Health systems performance assessment

Christopher JL Murray, David Evans

2003-01-01

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Assisting allied health in performance evaluation: a systematic review

Lucylynn Lizarondo,Karen Grimmer,Saravana Kumar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-014-0572-7

2014-11-14

BMC Health Services Research

Abstract:BackgroundPerformance evaluation raises several challenges to allied health practitioners and there is no agreed approach to measuring or monitoring allied health service performance. The aim of this review was to examine the literature on performance evaluation in healthcare to assist in the establishment of a framework that can guide the measurement and evaluation of allied health clinical service performance. This review determined the core elements of a performance evaluation system, tools for evaluating performance, and barriers to the implementation of performance evaluation.MethodsA systematic review of the literature was undertaken. Five electronic databases were used to search for relevant articles: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsychInfo, and Academic Search Premier. Articles which focussed on any allied health performance evaluation or those which examined performance in health care in general were considered in the review. Content analysis was used to synthesise the findings from individual articles.ResultsA total of 37 articles were included in the review. The literature suggests there are core elements involved in performance evaluation which include prioritising clinical areas for measurement, setting goals, selecting performance measures, identifying sources of feedback, undertaking performance measurement, and reporting the results to relevant stakeholders. The literature describes performance evaluation as multi-dimensional, requiring information or data from more than one perspective to provide a rich assessment of performance. A range of tools or instruments are available to capture various perspectives and gather a comprehensive picture of health care quality.ConclusionsEvery allied health care delivery system has different performance needs and will therefore require different approaches. However, there are core processes that can be used as a framework to evaluate allied health performance. A careful examination of barriers to performance evaluation and subsequent tailoring of strategies to overcome these barriers should be undertaken to achieve the aims of performance evaluation. The findings of this review should inform the development of a standardised framework that can be used to measure and evaluate allied health performance. Future research should explore the utility and overall impact of such framework in allied health service delivery.

health care sciences & services
Healthy working and performance management. A discussion of the approach and a report on a survey of NHS organizations

H D Flanagan,P Henry

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/09552069410060067

Abstract:Achieving high performance in an organization is a complex business. Most approaches are too piecemeal, unidimensional or iatrogenic. Healthy working is an approach to managing performance that attempts to overcome these problems by aiming, in a holistic manner, to harmonize those factors which affect, either separately or jointly, individual physical, mental and emotional health and individual and organizational performance. The approach is based on a set of values and a series of steps. The first step has to be establishing an information base-line--the four key indicators. A survey was undertaken by PBS to establish the availability and usefulness of data in NHS organizations; summarizes some of the issues raised. Although a worryingly small number keep useful data or produce useful information, much can be done in making critical links if available data is fully used.
A Performance Management System in Healthcare for All Seasons?

Milena Vainieri,Guido Noto,Francesca Ferre,Laura C. Rosella

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17155590

IF: 4.614

2020-08-03

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Abstract:Health systems face challenges which are inherent to care demand and supply evolution (i.e., demographic change, new technologies) or are the results of unexpected occurrence originating outside the health system, such as economic shocks or epidemic outbreaks. Both challenges often require a paradigm shift in governance and organization, financing and resource allocation, accountability frameworks, as well as public health system responses. Based on key reviews and seminal papers of performance management, public health, sustainability and resilience, the article presents three emerging challenges for performance management systems in healthcare: i) the inclusion of the population approach; ii) the measurement and consideration of the multi-facets concepts of value; iii) the importance of resilience and sustainability. Performance management systems need to evolve to cope with this changing scenario. The article sheds light on uncovered areas by performance management, and it proposes a research agenda for scholars of both performance management and health service research.

public, environmental & occupational health,environmental sciences
Alignment Between Objective and Subjective Assessments of Health System Performance: Findings From a Mixed-Methods Study

