Winterthur Institute of Health Economics, School of Management and Law, ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Winterthur, Switzerland.
Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, University of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland.
Front Public Health. 2024 Nov 4;12:1439788. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1439788. eCollection 2024.
With rising healthcare costs over the last decades, the concept of efficiency has gained popularity in healthcare provision research. As efficiency can be understood and measured in many different ways, it is often unclear what is meant by "efficient health systems" or "efficient healthcare providers".
This study aims to analyze and categorize the different definitions and understandings of "efficiency" used in healthcare provision research over time.
We searched five databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Business Source Premier, and EconLit) to conduct a scoping review. Sources were screened independently by two researchers, using the online software Rayyan. Results are reported using PRISMA-ScR.
Of 1,441 individual sources identified, 389 were included in the review. Most papers (77.3%) using the term "efficiency" do not include explicit definitions or explanations of their understanding of it. Almost all papers (99.0%) are interested in productive efficiency (vs. allocative efficiency) and more specifically technical efficiency, therefore comparing the number of inputs used and outputs produced. While many papers (70.4%) include some elements of quality of care or health outcomes in their discussion, few (30.3%) include aspects of quality in their measurement of efficiency. Over the last decades, Data Envelopment Analysis has become the main method to measure efficiency. We propose a broad categorization of efficiency definitions that could be used by researchers to improve the comprehensibility and comparability of their research. Key features are the general type of efficiency, inclusion of quality or outcome information, and inclusion of cost information.
To allow for better comparability and comprehensibility, researchers in healthcare provision should state explicitly which type of efficiency they are studying. To do this, we propose to use combinations of the terms , , , and .
在过去几十年中,医疗保健成本不断上升,因此效率概念在医疗保健提供研究中变得越来越受欢迎。由于效率可以以多种不同的方式理解和衡量,因此“高效的卫生系统”或“高效的医疗保健提供者”的含义通常并不明确。
本研究旨在分析和分类随时间推移在医疗保健提供研究中使用的不同“效率”定义和理解。
我们搜索了五个数据库(Medline、Embase、CINAHL、Business Source Premier 和 EconLit)进行范围综述。使用在线软件 Rayyan 由两名研究人员独立筛选来源。结果使用 PRISMA-ScR 报告。
在确定的 1441 个单独来源中,有 389 个被纳入审查。使用“效率”一词的大多数论文(77.3%)都没有包含对其理解的明确定义或解释。几乎所有论文(99.0%)都对生产效率(与配置效率相比)感兴趣,更具体地说是对技术效率感兴趣,因此比较了使用的投入数量和产生的产出数量。虽然许多论文(70.4%)在讨论中包含了一些护理质量或健康结果的要素,但很少(30.3%)在其效率衡量中包含质量方面的内容。在过去几十年中,数据包络分析已成为衡量效率的主要方法。我们提出了一种广泛的效率定义分类,研究人员可以使用它来提高研究的可理解性和可比性。关键特征是一般类型的效率、包含质量或结果信息以及包含成本信息。
为了提高可比性和可理解性,医疗保健提供者的研究人员应明确说明他们正在研究哪种类型的效率。为此,我们建议使用术语 、 、 、和 的组合。