Evelyn Cornelissen1, Craig Mitton2, Alan Davidson3, R Colin Reid4, Rachelle Hole5, Anne-Marie Visockas6, Neale Smith7. 1. Department of Family Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Electronic address: evelyn.cornelissen@ubc.ca. 2. Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; School of Population and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Electronic address: craig.mitton@ubc.ca. 3. Faculty of Health and Social Development, University of British Columbia - Okanagan, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada. Electronic address: alan.davidson@ubc.ca. 4. Faculty of Health and Social Development, University of British Columbia - Okanagan, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada. Electronic address: colin.reid@ubc.ca. 5. Faculty of Health and Social Development, University of British Columbia - Okanagan, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada. Electronic address: rachelle.hole@ubc.ca. 6. Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Electronic address: anne-marie.visockas@albertahealthservices.ca. 7. Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Electronic address: neale.smith@ubc.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Programme budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA) is a priority setting approach that assists decision makers in choosing among resource demands. This paper describes and evaluates the process of implementing PBMA in a Canadian regional health authority, and draws out key lessons learned from this experience. METHODS: Qualitative data were collected through semi-structured participant interviews (twelve post year-1; nine post year-2), meeting attendance, and document review. Interview transcripts were analyzed using a constant comparison technique. Other data were analyzed to evaluate PBMA implementation. RESULTS: Desire for more clarity and for PBMA adaptations emerged as overarching themes. Participants desired greater clarity of their roles and how PBMA should be used to achieve PBMA's potential benefits. They argued that each PBMA stage should be useful independent of the others so that implementation could be adapted. To help improve clarity and ensure that resources were available to support PBMA, participants requested an organizational readiness and capacity assessment. CONCLUSION: We suggest tactics by which PBMA may be more closely aligned with real-world priority setting practice. Our results also contribute to the literature on PBMA use in various healthcare settings. Highlighting implementation issues and potential responses to these should be of interest to decision makers implementing PBMA and other evidence-informed practices.
BACKGROUND: Programme budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA) is a priority setting approach that assists decision makers in choosing among resource demands. This paper describes and evaluates the process of implementing PBMA in a Canadian regional health authority, and draws out key lessons learned from this experience. METHODS: Qualitative data were collected through semi-structured participant interviews (twelve post year-1; nine post year-2), meeting attendance, and document review. Interview transcripts were analyzed using a constant comparison technique. Other data were analyzed to evaluate PBMA implementation. RESULTS: Desire for more clarity and for PBMA adaptations emerged as overarching themes. Participants desired greater clarity of their roles and how PBMA should be used to achieve PBMA's potential benefits. They argued that each PBMA stage should be useful independent of the others so that implementation could be adapted. To help improve clarity and ensure that resources were available to support PBMA, participants requested an organizational readiness and capacity assessment. CONCLUSION: We suggest tactics by which PBMA may be more closely aligned with real-world priority setting practice. Our results also contribute to the literature on PBMA use in various healthcare settings. Highlighting implementation issues and potential responses to these should be of interest to decision makers implementing PBMA and other evidence-informed practices.
Authors: Marilia Sá Carvalho; Claudia Medina Coeli; Dóra Chor; Rejane Sobrino Pinheiro; Maria de Jesus Mendes da Fonseca; Luiz Carlos de Sá Carvalho Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-07-14 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Claire Harris; Kelly Allen; Vanessa Brooke; Tim Dyer; Cara Waller; Richard King; Wayne Ramsey; Duncan Mortimer Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2017-05-25 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Claire Harris; Kelly Allen; Cara Waller; Tim Dyer; Vanessa Brooke; Marie Garrubba; Angela Melder; Catherine Voutier; Anthony Gust; Dina Farjou Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2017-06-21 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Claire Harris; Kelly Allen; Richard King; Wayne Ramsey; Cate Kelly; Malar Thiagarajan Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2017-05-05 Impact factor: 2.655