Dmitry Khodyakov,Christine Buttorff,Lea Xenakis,Cheryl L Damberg,M Susan Ridgely

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/JHM-D-20-00249

Abstract:The article examines whether subjective performance assessments from health system executives match objective performance assessments and qualitatively explores ways to achieve high performance. We interviewed 138 C-suite executives of 24 health systems in California, Minnesota, Washington, and Wisconsin between 2017 and 2019. We used maximum variation sampling to select health systems to achieve diversity in performance on objective measures of clinical performance. Our interviews focused on executives' perceptions of their own health system's performance and factors they thought generally contributed to high performance. In our analysis, we grouped health systems based on objective performance levels (high, medium, and low) used in sampling, compared objective performance ratings with executives' subjective performance assessments, and used thematic analysis to identify reasons for subjective assessment of health system performance and levers of high performance in general. There was poor agreement between objective and subjective performance assessments (kappa = 0.082). Subjective assessments were higher than objective assessments and captured more factors than are typically considered in performance accountability and value-based payment initiatives. Executives whose views were inconsistent with objective performance assessments did not cite clinical care quality per se as the basis for their assessment, focusing instead on market competition, financial performance, and high customer satisfaction and loyalty. Executives who cited clinical quality metrics as the basis of their assessment offered subjective ratings consistent with objective ratings. Executives identified organizational culture, organizational governance, and staff engagement as levers for achieving high performance. Future research should explore the benefits and drawbacks of considering subjective performance assessments in value-based payment initiatives.
A framework for assessing health systems from the public's perspective: the ALPS approach

Göran Dahlgren,Margaret Whitehead

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2190/U814-6X80-N787-807J

Abstract:There is hardly a country in the world where the health system is not undergoing major changes. Low- and middle-income countries are particularly hard hit by enforced reforms and commercialization. The overwhelming focus of assessment of these reforms has been on the supply side: effects on governments and providers. Yet the raison d'être of health services is to serve people when in need, and most systems have the equity objective of ensuring the widest possible access to essential services for the whole population, and poor people in particular. The Affordability Ladder Program (ALPS) is a tool for analyzing health systems from the public's perspective--the so-called "demand side," which the authors prefer to consider in terms of "need" for care. ALPS is concerned with how social inequities in health care are experienced by people in different sections of society. By taking a step-by-step approach to examining the many aspects of a health care system from a household/patient perspective, one can more accurately pinpoint where and why a country's health system is working and where it is breaking down, and identify the sticking points that need to be addressed by reconsidering present policies and initiating new ones to promote efficient, equitable health care systems.
How can the healthcare system deliver sustainable performance? A scoping review

Yvonne Zurynski,Jessica Herkes-Deane,Joanna Holt,Elise McPherson,Gina Lamprell,Genevieve Dammery,Isabelle Meulenbroeks,Nicole Halim,Jeffrey Braithwaite

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059207

IF: 3.006

2022-05-24

BMJ Open

Abstract:Background: Increasing health costs, demand and patient multimorbidity challenge the sustainability of healthcare systems. These challenges persist and have been amplified by the global pandemic. Objectives: We aimed to develop an understanding of how the sustainable performance of healthcare systems (SPHS) has been conceptualised, defined and measured. Design: Scoping review of peer-reviewed articles and editorials published from database inception to February 2021. Data sources: PubMed and Ovid Medline, and snowballing techniques. Eligibility criteria: We included articles that discussed key focus concepts of SPHS: (1) definitions, (2) measurement, (3) identified challenges, (4) identified solutions for improvement and (5) scaling successful solutions to maintain SPHS. Data extraction and synthesis: After title/abstract screening, full-text articles were reviewed, and relevant information extracted and synthesised under the five focus concepts. Results: Of 142 included articles, 38 (27%) provided a definition of SPHS. Definitions were based mainly on financial sustainability, however, SPHS was also more broadly conceptualised and included acceptability to patients and workforce, resilience through adaptation, and rapid absorption of evidence and innovations. Measures of SPHS were also predominantly financial, but recent articles proposed composite measures that accounted for financial, social and health outcomes. Challenges to achieving SPHS included the increasingly complex patient populations, limited integration because of entrenched fragmented systems and siloed professional groups, and the ongoing translational gaps in evidence-to-practice and policy-to-practice. Improvement strategies for SPHS included developing appropriate workplace cultures, direct community and consumer involvement, and adoption of evidence-based practice and technologies. There was also a strong identified need for long-term monitoring and evaluations to support adaptation of healthcare systems and to anticipate changing needs where possible. Conclusions: To implement lasting change and to respond to new challenges, we need context-relevant definitions and frameworks, and robust, flexible, and feasible measures to support the long-term sustainability and performance of healthcare systems.
Population assessment of health system performance in 16 countries

