Improvement and Experience, St. Vincent's Health Australia, Level 5, 340 Albert Road, East, Melbourne, Victoria, 3002, Australia.
Health Services Management, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, 3086, Australia.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Mar 10;23(1):237. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09258-1.
Governments, funders and hospital managers around the world are looking for ways to address the continual growth in expenditure by reducing the level of waste in the healthcare delivery system and improving the value of care provided to patients. Process improvement methods are applied to increase high value care, reduce low value care and remove waste from care processes. The purpose of this study is to review the literature to identify the methods used by hospitals to measure and capture financial benefits from PI initiatives to identify best practice. The review also pursues the way hospitals collate these benefits at the enterprise level to achieve improved financial performance.
A systematic review was undertaken in line with the PRISMA process and employed qualitative research methods. Databases searched were Medline, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINHAL), Web of Science and SCOPUS. The initial search was conducted in in July 2021 with a follow up search conducted in February 2023 using the same search terms and databases to identify additional studies published in the intervening period. The search terms were identified through the PICO (Participants, Interventions, Comparisons and Outcomes) method.
Seven papers were identified that reported reduction in care process waste or improvement of the value of care using an evidence-based PI approach and included financial benefits analysis. Positive financial impact was measured for the PI initiatives but none of the studies reported how these financial benefits were captured or applied at the enterprise level. Three of the studies suggested that sophisticated cost accounting systems were required to enable this.
The study demonstrates the paucity of literature in the field of PI and financial benefits measurement in healthcare. Where financial benefits are documented, they vary in terms of cost inclusions and the 'level' at which the costs were measured. Further research on best practice financial measurement methods is needed to enable other hospitals to measure and capture financial benefits arising from their PI programs.
全球各国政府、资助者和医院管理者都在寻找方法,通过减少医疗服务提供系统中的浪费程度并提高向患者提供的护理价值,来应对医疗支出的持续增长。流程改进方法被用于增加高价值护理,减少低价值护理,并从护理流程中去除浪费。本研究旨在通过回顾文献,确定医院用于衡量和获取 PI 计划带来的财务效益的方法,以确定最佳实践。该综述还探讨了医院在企业层面上汇总这些效益的方式,以实现财务绩效的改善。
本研究按照 PRISMA 流程进行了系统综述,并采用了定性研究方法。检索的数据库包括 Medline、Cochrane 图书馆、护理与联合健康文献累积索引(CINHAL)、Web of Science 和 SCOPUS。最初的搜索于 2021 年 7 月进行,2023 年 2 月进行了后续搜索,使用相同的搜索词和数据库,以确定在此期间发表的其他研究。搜索词是通过 PICO(参与者、干预、比较和结果)方法确定的。
确定了 7 篇报告使用基于证据的 PI 方法减少护理流程浪费或提高护理价值并包括财务效益分析的论文。PI 计划的积极财务影响得到了衡量,但没有一项研究报告这些财务效益是如何在企业层面上被捕获或应用的。其中 3 项研究表明,需要复杂的成本核算系统来实现这一点。
本研究表明,PI 和医疗保健财务效益衡量领域的文献匮乏。在记录财务效益的地方,成本包含和成本衡量的“层面”都存在差异。需要进一步研究最佳实践财务衡量方法,以使其他医院能够衡量和获取其 PI 计划带来的财务效益。