Department for Health Evidence (HEV), Radboud Institute for Health Sciences (RIHS), Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2022 Oct 19;11(10):2337-2339. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2022.6940. Epub 2022 Mar 2.
The article by Waitzberg et al on dual agency in hospitals reports on three strategies to mitigate dilemmas arising from conflicting clinical and economic considerations. This could be further explored by using systems science methods that allow in-depth analyses of (health) system dynamics, networks, and agent-based modelling, and that take into account local context, incentives and how institutions work. Future studies may also draw on the literature of multi-criteria decision-making and evidence-informed deliberative processes (EDPs) that are increasingly being used to optimise legitimate health benefit package design. Toolkits to assist hospital professionals in improving their decision-making need to be practical, with ample attention for the process of decision-making, including transparency, use of evidence, and opportunities for health professionals (and possibly others stakeholders) to contest or formally appeal against certain decisions.
Waitzberg 等人撰写的关于医院双重代理的文章报告了三种策略,可以减轻因临床和经济考虑相互冲突而产生的困境。可以使用系统科学方法进一步探讨这一问题,这些方法可以深入分析(卫生)系统动态、网络和基于代理的建模,并考虑到当地背景、激励措施以及机构的运作方式。未来的研究也可能借鉴多标准决策和循证审议程序(EDPs)的文献,这些文献越来越多地被用于优化合法的健康福利套餐设计。协助医院专业人员改善决策的工具包需要实用,充分关注决策过程,包括透明度、证据的使用,以及卫生专业人员(可能还有其他利益相关者)对某些决策提出质疑或正式上诉的机会。