Margaret E Kruk,Shalom Sabwa,Todd P Lewis,Ifeyinwa Aniebo,Catherine Arsenault,Susanne Carai,Patricia J Garcia,Ezequiel Garcia-Elorrio,Günther Fink,Munir Kassa,Sailesh Mohan,Mosa Moshabela,Juhwan Oh,Muhammad Ali Pate,Jacinta Nzinga

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.23.291184

2024-07-01

Abstract:Objective: To demonstrate how the new internationally comparable instrument, the People's Voice Survey, can be used to contribute the perspective of the population in assessing health system performance in countries of all levels of income. Methods: We surveyed representative samples of populations in 16 low-, middle- and high-income countries on health-care utilization, experience and confidence during 2022-2023. We summarized and visualized data corresponding to the key domains of the World Health Organization universal health coverage framework for health system performance assessment. We examined correlation with per capita health spending by calculating Pearson coefficients, and within-country income-based inequities using the slope index of inequality. Findings: In the domain of care effectiveness, we found major gaps in health screenings and endorsement of public primary care. Only one in three respondents reported very good user experience during health visits, with lower proportions in low-income countries. Access to health care was rated highest of all domains; however, only half of the populations felt secure that they could access and afford high-quality care if they became ill. Populations rated the quality of private health systems higher than that of public health systems in most countries. Only half of respondents felt involved in decision-making (less in high-income countries). Within countries, we found statistically significant pro-rich inequalities across many indicators. Conclusion: Populations can provide vital information about the real-world function of health systems, complementing other system performance metrics. Population-wide surveys such as the People's Voice Survey should become part of regular health system performance assessments.
Measuring health systems strength and its impact: experiences from the African Health Initiative

Kenneth Sherr,Quinhas Fernandes,Almamy M Kanté,Ayaga Bawah,Jeanine Condo,Wilbroad Mutale,AHI PHIT Partnership Collaborative,Ahmed Hingora,Dominic Mboya,Amon Exavery,Kassimu Tani,Fatuma Manzi,Senga Pemba,James Phillips,Almamy Malick Kante,Kate Ramsey,Colin Baynes,John Koku Awoonor-Williams,Belinda Afriyie Nimako,Nicholas Kanlisi,Elizabeth F Jackson,Mallory C Sheff,Pearl Kyei,Patrick O Asuming,Adriana Biney,Roma Chilengi,Helen Ayles,Moses Mwanza,Cindy Chirwa,Jeffrey Stringer,Mary Mulenga,Dennis Musatwe,Masoso Chisala,Michael Lemba,Peter Drobac,Felix Cyamatare Rwabukwisi,Lisa R Hirschhorn,Agnes Binagwaho,Neil Gupta,Fulgence Nkikabahizi,Anatole Manzi,Didi Bertrand Farmer,Bethany Hedt-Gauthier,Fatima Cuembelo,Catherine Michel,Sarah Gimbel,Bradley Wagenaar,Catherine Henley,Marina Kariaganis,João Luis Manuel,Manuel Napua,Alusio Pio

