Innovating in healthcare delivery: a systematic review and a preference-based framework of patient and provider needs

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 92-100
Author(s):  
Joseph S Salama ◽  
Alex Lee ◽  
Ashkan Afshin
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Unmet Needs ◽  
Healthcare Delivery ◽  
Process Of Care ◽  
Literature Reviews ◽  
Reducing Costs ◽  
Healthcare Innovation

Healthcare innovation is becoming a popular but poorly defined option for those who are seeking new ways of reducing costs while also improving the quality of care. The process of innovating in healthcare delivery can be improved by identifying and understanding the unmet needs of patients and providers. We conducted two systematic literature reviews to identify the needs of these stakeholders throughout healthcare delivery and developed a conceptual framework for innovating in healthcare. Our results reveal tension between patients’ and providers’ preferences across three major categories—treatment and outcomes, process of care and structure of care. Therefore, innovating in healthcare may be better understood as addressing the unmet needs of each stakeholder by easing or eliminating tensions between stakeholders. This conceptual framework may serve as a useful instrument for health policymakers, payers and innovators to alike make better decisions as they invest in healthcare innovations.

scholarly journals The impact of asynchronous e-visits on clinical outcomes and healthcare delivery: A systematic review (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver T. Nguyen ◽  
Amir Alishahi Tabriz ◽  
Jinhai Huo ◽  
Karim Hanna ◽  
Christopher M. Shea ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Healthcare Costs ◽  
Healthcare Delivery ◽  
Healthcare Quality ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Infection Management ◽  
The Impact

BACKGROUND E-visits involve asynchronous communication between providers and patients through a secure web-based platform, such as a patient portal, to elicit symptoms and determine a diagnosis and treatment plan. E-visits are now reimbursable through Medicare due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The state of the evidence regarding e-visits, such as the impact on clinical outcomes and healthcare delivery, is unclear. OBJECTIVE To address this gap, this systematic review examines how e-visits have impacted clinical outcomes and healthcare quality, access, utilization, and costs. METHODS MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from January 2000 through October 2020 for peer-reviewed studies that assessed e-visits’ impact on clinical and healthcare delivery outcomes. RESULTS Out of 1,858 papers, 19 studies met the inclusion criteria. E-visit usage was associated with improved or comparable clinical outcomes, especially for chronic disease management (e.g., diabetes care, blood pressure management). The impact on quality of care varied across conditions. Quality of care was equivalent or better for chronic conditions but variable quality was observed in infection management (e.g., appropriate antibiotic prescribing). Similarly, the impact on healthcare utilization varied across conditions (e.g., lower utilization for dermatology) but mixed impact in primary care. Healthcare costs were lower for e-visits for a wide-range of conditions (e.g., dermatology and acute visits). No studies examined the impact of e-visits on healthcare access. Available studies are observational in nature and it is difficult to draw firm conclusions about effectiveness or impact on care delivery. CONCLUSIONS Overall, the evidence suggests e-visits may provide comparable clinical outcomes to in-person care and reduce healthcare costs for certain healthcare conditions. At the same time, there is mixed evidence on healthcare quality, especially regarding infection management (e.g., sinusitis, urinary tract infections, conjunctivitis). Further studies are needed to test implementation strategies that might improve delivery (e.g., clinical decision support for antibiotic prescribing) and to assess which conditions are amenable to e-visits and which conditions require in-person or face-to-face care (e.g., virtual visit). CLINICALTRIAL not applicable

Do performance measurement models have any impact on primary health care? A systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 319-334
Author(s):  
Brahim Zaadoud ◽  
Youness Chbab ◽  
Aziz Chaouch
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Primary Health Care ◽  
Performance Measurement ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Conceptual Frameworks ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Primary Health

