Search results

People with intellectual disability die prematurely and from avoidable causes. Innovative solutions and proactive strategies have been limited in addressing this disparity. This paper aims to detail the process of developing a risk stratification tool to identify those individuals who are higher risk of premature mortality.

This study used population health management principles to conceptualise a risk stratification tool for avoidable deaths in people with intellectual disability. A review of the literature examined the existing evidence of causes of death in people with intellectual disability. A qualitative methodology using focused groups of specialist clinicians was used to understand the factors that contributed towards avoidable deaths in people with intellectual disability. Delphi groups were used for consensus on the variables for inclusion in the risk stratification tool (Decision Support Tool for Physical Health).

A pilot of the Decision Support Tool for Physical Health within specialist intellectual disability service demonstrated effective utility and acceptability in clinical practice. The tool has also demonstrated good face and construct validity. A further study is currently being completed to examine concurrent and predictive validity of the tool.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the only study that has used a systematic approach to designing a risk stratification tool for identifying premature mortality in people with intellectual disability. The Decision Support Tool for Physical Health in clinical practice aims to guide clinical responses and prioritise those identified as at higher risk of avoidable deaths.

During the 1990s, Italian healthcare organisations (HOs) underwent a process of corporatisation, and the most innovative HOs introduced the balanced scorecard (BSC) to address the need for broader accountability. Currently, there is a limited understanding of the dynamics and outcomes of such a process. Therefore, this study aims to explore whether the BSC is still considered an effective performance management tool and analyse the factors driving and hindering its evolution and endurance in public and non-profit HOs.

We conducted a retrospective longitudinal analysis of two pioneering cases in the adoption of the BSC: one in a public hospital and the other in a non-profit hospital. Data collection relied on accessing institutional documents and reports from the early 2000s to the present, as well as conducting semi-structured interviews with the internal sponsors of the BSC.

We found evidence of three main categories of factors that trigger or hinder the adoption and development of the BSC: (1) the role of the internal sponsor and professionals’ commitment; (2) information technology and the controller’s technological skills; and (3) the relationship between the management and professionalism logics during the implementation process. At the same time, there is no evidence to suggest that specific technical features of the BSC influence its endurance.

The paper contributes to the debate on the key factors for implementing and sustaining multidimensional control systems in professional organisations. It emphasises the importance of knowledge-based assets and distinctive internal capabilities for the success of the business. The implications of the BSC legacy are discussed, along with future developments of multidimensional control tools aimed at supporting strategy execution.

Value-based healthcare suggested using patient-reported information to complement the information available in the medical records and administrative healthcare data to provide insights into patients' perceptions of satisfaction, experience and self-reported outcomes. However, little attention has been devoted to questions about factors fostering the use of patient-reported information to create value at the system level.

Action research design is carried out to elicit possible triggers using the case of patient-reported experience and outcome data for breast cancer women along their clinical pathway in the clinical breast network of Tuscany (Italy).

The case shows that communication and engagement of multi-stakeholder representation are needed for making information actionable in a multi-level, multispecialty care pathway organized in a clinical network; moreover, political and managerial support from higher level governance is a stimulus for legitimizing the use for quality improvement. At the organizational level, an external facilitator disclosing and discussing real-world uses of collected data is a trigger to link measures to action. Also, clinical champion(s) and clear goals are key success factors. Nonetheless, resource munificent and dedicated information support tools together with education and learning routines are enabling factors.

Current literature focuses on key factors that impact performance information use often considering unidimensional performance and internal sources of information. The use of patient/user-reported information is not yet well-studied especially in supporting quality improvement in multi-stakeholder governance. The work appears relevant for the implications it carries, especially for policymakers and public sector managers when confronting the gap in patient-reported measures for quality improvement.