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2658-5

2017-12-21

Abstract:Background: Health systems are essential platforms for accessible, quality health services, and population health improvements. Global health initiatives have dramatically increased health resources; however, funding to strengthen health systems has not increased commensurately, partially due to concerns about health system complexity and evidence gaps demonstrating health outcome improvements. In 2009, the African Health Initiative of the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation began supporting Population Health Implementation and Training Partnership projects in five sub-Saharan African countries (Ghana, Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Zambia) to catalyze significant advances in strengthening health systems. This manuscript reflects on the experience of establishing an evaluation framework to measure health systems strength, and associate measures with health outcomes, as part of this Initiative. Methods: Using the World Health Organization's health systems building block framework, the Partnerships present novel approaches to measure health systems building blocks and summarize data across and within building blocks to facilitate analytic procedures. Three Partnerships developed summary measures spanning the building blocks using principal component analysis (Ghana and Tanzania) or the balanced scorecard (Zambia). Other Partnerships developed summary measures to simplify multiple indicators within individual building blocks, including health information systems (Mozambique), and service delivery (Rwanda). At the end of the project intervention period, one to two key informants from each Partnership's leadership team were asked to list - in rank order - the importance of the six building blocks in relation to their intervention. Results: Though there were differences across Partnerships, service delivery and information systems were reported to be the most common focus of interventions, followed by health workforce and leadership and governance. Medical products, vaccines and technologies, and health financing, were the building blocks reported to be of lower focus. Conclusion: The African Health Initiative experience furthers the science of evaluation for health systems strengthening, highlighting areas for further methodological development - including the development of valid, feasible measures sensitive to interventions in multiple contexts (particularly in leadership and governance) and describing interactions across building blocks; in developing summary statistics to facilitate testing intervention effects on health systems and associations with health status; and designing appropriate analytic models for complex, multi-level open health systems.
Combining patient, clinical and system perspectives in assessing performance in healthcare: an integrated measurement framework

Jean-Frederic Levesque,Kim Sutherland

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4807-5

2020-01-08

BMC Health Services Research

Abstract:Abstract Background The science of measuring and reporting on the performance of healthcare systems is rapidly evolving. In the past decade, across many jurisdictions, organisations tasked with monitoring progress towards reform targets have broadened their purview to take a more system-functioning approach. Their aim is to bring clarity to performance assessment, using relevant and robust concepts – and avoiding reductionist measures – to build a whole-of-system view of performance. Existing performance frameworks are not fully aligned with these developments. Methods An eight stage process to develop a conceptual framework incorporated literature review, mapping, categorisation, integration, synthesis and validation of performance constructs that have been used by organisations and researchers in order to assess, reflect and report on healthcare performance. Results A total of 19 performance frameworks were identified and included in the review. Existing frameworks mostly adopted either a logic model (inputs, outputs and outcomes), a functional, or a goal-achievement approach. The mapping process identified 110 performance terms and concepts. These were integrated, synthesised and resynthesised to produce a framework that features 12 derived constructs reflecting combinations of patients’ needs and expectations; healthcare resources and structures; receipt and experience of healthcare services; healthcare processes, functions and context; and healthcare outcomes. The 12 constructs gauge performance in terms of coverage, accessibility, appropriateness, effectiveness, safety, productivity, efficiency, impact, sustainability, resilience, adaptability and equity. They reflect four performance perspectives (patient, population, delivery organisation and system). Conclusions Internationally, healthcare systems and researchers have used a variety of terms to categorise indicators of healthcare performance, however few frameworks are based on a theoretically-based conceptual underpinning. The proposed framework incorporates a manageable number of performance domains that together provide a comprehensive assessment, as well as conceptual and operational clarity and coherence that support multifaceted measurement systems for healthcare.

health care sciences & services
Performance assessment of the county healthcare systems in Kenya: a mixed-methods analysis

Mark W Moses,Julius Korir,Wu Zeng,Anita Musiega,Joyce Oyasi,Ruoyan Lu,Jane Chuma,Laura Di Giorgio