PurposeThe purpose of this article is to analyze and compare between the frameworks of performance measurement in primary health care in the world. The subject of search is to compare if the frameworks of performance measurement in primary health care have an influence on performances of health centers.Design/methodology/approachWe conducted a systematic review of the literature to (1) identify the conceptual framework for measuring quality management systems, (2) assess the effects of conceptual framework on quality improvement and quality of care outcomes. We opted for the frameworks that are more cited in the literature and we analyzed and compared between these frameworks.FindingsEight dimensions were identified for assessing performance in Primary Health Care Facilities “PHCF” in more than 50% frameworks: Effectiveness, Safety, Accessibility, Equity, Efficiency, Acceptability, Patient Centeredness and Timeliness.Research limitations/implicationsThe limits of this study can be represented by the following elements: (1) lack of exhaustiveness with regard to the current Frameworks. (2) The evaluation of reliability and validity of the qualitative studies remains difficult to appreciate. (3) Most of the evaluation tools of the primary health care are not validated yet. (4) The difference in performance levels between countries, especially for the developed countries and the multitude of the frames of measure of performance, limits the comparability of the results.Practical implicationsThis study provides a conceptual and descriptive literature on the different conceptual frameworks for performance measurement in primary health care, and a practical and useful tool for comparison between the different conceptual frameworks. Several organisations of accreditation or certification introduced, developed, incorporated and checked the indicators of clinical quality in the organizations of health care. Some studies revealed links with the governance, the access, the continuity, the coordination, the efficiency and the strength primary care (Dionne Kringos, 2018). Improvements in the quality of care have been observed in the results of accreditation and certification bodies regarding hospital infection control infrastructure, organization and performance.Originality/valueEven if the links are not established within the framework of a scientific research, quality approaches are generally recognized as an essential tool to help establishments to improve the quality and the safety of the patients. Until now, it is not still common to make evaluation of the quality of care in the “PHCF” to obtain the relevant information. The necessity of having performance measurement tools, which puts in coherence the piloting of the operational level with the strategy, to integrate the organizational objectives into the measures of operational performances and make estimate its structures towards a real management by the quality.

scholarly journals Prognostic factors for chronic post-surgical pain after lung or pleural surgery: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e051554
Author(s):  
Pascal Richard David Clephas ◽  
Sanne Elisabeth Hoeks ◽  
Marialena Trivella ◽  
Christian S Guay ◽  
Preet Mohinder Singh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Prognostic Factor ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Surgical Pain ◽  
Literature Reviews ◽  
Chronic Post Surgical Pain

IntroductionChronic post-surgical pain (CPSP) after lung or pleural surgery is a common complication and associated with a decrease in quality of life, long-term use of pain medication and substantial economic costs. An abundant number of primary prognostic factor studies are published each year, but findings are often inconsistent, methods heterogeneous and the methodological quality questionable. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are therefore needed to summarise the evidence.Methods and analysisThe reporting of this protocol adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) checklist. We will include retrospective and prospective studies with a follow-up of at least 3 months reporting patient-related factors and surgery-related factors for any adult population. Randomised controlled trials will be included if they report on prognostic factors for CPSP after lung or pleural surgery. We will exclude case series, case reports, literature reviews, studies that do not report results for lung or pleural surgery separately and studies that modified the treatment or prognostic factor based on pain during the observation period. MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL, Google Scholar and relevant literature reviews will be searched. Independent pairs of two reviewers will assess studies in two stages based on the PICOTS criteria. We will use the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool for the quality assessment and the CHARMS-PF checklist for the data extraction of the included studies. The analyses will all be conducted separately for each identified prognostic factor. We will analyse adjusted and unadjusted estimated measures separately. When possible, evidence will be summarised with a meta-analysis and otherwise narratively. We will quantify heterogeneity by calculating the Q and I2 statistics. The heterogeneity will be further explored with meta-regression and subgroup analyses based on clinical knowledge. The quality of the evidence obtained will be evaluated according to the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation guideline 28.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval will not be necessary, as all data are already in the public domain. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021227888.

Improving the organisation of breast cancer care increases quality of care while reducing costs

2004 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 113
Author(s):  
G.L Beets ◽  
C.N.A Frotscher ◽  
C.D Dirksen ◽  
M.H Hebly ◽  
M.F von Meyenfeldt
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Breast Cancer Care ◽  
Reducing Costs

QUALITY-OF-CARE INDICATORS FOR WOMEN WITH OVERACTIVE BLADDER: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

2009 ◽  
Vol 181 (4S) ◽  
pp. 5-5
Author(s):  
Aviva E. Weinberg ◽  
Jennifer T Anger ◽  
Ja-Hong Kim ◽  
Paul Shekelle ◽  
Shlomo Raz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Overactive Bladder ◽  
Review Of The Literature

