Search results

Value-based health care (VBHC) argues that health-care needs to re-focus to maximise value creation, defining value as the quota when dividing the outcomes important for the patient, by the cost for health care to deliver such outcomes. This study aims to explore the perception of value among different stakeholders involved in the process of implementing VBHC at a Swedish hospital to support leaders to be more efficient and effective when developing health care.

Participants comprised 19 clinicians and non-clinicians involved in the implementation of VBHC. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and content analysis was performed.

The clinicians described value as a dynamic concept, dependent on the patient and the clinical setting, stating that improving outcomes was more important than containing costs. The value for non-clinicians appeared more driven by the interplay between the outcome and the cost. Non-clinicians related VBHC to a strategic framework for governance or for monitoring different continuous improvement processes, while clinicians appreciated VBHC, as they perceived its introduction as an opportunity to focus more on outcomes for patients and less on cost containment.

There is variation in how clinicians and non-clinicians perceive the key concept of value when implementing VBHC. Clinicians focus on increasing treatment efficacy and improving medical outcomes but have a limited focus on cost and what patients consider most valuable. If the concept of value is defined primarily by clinicians’ own assumptions, there is a clear risk that the foundational premise of VBHC, to understand what outcomes patients value in their specific situation in relation to the cost to produce such outcome, will fail. Health-care leaders need to ensure that patients and the non-clinicians’ perception of value, is integrated with the clinical perception, if VBHC is to deliver on its promise.

The UK Government-funded National Health Service (NHS) is experiencing significant pressures because of the complexity of challenges to, and demands of, health-care provision. This situation has driven government policy level support for transformational change initiatives, such as value-based health care (VBHC), through closer alignment and collaboration across the health-care system-life science sector nexus. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the necessary antecedents to collaboration in VBHC through a critical exploration of the existing literature, with a view to establishing the foundations for further development of policy, practice and theory in this field.

A literature review was conducted via searches on Scopus and Google Scholar between 2009 and 2019 for peer-reviewed articles containing keywords and phrases “Value-based healthcare industry” and “healthcare industry collaboration”. Refinement of the results led to the identification of “guiding conditions” (GCs) for collaboration in VBHC.

Five literature-derived GCs were identified as necessary for the successful implementation of initiatives such as VBHC through system-sector collaboration. These are: a multi-disciplinarity; use of appropriate technological infrastructure; capturing meaningful metrics; understanding the total cycle-of-care; and financial flexibility. This paper outlines research opportunities to empirically test the relevance of the five GCs with regard to improving system-sector collaboration on VBHC.

This paper has developed a practical and constructive framework that has the potential to inform both policy and further theoretical development on collaboration in VBHC.

This study aims to explore the institutionalization of value-based healthcare (VBHC) in the public healthcare system in the state of Victoria, Australia.

The empirical part of this paper is based on a content analysis of 34 policy and industry-commissioned reports that have guided the development of health-care strategy in Victoria from 1988 to 2020.

This study sheds light on how VBHC in Victoria has been institutionalized over time, through three key phases (centralization, transitioning and digitalization), how the conceptualization of best value has changed in each phase and the implications each phase has presented for other actors in the health-care system.

This study highlights the key opportunities and challenges for organizational actors that emerge when a health-care system transitions toward VBHC, and derives implications for vendors, health-care procurement, policymakers and governmental agencies.

This study develops a longitudinal analysis that describes the evolution and institutionalization of a VBHC approach in a complex societal system over three decades and highlights the key implications for other organizational stakeholders.

This study explores four pilot teams’ experiences of improvements resulting from the implementation of value-based healthcare (VBHC) at a Swedish University Hospital. The aim of this study is to gain a deeper understanding of VBHC when used as a management strategy to improve patients’ health outcomes.

An exploratory design was used and qualitative interviews were undertaken with 20 team members three times each, during a period of two years. The content of the interviews was qualitatively analysed.