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-004707

Abstract:Introduction: A well performing public healthcare system is necessary for Kenya to continue progress towards universal health coverage (UHC). Identifying actionable measures to improve the performance of the public healthcare system is critical to progress towards UHC. We aimed to measure and compare the performance of Kenya's public healthcare system at the county level and explore remediable drivers of poor healthcare system performance. Methods: Using administrative data from fiscal year 2014/2015 through fiscal year 2017/2018, we measured the technical efficiency of 47 county-level public healthcare systems in Kenya using stochastic frontier analysis. We then regressed the technical efficiency measure against a set of explanatory variables to examine drivers of efficiency. Additionally, in selected counties, we analysed surveys and focus group discussions to qualitatively understand factors affecting performance. Results: The median technical efficiency of county public healthcare systems was 84% in fiscal year 2017/2018 (with an IQR of 79% to 90%). Across the four fiscal years of data, 27 out of the 47 Kenyan counties had a declining technical efficiency score. Our regression analysis indicated that impediments to the flow of funding-measured by the budget absorption rate which is the ratio between funds spent and funds released-were significantly related to poor healthcare system performance. Our analysis of interviews and surveys yielded a similar conclusion as nearly 50% of respondents indicated issues stemming from poor budget absorption were significant drivers of poor healthcare system performance. Conclusion: Public healthcare systems at the county-level in Kenya general performed well; however, addressing delays in the flow of funding is a concrete step to improve healthcare system performance. As Kenya-and other countries-provides additional funding to meet their UHC goals, establishing a strong and robust public financial management system is critical to ensure that the benefits of UHC are realised.
Developing an integrated performance management and measurement system in healthcare organisations: a Canadian case study

Anes Ben Fradj,Neila El Asli,Tasseda Boukherroub,Claude Olivier

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.138430.1

2023-10-30

Abstract:This study proposes a performance management and measurement system for a large healthcare organisation. First, data is collected to analyse and understand the current performance management system. Second, the SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) method is used to identify the main aspects of the performance management system to be improved. Third, based on the scientific literature and SWOT analysis, BSC principles are integrated to this performance management system to better align the organisation's performance objectives and indicators with its strategy. Finally, we develop a performance indicator structure and specify indicators to be used as well as how these indicators could be integrated and shared with higher hierarchical levels in the organisation by using AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process). Our approach is applied to the program "Physical disability, intellectual disability, and autism spectrum disorder" of CIUSSS du Centre-Sud-de-l'île-de-Montreal, a large healthcare network, in the province of Québec, Canada.
District Health System performance in South Africa: Are current monitoring systems optimal?

P Barron,H Mahomed,T C Masilela,K Vallabhjee,H Schneider

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7196/samj.2023.v113i12.1614

2024-03-09

South African Medical Journal

Abstract:In this article, we review the monitoring and evaluation system that is used to measure the performance of primary healthcare delivered through the district health system and district management teams. We then review some global frameworks, especially linked to the World Health Organization, and look at some of the differences between what is internationally recommended and what we do in South Africa. We end with some recommendations to improve the system.

medicine, general & internal
Health system performance assessment: embedding resilience through performance intelligence

Dionne Kringos,Damir Ivanković,Erica Barbazza,Niek Klazinga,Óscar Brito Fernandes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzae010

2024-01-01

International Journal for Quality in Health Care

Abstract:Abstract Health systems around the world are facing challenges in achieving their goals. In the wake of the coronavirus disease pandemic, the need for resilient health systems has become even more apparent. This article argues that embedding resilience into health system performance assessment (HSPA) frameworks can be a valuable approach for improving health system performance. This perspective examines key challenges threatening health systems and makes a case for the continued relevance of HSPA by embedding resilience-related performance intelligence.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Measuring the overall performance of mental healthcare providers

María José Aragón,Hugh Gravelle,Adriana Castelli,Maria Goddard,Nils Gutacker,Anne Mason,Donna Rowen,Russell Mannion,Rowena Jacobs