A Recent Systematic Review on Simulation Modeling and Emergency Departments

2019 ◽  
pp. 1232-1264
Author(s):  
Soraia Oueida ◽  
Seifedine Kadry ◽  
Pierre Abi Char
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Emergency Department ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Simulation Modeling ◽  
Recommended Care ◽  
Recent Systematic Review ◽  
Increase Patient Satisfaction ◽  
System Review

Healthcare, being a complex and huge system, suffers from low quality of care delivered to arriving patients. The quality of care depends on the patient's condition and the availability of hospital's resources. Therefore, many authors have studied the problems faced by such systems and emphasized in their articles the importance of a system review for better performance. In healthcare, different departments interact with each other in order to deliver a certain service to arriving patients and provide the recommended care. In particular, the emergency department (ED) is proven to be the busiest unit of the hospital; thus, the exiting problems and recommended solutions are highlighted in this study by a literature systematic review. The main goal of this article is to study the problems that EDs face nowadays and how simulation modeling can interfere in order to alleviate these problems, propose corresponding solutions and increase patient satisfaction.

scholarly journals Avaliação do transporte crítico de pacientes: Uma revisão sistemática

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 615-647
Author(s):  
Leonardo Nogueira Melo ◽  
Vera Lúcia Freitas ◽  
Emanuel Pereira dos Santos ◽  
Raphael Dias de Mello Pereira ◽  
Vanessa Silva De Oliveira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Care Practice ◽  
Transportation Of Patients ◽  
Time Space ◽  
Revisión Sistemática ◽  
Trabajo En Equipo ◽  
Main Factors

Objetivo: Evaluar, según la literatura, cuáles son los principales factores considerados facilitadores y/o agravantes en la realización del transporte de pacientes en estado crítico.Método: Este estudio se trata de una revisión sistemática realizada con el método PICOResultado: Los periódicos seleccionados comprendían un espacio temporal en los últimos diez años, donde 6 periódicos fueron elegibles, basado en los criterios establecidos. Los resultados relatan que los temas encontrados en esta revisión demuestran una alineación entre la práctica asistencial y la literatura, pero para que el transporte sea realizado sin eventos adversos, es necesario que haya unión entre la gestión y los profesionales involucrados.Conclusión: Aunque los hallazgos demuestren una gran preocupación en relación a la calidad en la asistencia y en la preparación del equipo, los autores creen que más estudios deben ser fomentados una vez que el trabajo en equipo, a pesar de ser complejo, es la clave para la realización de los procedimientos con efectividad. Objective: To evaluate, according to the literature, the main factors considered facilitators and/or aggravating in the transportation of patients in critical condition.Method: This study is a systematic review performed using the PICO method.Results: The selected journals comprised a time space in the last 10 years, with six journals eligible, based on the established criteria. The results report that the themes found in this review demonstrate an alignment between care practice and literature, but, for a transportation without adverse events, there must be a union between the management and the professionals involved.Conclusion: Although the findings demonstrate a great concern regarding the quality of care and team preparation, the authors believe that more studies should be encouraged since teamwork, despite being complex, is the key to performing the procedures with effectiveness. Objetivo: Avaliar segundo a literatura quais são os principais fatores que são considerados facilitadores e/ou agravantes na realização do transporte de pacientes em estado crítico.Método: Este estudo trata-se de uma revisão sistemática realizada com método PICOResultado: Os periódicos selecionados compreendiam um espaço temporal nos últimos dez anos, onde 6 periódicos foram elegíveis, baseado nos critérios estabelecidos. Os resultados relatam que os temas encontrados nesta revisão demonstram um alinhamento entre a prática assistencial e a literatura, porém para que o transporte seja realizado sem eventos adversos, é necessário que haja união entre a gestão e os profissionais envolvidos.Conclusão: Embora os achados demonstrem uma grande preocupação em relação à qualidade na assistência e no preparo da equipe, os autores acreditam que mais estudos devem ser fomentados uma vez que o trabalho em equipe apesar de ser complexo, é a chave para a realização dos procedimentos com efetividade.

Author response: Reducing costs while enhancing quality of care in MS

Neurology ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 88 (12) ◽  
pp. 1212-1212
Author(s):  
Ilya Kister ◽  
John Corboy
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Author Response ◽  
Reducing Costs
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document