型(称为360IBD护理),包括数字健康工具的作用和影响,监测,并在IBD中交付,以及向基于价值的护理模式的转变,讨论IBD中的付款人优先事项。我们还建议IBD从业人员在当地范围内纳入整体护理要素的潜在机会。一起,我们希望这种护理模式不仅能提高IBD特定的健康结果,而且还可以改善我们今天和明天IBD患者的总体健康状况。
    There is increasing recognition of the associated bi-directional impact of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on patient well-being and the potential benefit of multidisciplinary teams to address these unique needs. At certain IBD centers, there has been an evolution towards patient-centric, holistic care to enhance well-being and improve health-related outcomes. Multiple models, incorporating various disciplines, care modalities, digital tools and care delivery, and resource support have arisen in IBD. Although most IBD centers of excellence are now incorporating such multidisciplinary care models, many practices still practice IBD-limited specialty care, limiting evaluations and interventions to the IBD itself and its direct consequences (eg, extraintestinal manifestations). In this piece, we seek to review the evolution of IBD care towards a patient-centric, holistic model (termed 360 IBD Care) including the role and impact of digital health tools, monitoring, and delivery in IBD, and a shift towards value-based care models with discussion of payor priorities in IBD. We also suggest potential opportunities for IBD practitioners to incorporate elements of holistic care on a local scale. Together, we hope such care models will enhance not only IBD-specific health outcomes, but also improve the general well-being of our patients with IBD today and tomorrow.
    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
    背景:选择性腰椎融合术因使用不当而受到批评。这里,我们使用新的操作价值指数(OVI)来评估是否“指示”,基于证据的腰椎融合与价值增加(每美元支出的结局)相关.
    方法:本研究是对一个大型学术机构接受择期腰椎融合术的294例患者的前瞻性观察性队列的回顾性分析。所有患者术前由一组神经外科医生评估是否与循证医学(EBM)一致,通过北美脊柱协会的指导方针确定。收集所有患者术前和术后6个月的Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)评分。采用时间驱动的基于活动的成本计算(TDABC)来确定直接和间接的术中成本。OVI被定义为术中每花费1,000美元的ODI改善百分比。广义线性混合模型(GLMM)回归,调整混杂因素,进行评估EBM一致性手术是否与较高的OVI相关。
    结果:在294次选择性腰椎融合中,92.9%(n=273)与EBM一致。EBM一致腰椎融合术的平均总成本为17,932美元(用品:13,020美元;人员:4,314美元),相比之下,EBM不一致融合的费用为20,616美元(用品:15,467美元;人员:4,758美元)。一致融合的平均OVI为2.27,与不一致融合的0.11相比。GLMM分析显示,EBM一致病例与OVI明显升高相关(β系数2.0,p<0.001)。
    结论:术中每花费1,000美元,EBM一致融合与ODI评分比基线提高2%相关。因此,提高腰椎融合器指南依从性的系统方法可以提高规模价值。
    BACKGROUND: Elective lumbar fusions have received criticism for inappropriate utilization. Here, we use a novel Operative Value Index (OVI) to assess whether \"indicated,\" evidence-based lumbar fusions are associated with increased value (outcomes per dollar spent).
    METHODS: This study is a retrospective analysis of a prospective observational cohort of 294 patients undergoing elective lumbar fusions at a single large academic institution. All patients were preoperatively evaluated by a panel of neurosurgeons for concordance with evidence-based medicine (EBM), determined through guidelines from the North American Spine Society. Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were collected for all patients both preoperatively and at 6-months postoperatively. Time-driven activity-based costing was employed to determine both direct and indirect intraoperative costs. The OVI was defined as the percent improvement in ODI per $1000 spent intraoperatively. Generalized linear mixed model regression, adjusting for confounders, was performed to assess whether EBM-concordant surgeries were associated with higher OVI.
    RESULTS: Of 294 elective lumbar fusions, 92.9% (n = 273) were EBM-concordant. The average total cost of an EBM-concordant lumbar fusion was $17,932 (supplies: $13,020; personnel: $4314), compared to $20,616 (supplies: $15,467; personnel: $4758) for an EBM-discordant fusion. Average OVI was 2.27 for a concordant fusion, compared to 0.11 for a discordant fusion. Generalized linear mixed model analysis revealed that EBM-concordant cases were associated with significantly higher OVI (β-coefficient 2.0, P < 0.001).