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.116582

IF: 5.379

2024-01-13

Social Science & Medicine

Abstract:To date there have been no attempts to construct composite measures of healthcare provider performance which reflect preferences for health and non-health benefits, as well as costs. Health and non-health benefits matter to patients, healthcare providers and the general public. We develop a novel provider performance measurement framework that combines health gain, non-health benefit, and cost and illustrate it with an application to 54 English mental health providers. We apply estimates from a discrete choice experiment eliciting the UK general population's valuation of non-health benefits relative to health gains, to administrative and patient survey data for years 2013–2015 to calculate equivalent health benefit (eHB) for providers. We measure costs as forgone health and quantify the relative performance of providers in terms of equivalent net health benefit (eNHB): the value of the health and non-health benefits minus the forgone benefit equivalent of cost. We compare rankings of providers by eHB, eNHB, and by the rankings produced by the hospital sector regulator. We find that taking account of the non-health benefits in the eNHB measure makes a substantial difference to the evaluation of provider performance. Our study demonstrates that the provider performance evaluation space can be extended beyond measures of health gain and cost, and that this matters for comparison of providers.

public, environmental & occupational health,social sciences, biomedical
Measuring People's Views on Health System Performance: Design and Development of the People's Voice Survey.

Todd P. Lewis,Neena R. Kapoor,Amit Aryal,Rodrigo Bazua-Lobato,Susanne Carai,Emma Clarke-Deelder,Kevin Croke,Rashmi Dayalu,Laura Espinoza-Pajuelo,Gunther Fink,Patricia J. Garcia,Ezequiel Garcia-Elorrio,Theodros Getachew,Prashant Jarhyan,Munir Kassa,Soon Ae Kim,Agustina Mazzoni,Jesus Medina-Ranilla,Sailesh Mohan,Gebeyaw Molla,Mosa Moshabela,Inbarani Naidoo,Jacinta Nzinga,Juhwan Oh,Emelda A. Okiro,Dorairaj Prabhakaran,Javier Roberti,Gillian Steelfisher,Tefera Taddele,Ashenif Tadele,Xiaohui Wang,Roman Xu,Hannah H. Leslie,Margaret E. Kruk

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004294

2023-01-01

PLoS Medicine

Abstract:Todd Lewis and co-authors discuss development and use of the People's Voice Survey for health system assessment.
A systematic review of the effectiveness of strategies to improve health care provider performance in low- and middle-income countries: Methods and descriptive results

Samantha Y Rowe,David H Peters,Kathleen A Holloway,John Chalker,Dennis Ross-Degnan,Alexander K Rowe

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217617

IF: 3.7

2019-05-31

PLoS ONE

Abstract:Background: Health care provider (HCP) performance in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is often inadequate. The Health Care Provider Performance Review (HCPPR) is a comprehensive systematic review of the effectiveness and cost of strategies to improve HCP performance in LMICs. We present the HCPPR's methods, describe methodological and contextual attributes of included studies, and examine time trends of study attributes. Methods: The HCPPR includes studies from LMICs that quantitatively evaluated any strategy to improve HCP performance for any health condition, with no language restrictions. Eligible study designs were controlled trials and interrupted time series. In 2006, we searched 15 databases for published studies; in 2008 and 2010, we completed searches of 30 document inventories for unpublished studies. Data from eligible reports were double-abstracted and entered into a database, which is publicly available. The primary outcome measure was the strategy's effect size. We assessed time trends with logistic, Poisson, and negative binomial regression modeling. We were unable to register with PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) because the protocol was developed prior to the PROSPERO launch. Results: We screened 105,299 citations and included 824 reports from 499 studies of 161 intervention strategies. Most strategies had multiple components and were tested by only one study each. Studies were from 79 countries and had diverse methodologies, geographic settings, HCP types, work environments, and health conditions. Training, supervision, and patient and community supports were the most commonly evaluated strategy components. Only 33.6% of studies had a low or moderate risk of bias. From 1958-2003, the number of studies per year and study quality increased significantly over time, as did the proportion of studies from low-income countries. Only 36.3% of studies reported information on strategy cost or cost-effectiveness. Conclusions: Studies have reported on the efficacy of many strategies to improve HCP performance in LMICs. However, most studies have important methodological limitations. The HCPPR is a publicly accessible resource for decision-makers, researchers, and others interested in improving HCP performance.
A performance assessment framework for hospitals: the WHO regional office for Europe PATH project

