首页> 外文期刊>International Journal for Quality in Health Care >From coordinated care trials to medicare locals: what difference does changing the policy driver from efficiency to quality make for coordinating care?
【24h】

From coordinated care trials to medicare locals: what difference does changing the policy driver from efficiency to quality make for coordinating care?

机译:从协调医疗试验到当地医疗保险:将政策驱动力从效率变为质量对协调医疗有何不同?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The terms coordination and integration refer to a wide range of interventions, from strategies aimed at coordinating clinical care for individuals to organizational and system interventions such as managed care, which contract medical and support ser-vices. Ongoing debate about whether financial and organizational integration are needed to achieve clinical integration is evident in policy debates over several decades, from a focus through the 1990s on improving coordination through structural reform and the use of market mechanisms to achieve allocative efficiencies (better overall service mix) to more recent attention on system performance to improve coordination and quality. We examine this shift in Australia and ask how has changing the policy driver affected efforts to achieve coordination? Care planning, fund pooling and purchasing are still important planks in coordination. Evidence suggests that financial strategies can be used to drive improvements for particular patient groups, but these are unlikely to improve outcomes without being linked to clinical strategies that support coordination through multidisciplinary teamwork, IT, disease management guidelines and audit and feedback. Meso level organizational strategies might align the various elements to improve coordination. Changing the policy driver has refocused research and policy over the last two decades from a focus on achieving allocative efficiencies to achieving quality and value for money. Research is yet to develop theoretical approaches that can deal with the implications for assessing effectiveness. Efforts need to identify intervention mechanisms, plausible relationships between these and their measurable outcomes and the components of contexts that support the emergence of intervention attributes.
机译:术语“协调和集成”指的是广泛的干预措施,从旨在协调个人临床护理的策略到组织和系统干预措施,例如与医疗和服务支持相关的管理式干预。从几十年来一直到1990年代的焦点集中在通过结构改革和使用市场机制以实现分配效率(更好的整体服务组合)来改善协调性的数十年的政策辩论中,关于是否需要财务和组织整合来实现临床整合的争论一直在进行。 ),以提高系统性能和协调性。我们研究了澳大利亚的这一转变,并问改变政策驱动因素如何影响实现协调的努力?护理计划,资金池和购买仍然是协调中的重要组成部分。有证据表明,财务策略可用于推动特定患者群体的改善,但如果不与支持通过多学科团队合作,IT,疾病管理指南以及审计和反馈提供支持的临床策略相联系,这些策略就不可能改善结果。中观水平的组织策略可能会调整各种元素以改善协调。过去二十年来,不断变化的政策驱动力使研究和政策重心从关注分配效率到实现质量和物有所值。尚无研究开发可处理评估效果的理论方法。需要努力确定干预机制,这些机制及其可测量结果之间的合理关系以及支持干预属性出现的情境成分。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号