VBHC worked as a trigger for initiating improvements related to processes, measurements and patients’ health outcomes. An example of improvements related to patients’ health outcomes was solving the problem of patients’ nausea. Improvement related to processes was developing care planning and increasing the number of contact nurses. Improvement related to measurements was increasing coverage ratio in the National Quality Registers used, and the development of a new coding system for measurements. VBHC contributed a structure for measurement and for identification of the need for improvements, but this structure on its own was not enough. To implement and sustain improvements, it is important to establish awareness of the need for improvements and to motivate changes not just among managers and clinical leaders directly involved in VBHC projects but also engage all other staff providing care.

This study shows that although the VBHC management strategy may serve as an initiator for improvements, it is not enough for the sustainable implementation of improvement initiatives. Regardless of strategy, managers and clinical leaders need to develop increased competence in change management.

The aim of this study has been to explore learning experiences from the two first years of the implementation of value-based healthcare (VBHC) at a large Swedish University Hospital.

An explorative design was used in this study. Individual open-ended interviews were carried out with 19 members from four teams implementing VBHC. Qualitative analysis was used to analyse the verbatim transcripts of the interviews.

Three main themes pinpointing learning experiences emerged through the analysis: resource allocation to support implementation, anchoring to create engagement and dedicated, development-oriented leadership with power of decision. Resource allocation included the need to set aside time and administrative resources and also the need to adjust essential IT-systems. The work of anchoring to create engagement involved both patients and staff and was found to be a never-ending task calling for deep commitment. The hospital top management’s explicit decision to implement VBHC facilitated the implementation process, but the team leaders’ lack of explicit management mandate was experienced as obstructing the process. The development process contributed not only to single-loop learning but also to double-loop learning.

Learning experiences drawn from implementing VBHC have not been studied before, and thus the results of this study could be of importance to managers and administrators wanting to implement this concept in their respective organizations.

Despite major progress made in improving the health and well-being of millions of people, more efforts are needed for investment in 21st century health care. However, public hospital waiting lists continue to grow. At the same time, there has been increased investment in e-health and digital interventions to enhance population health and reduce hospital admissions. The purpose of this study is to highlight the accounting challenges associated with measuring, investing and accounting for value in this setting. The authors argue that this requires more nuanced performance metrics that effect a shift from a technical practice to one that embraces social and moral values.

This research is based on field interviews held with clinicians, accountants and administrators in public hospitals throughout Australia and Europe. The field research and multidisciplinary narratives offer insights and issues relating to value and valuing and managing digital health investment decisions for the post-COVID-19 “value-based health-care” future of accounting in the hospital setting.

The authors find that the complex activity-based hospital funding models operate as a black box, with limited clinician understanding and hybridised accounting expertise for informed social, moral and ethical decision-making. While there is malleability of the health economics-derived activity-based hospital funding models, value contestation and conflict are evident in the operationalisation of these models in practice. Activity-based funding (ABF) mechanisms reward patient throughput volumes in hospitals but at the same time stymie investment in digital health. Although classified as strategic investments, there is a limit to strategic planning.

Accounting in public hospitals has become increasingly visible and contested during the pandemic-driven health-care crisis. Further research is required to examine the hybridising accounting expertise as it is increasingly implicated in the incremental changes to ABF in the emergence of value-based health care and associated digital health investment strategies. Despite operationalising these health economic models in practice, accountants are currently being blamed for dysfunctional health-care decisions. Further education for practicing accountants is required to effect operational change. This includes education on the significant moral and ethical dilemmas that result from accounting for patient mix choices in public hospital service provision.

This research involved a multidisciplinary team from accounting, digital health, information systems, value-based health care and clinical expertise. Unique insights on the move to digital health care are provided. This study contributes to policy development and the limited value-based health-care literature in accounting.

The concept of value is becoming increasingly fashionable in healthcare and various improvement approaches (IAs) have been introduced with the aim of increasing value. The purpose of this paper is to construct a taxonomy that supports the management of parallel IAs in healthcare.

Based on previous research, this paper proposes a taxonomy that includes the dimensions of view on value and organizational focus; three contemporary IAs – lean, value-based healthcare, and patient-centered care – are related to the taxonomy. An illustrative qualitative case study in the context of psychiatric (psychosis) care is then presented that contains data from 23 interviews and focuses on the value concept, IAs, and the proposed taxonomy.

