Literature DB >> 19819058

Can regional resource shares be based only on prevalence data? An empirical investigation of the proportionality assumption.

Laura Vallejo-Torres1, Stephen Morris, Roy Carr-Hill, Paul Dixon, Malcom Law, Nigel Rice, Matthew Sutton.   

Abstract

The needs component of the current formulae for allocating resources for hospital services and prescribing in England is based on a utilisation approach. This assumes that expenditure on NHS activity in different geographical areas reflects relative needs and supply conditions, and that these can be disentangled by regression models to yield an estimate of relative need. These assumptions have been challenged on the grounds that the needs of some groups may be systematically 'unmet'. Critics have suggested an alternative based on variations in the prevalence of health conditions, called the 'epidemiological approach'. The epidemiological approach uses direct measures of morbidity to allocate health care resources. It divides the total national budget into disease programmes based on primary diagnosis, computes the proportion of total cases for each programme in each geographical area, and then allocates budgets to geographical areas proportional to their share of total cases. The main obstacle to the epidemiological approach has been seen as its very demanding data requirements. But it also faces methodological challenges. These centre on the assumption of proportionality which, at the area level to which resources will be allocated, requires that the average level of need for 'cases' within each disease programme is the same in every area. We illustrate the epidemiological approach, and test the proportionality assumption underpinning it, using data from the 2002-2004 rounds of the Health Survey for England. We find regional variation in disease severity for major diseases, which suggests that health care needs for some conditions vary by area. Further analysis suggests that the epidemiological approach might systematically underallocate resources to rural areas, areas with younger populations, and deprived areas. Since the proportionality assumption underpinning the epidemiological approach does not hold, its adoption would fail to take account of variations in severity. This casts some doubt on the utility of the approach for resource allocation at the present time.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19819058     DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.09.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  5 in total

1.  Time for a new budget allocation model for hospital care in Stockholm?

Authors:  Per-Åke Andersson; Daniel Bruce; Anders Walander; Inga Viberg
Journal:  Health Care Manag Sci       Date:  2010-10-13

2.  How are population-based funding formulae for healthcare composed? A comparative analysis of seven models.

Authors:  Erin Penno; Robin Gauld; Rick Audas
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2013-11-08       Impact factor: 2.655

3.  The spatial structure of chronic morbidity: evidence from UK census returns.

Authors:  Peter F Dutey-Magni; Graham Moon
Journal:  Int J Health Geogr       Date:  2016-08-24       Impact factor: 3.918

4.  Estimating local need for mental healthcare to inform fair resource allocation in the NHS in England: cross-sectional analysis of national administrative data linked at person level.

Authors:  Laura Anselmi; Anna Everton; Robert Shaw; Wataru Suzuki; Jeremy Burrows; Richard Weir; Roman Tatarek-Gintowt; Matt Sutton; Stephen Lorrimer
Journal:  Br J Psychiatry       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 9.319

5.  A review of appropriate indicators for need-based financial resource allocation in health systems.

Authors:  Maryam Radinmanesh; Farbod Ebadifard Azar; Asgar Aghaei Hashjin; Behzad Najafi; Reza Majdzadeh
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2021-07-09       Impact factor: 2.655

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.