    CONCLUSIONS: EBM-concordant fusions were associated with 2% greater improvement in ODI scores from baseline for every $1000 spent intraoperatively. Systematic methods for increasing guideline adherence for lumbar fusions could therefore improve value at scale.
    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
    暂无摘要。
    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
    背景:最近一直在推动将以前在医院门诊外科(HOPD)进行的手术过渡到门诊手术中心(ASC)。然而,关于术后早期并发症和护理利用差异的数据有限(例如,急诊科就诊和计划外入院)可能会导致总体成本增加或结果更糟。
    目的:/假设:本研究的目的是检查与肩关节手术相关的90天早期不良结局和术后急诊就诊的差异,排除在HOPD和ASC中在封闭式军事医疗系统中进行的关节置换术。我们假设治疗设置之间的结果没有差异。
    方法:我们回顾性评估了2015年至2020年1,748例选择性肩关节手术的记录。根据患者是否在ASC或HOPD环境中接受手术,将患者视为两个队列之一。我们评估了不同群体的复杂性,手术时间,和医疗风险。结果措施是急诊就诊,计划外入院,以及术后前90天内的并发症。
    结果:在HOPDs(n=606)和ASCs(n=1142)进行的术后90天急诊就诊没有差异。在HOPD队列中,手术后90天内计划外入院率略有增加,最常见的是疼痛或过夜观察。手术时间明显缩短(105vs119分钟,p<0.01)在ASC,但两组病例复杂性无差异(p=0.28).
    结论:我们的结果表明,在适当的患者中,ASC中的手术可以安全地利用其成本节约,效率,患者满意度,手术时间减少,在术中和术后早期可能会降低资源利用率。
    BACKGROUND: There has been a recent push to transition procedures previously performed at hospital-based outpatient surgical departments (HOPDs) to ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). However, limited data regarding differences in early postoperative complications and care utilization (e.g., emergency department visits and unplanned admissions) may drive increased overall costs or worse outcomes.
    OBJECTIVE: /Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to examine differences in early 90-day adverse outcomes and postoperative emergency department visits associated with shoulder surgeries excluding arthroplasties that were performed in HOPDs and ASCs in a closed military health care system. We hypothesized that there would be no difference in outcomes between treatment settings.
    METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the records for 1,748 elective shoulder surgeries from 2015 to 2020. Patients were considered as one of two cohorts depending on whether they underwent surgery in an ASC or HOPD setting. We evaluated groups for differences incomplexity, surgical time, and medical risk. Outcome measures were emergency department visits, unplanned hospital admissions, and complications within the first 90 days after surgery.
    RESULTS: There was no difference in 90-day postoperative emergency department visits between procedures performed at HOPDs (n = 606) and ASCs (n = 1142). There was a slight increase in rate of unplanned hospital admission within 90 days after surgery in the HOPD cohort, most commonly for pain or overnight observation. The surgical time was significantly shorter (105 vs 119 minutes, p <0.01) at the ASC, but there was no difference in case complexity between the cohorts (p = 0.28).
    CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that in appropriate patients, surgery in ASCs can be safely leveraged for its costs savings, efficiency, patient satisfaction, decreases in operative time, and potentially decreased resource utilization both during surgery and in the early postoperative period.