Respondents recognized the dimensions of the proposed taxonomy and indicated its usefulness as support for choosing and combining different IAs into a coherent management model, and for facilitating dialog about IAs. The findings also suggested that the view of value as “health outcomes” is widespread, but healthcare professionals are less likely than managers to also view value as a process.

The conceptual contribution of this paper is to delineate some important characteristics of IAs in relation to the emerging “value era”. It also highlights the coexistence of different IAs in healthcare management practice. A taxonomy is proposed that can help managers choose, adapt, and combine IAs in local management models.

The article seeks to explain whether and how value-based healthcare principles lead to hybridization. The public management literature has been increasingly interested in hybrid forms of governance and hybrid performance management, but empirical studies are still rare. Further, the article studies the design of performance management and accounting systems as healthcare organizations reorganize their care processes applying value-based healthcare principles.

This article first connects the theoretical discussions on value-based healthcare and performance management for hybrids. The conceptual understanding of performance management in hybrid healthcare uses a case study of a Finnish healthcare organization with documentary data and transcribed interviews with healthcare professionals from both the strategic and operative levels of healthcare.

The article illustrates and analyses how new policy-level objectives and principles of value-based healthcare led to hybridity in healthcare, manifest in mixed ownership of a particular care path and new forms of social and financial control. Further, the article provides empirical evidence of how increased hybridity necessitated new organizational modes and roles, new managerial tools for performance management and created a need to develop the capability to account and measure entire integrated care processes. Important enabling factors for the integration of care and hybrid performance management were commitment created in dialogue, voluntary-based trust and technology to generate factual shared information.

The study is informative for stakeholders, funders and managers of healthcare organizations, namely new knowledge for the discussion of hybrid governance in healthcare, including a critical account of the applicability and impact of a hybrid service model in healthcare management. Moreover, the article illustrates what needs to be reconsidered in performance management and accounting practices when reorganizing care processes according to the principles of value-based healthcare.

The article extends the analysis of performance management in hybrids and sheds new light on hybridization in healthcare. It also provides much-needed empirical evidence on the processes and practices of accounting and performance management after implementing a value-based healthcare strategy.

This study aims to analyze the value-based health-care model in defining a strategy to guide the evolution of health-care organizations toward a value-oriented model. To improve the quality of care by ensuring economic sustainability, it is necessary to redefine the concept of competition in healthcare and align it with the concept of maximizing value for patients.

Performance measurement is a crucial aspect of the analysis of health-care organizations. Porter developed an effective analytical technique and presented the measurement of health-care outcomes based on health conditions, the efficiency of health-care organizations and the type of service provided.

Clinical outcomes and data on the costs of care of each patient are essential to evaluate improvement in treatment value over time. Engaging in the evaluation of what happens to patients in their course of care enables the expansion of the measurement of outcomes because it measures all the health services related to it.

Building a health-care system based on the value and continuous improvement of care and services provided is a goal shared by many countries and international organizations. Today, the analysis of outcomes is important for making informed decisions, directing and planning clinical and organizational changes by improving the quality of care and services.

The resource crisis in healthcare can be alleviated by engaging external stakeholders and resources in healthcare delivery. The authors use value and open innovation concepts to understand what motivates the stakeholders to join the healthcare innovation ecosystem and what value such an ecosystem brings to healthcare.

A systematic literature review following the PRISMA framework method was applied to reach the research objective. Out of a total of 509 identified articles published till 2021, 25 were selected as relevant for this review.

Six categories of actors were identified, including innovation intermediaries, which were so far neglected in the healthcare innovation literature. Furthermore, patients, healthcare providers, innovation suppliers, investors and influencers were described. The authors also distinguished internal and external stakeholders. The authors show why and how open innovation projects contribute to involving external stakeholders and resources in healthcare delivery by contributing to patient autonomy, relationship building, knowledge transfer, improving collaborative mindset and culture, advancing know-how and bringing additional finances.

This article is the first one to systematically describe the value of open innovation in healthcare. The authors challenge the positivist approach in value presented by value-based healthcare. The authors show how openness contributes to addressing the resource crisis by involving new stakeholders and resources in the care delivery process.