J Veillard,F Champagne,N Klazinga,V Kazandjian,O A Arah,A-L Guisset,J. Veillard,F. Champagne,N. Klazinga,V. Kazandjian,O. A. Arah,A.-L. Guisset

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzi072

2005-09-09

International Journal for Quality in Health Care

Abstract:OBJECTIVE: The World Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for Europe launched in 2003 a project aiming to develop and disseminate a flexible and comprehensive tool for the assessment of hospital performance and referred to as the performance assessment tool for quality improvement in hospitals (PATH). This project aims at supporting hospitals in assessing their performance, questioning their own results, and translating them into actions for improvement, by providing hospitals with tools for performance assessment and by enabling collegial support and networking among participating hospitals.METHODS: PATH was developed through a series of four workshops gathering experts representing most valuable experiences on hospital performance assessment worldwide. An extensive review of the literature on hospital performance projects was carried out, more than 100 performance indicators were scrutinized, and a survey was carried out in 20 European countries.RESULTS: Six dimensions were identified for assessing hospital performance: clinical effectiveness, safety, patient centredness, production efficiency, staff orientation and responsive governance. The following outcomes were achieved: (i) definition of the concepts and identification of key dimensions of hospital performance; (ii) design of the architecture of PATH to enhance evidence-based management and quality improvement through performance assessment; (iii) selection of a core and a tailored set of performance indicators with detailed operational definitions; (iv) identification of trade-offs between indicators; (v) elaboration of descriptive sheets for each indicator to support hospitals in interpreting their results; (vi) design of a balanced dashboard; and (vii) strategies for implementation of the PATH framework.CONCLUSION: PATH is currently being pilot implemented in eight countries to refine its framework before further expansion.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Measuring performance in allied health professional role substitution models of care: a clinician survey

Rumbidzai N. Mutsekwa,Katrina L. Campbell,Russell Canavan,Rebecca L. Angus,Liza-Jane McBride,Joshua M. Byrnes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-10556-5

2024-01-17

BMC Health Services Research

Abstract:Professional role substitution models of care have emerged as a key strategy to address increasing healthcare demand. Gaining insights from those actively engaged in the process of these models' implementation and evaluation is pivotal to ensuring sustainability and further successful implementation. The purpose of this study was to describe allied-health clinicians' perceptions, practice, and experiences of healthcare performance evaluation in professional role substitution models of care.

health care sciences & services
Public release of performance data and quality improvement: internal responses to external data by US health care providers

H T Davies,H T O Davies

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/qhc.10.2.104

2001-06-01

Quality in Health Care

Abstract:Health policy in many countries emphasises the public release of comparative data on clinical performance as one way of improving the quality of health care. Evidence to date is that it is health care providers (hospitals and the staff within them) that are most likely to respond to such data, yet little is known about how health care providers view and use these data. Case studies of six US hospitals were studied (two academic medical centres, two private not-for-profit medical centres, a group model health maintenance organisation hospital, and an inner city public provider "safety net" hospital) using semi-structured interviews followed by a broad thematic analysis located within an interpretive paradigm. Within these settings, 35 interviews were held with 31 individuals (chief executive officer, chief of staff, chief of cardiology, senior nurse, senior quality managers, and front line staff). The results showed that key stakeholders in these providers were often (but not always) antipathetic towards publicly released comparative data. Such data were seen as lacking in legitimacy and their meanings were disputed. Nonetheless, the public nature of these data did lead to some actions in response, more so when the data showed that local performance was poor. There was little integration between internal and external data systems. These findings suggest that the public release of comparative data may help to ensure that greater attention is paid to the quality agenda within health care providers, but greater efforts are needed both to develop internal systems of quality improvement and to integrate these more effectively with external data systems.
"We cobble together a storyline of system performance using a diversity of things": a qualitative study of perspectives on public health performance measurement in Canada