    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
    暂无摘要。
    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
    背景:肺癌切除术主要集中在围手术期结果上(例如,死亡率)到基准性能。虽然围手术期结局和服务利用率存在差异(例如,门诊程序,住院治疗)已经独立证明,对这些结局之间的关联评估有限.我们评估了围手术期结局与服务利用率之间的关系,以评估更广泛的护理背景下提供者的表现。
    方法:这是一项2017年至2019年肺癌切除术患者的回顾性队列研究。我们利用分层逻辑回归模型来确定风险和可靠性调整后的死亡率以及风险调整后的服务利用率,在医院层面。然后,我们评估了围手术期死亡率的四分位数对服务的利用。
    结果:297家医院共有15,168名患者接受了肺癌切除术。平均风险和可靠性调整后的90天死亡率在四分位数的1.58%(95%CI,1.54%-1.62%)和2.74%(95%CI,2.59%-2.90%)之间变化。在表现最好(死亡率最低)的四分位数中,所有门诊手术的风险调整利用率最高,为37.7%(95%CI,33.6%-41.8%)。此外,手术前和手术后风险调整后的住院患者利用率在表现最好的四分位数中最低,分别为15%(95%CI,13.7%-16.3%)和19.3%(95%CI,17.5%-21.0%),分别。
    结论:围手术期死亡率最低的医院显示出在手术前使用更多门诊资源的趋势,但肺癌切除的住院服务较少。这种相关性突出了除其他指标外还纳入服务利用的重要性,以描述在更广泛的护理范围内进行肺癌切除术的中心的效率和有效性。
    BACKGROUND: Lung cancer resection has largely focused on perioperative outcomes (eg, mortality) to benchmark performance. While variations in perioperative outcomes and in utilization of services (eg, ambulatory procedures, hospitalization) have been independently demonstrated, there has been limited evaluation of associations between these outcomes. We evaluated the association between perioperative outcomes and utilization of services to evaluate provider performance across a broader context of care.
    METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing lung cancer resection in 2017 to 2019. We utilized hierarchical logistic regression models to determine risk- and reliability-adjusted mortality and risk-adjusted utilization of services, at the hospital-level. We then evaluated utilization of services across quartiles of perioperative mortality.
    RESULTS: A total of 15,168 patients across 297 hospitals underwent lung cancer resection. Mean risk- and reliability-adjusted 90-day mortality varied between 1.58% (95% CI, 1.54%-1.62%) and 2.74% (95% CI, 2.59%-2.90%) across quartiles. Risk-adjusted utilization of all ambulatory procedures was highest in the best performing (lowest mortality) quartile at 37.7% (95% CI, 33.6%-41.8%). Additionally, risk-adjusted inpatient utilization prior to and after surgery was lowest in the best performing quartile at 15% (95% CI, 13.7%-16.3%) and 19.3% (95% CI, 17.5%-21.0%), respectively.
    CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals with the lowest perioperative mortality demonstrated trends towards using more outpatient resources prior to surgery, but fewer inpatient services surrounding lung cancer resection. This correlation highlights the importance of incorporating utilization of services in addition to other metrics to profile the efficiency and effectiveness of centers performing lung cancer resection across a broader spectrum of care.
    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
    尽管在高效抗肥胖药物方面取得了显著的临床进展,它们的高价格和潜在的预算影响在平衡公平获取和可负担性方面构成了重大挑战。虽然大多数注意力都集中在减轻体重上,在个体停止减肥后,人们对维持减肥的干预措施考虑较少.使用策略模拟模型,我们量化了初始全剂量胰高血糖素样肽1(GLP-1)受体激动剂或肠促胰岛素模拟物使用后体重减轻平台后体重维持计划的影响.我们测量了长期医疗保健节省和一些健康益处的损失(例如,保持减肥,改善心脏代谢危险因素,并减少糖尿病和心血管事件)。我们的模型表明,与连续长期全剂量GLP-1受体激动剂或肠促胰岛素模拟药物相比,替代的体重维持计划将产生较少的临床获益,同时节省大量的终身医疗保健支出.使用较便宜且可能不太有效的替代体重维持计划可以提供额外的余量,以在积极的减肥阶段扩大获得抗肥胖药物的机会,而不会增加总的医疗保健支出。
    Despite remarkable clinical advances in highly effective anti-obesity medications, their high price and potential budget impact pose a major challenge in balancing equitable access and affordability. While most attention has been focused on the amount of weight loss achieved, less consideration has been paid to interventions to sustain weight loss after an individual stops losing weight. Using a policy simulation model, we quantified the impact of a weight-maintenance program following the weight-loss plateau from the initial full-dose glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists or incretin mimetic use. We measured long-term health care savings and the loss of some health benefits (eg, maintenance of weight loss, improvements in cardiometabolic risk factors, and reductions in diabetes and cardiovascular events). Our model suggested that, compared with continuous long-term full-dose GLP-1 receptor agonists or incretin mimetic drugs, the alternative weight-maintenance program would generate slightly fewer clinical benefits while generating substantial savings in lifetime health care spending. Using less expensive and potentially less effective alternative weight-maintenance programs may provide additional headroom to expand access to anti-obesity medications during the active weight-loss phase without increasing total health care spending.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号