Meghan O'Neill,Eric De Prophetis,Sara Allin,Andrew D Pinto,Robert W Smith,Erica Di Ruggiero,Robert Schwartz,Jasmine Pawa,Mehdi Ammi,Laura C Rosella

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-022-00931-1

2022-07-29

Abstract:Background: There have been longstanding calls for public health systems transformations in many countries, including Canada. Core to these calls has been strengthening performance measurement. While advancements have been made in performance measurement for certain sectors of the health care system (primarily focused on acute and primary health care), effective use of indicators for measuring public health systems performance are lacking. This study describes the current state, anticipated challenges, and future directions in the development and implementation of a public health performance measurement system for Canada. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with public health leaders (n = 9) between July and August 2021. Public health leaders included researchers, government staff, and former medical officers of health who were purposively selected due to their expertise and experience with performance measurement with relevance to public health systems in Canada. Thematic analysis included both a deductive approach for themes consistent with the conceptual framework and an inductive approach to allow new themes to emerge from the data. Results: Conceptual, methodological, contextual, and infrastructure challenges were highlighted by participants in designing a performance measurement system for public health. Specifically, six major themes evolved that encompass 1) the mission and purpose of public health systems, including challenges inherent in measuring the functions and services of public health; 2) the macro context, including the impacts of chronic underinvestment and one-time funding injections on the ability to sustain a measurement system; 3) the organizational structure/governance of public health systems including multiple forms across Canada and underdevelopment of information technology systems; 4) accountability approaches to performance measurement and management; and 5) timing and unobservability in public health indicators. These challenges require dedicated investment, strong leadership, and political will from the federal and provincial/territorial governments. Conclusion: Unprecedented attention on public health due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has highlighted opportunities for system improvements, such as addressing the lack of a performance measurement system. This study provides actionable knowledge on conceptual, methodological, contextual, and infrastructure challenges needed to design and build a pan-Canadian performance measurement system for public health.

Health systems performance assessment

Assisting allied health in performance evaluation: a systematic review

Healthy working and performance management. A discussion of the approach and a report on a survey of NHS organizations

A Performance Management System in Healthcare for All Seasons?

Alignment Between Objective and Subjective Assessments of Health System Performance: Findings From a Mixed-Methods Study

A framework for assessing health systems from the public's perspective: the ALPS approach

How can the healthcare system deliver sustainable performance? A scoping review

Population assessment of health system performance in 16 countries

Measuring health systems strength and its impact: experiences from the African Health Initiative

Combining patient, clinical and system perspectives in assessing performance in healthcare: an integrated measurement framework

Performance assessment of the county healthcare systems in Kenya: a mixed-methods analysis

Developing an integrated performance management and measurement system in healthcare organisations: a Canadian case study

District Health System performance in South Africa: Are current monitoring systems optimal?

Health system performance assessment: embedding resilience through performance intelligence

Measuring the overall performance of mental healthcare providers

Measuring People's Views on Health System Performance: Design and Development of the People's Voice Survey.

A systematic review of the effectiveness of strategies to improve health care provider performance in low- and middle-income countries: Methods and descriptive results

A performance assessment framework for hospitals: the WHO regional office for Europe PATH project

Measuring performance in allied health professional role substitution models of care: a clinician survey

Public release of performance data and quality improvement: internal responses to external data by US health care providers

"We cobble together a storyline of system performance using a diversity of things": a qualitative study of perspectives on public health performance measurement in Canada