Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28476159›Full record

ReviewBMC health services research2017

Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 2: identifying opportunities for disinvestment in a local healthcare setting.

Claire Harris, Kelly Allen, Richard King, Wayne Ramsey, Cate Kelly, Malar Thiagarajan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Claire HarrisSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia. claire.harris@monash.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-5367-8144
Kelly AllenSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.
Richard KingMedicine Program, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia.
Wayne RamseyMedical Services and Quality, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia.
Cate KellyMedical Services, Melbourne Health, Victoria, Australia.
Malar ThiagarajanAgeing and Aged Care Branch, Department of Health and Human Services, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis is the second in a series of papers reporting a program of Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) in a local healthcare setting. Rising healthcare costs, continuing advances in health technologies and recognition of ineffective practices and systematic waste are driving disinvestment of health technologies and clinical practices that offer little or no benefit in order to maximise outcomes from existing resources. However there is little information to guide regional health services or individual facilities in how they might approach disinvestment locally. This paper outlines the investigation of potential settings and methods for decision-making about disinvestment in the context of an Australian health service.

methodsMethods include a literature review on the concepts and terminology relating to disinvestment, a survey of national and international researchers, and interviews and workshops with local informants. A conceptual framework was drafted and refined with stakeholder feedback.

resultsThere is a lack of common terminology regarding definitions and concepts related to disinvestment and no guidance for an organisation-wide systematic approach to disinvestment in a local healthcare service. A summary of issues from the literature and respondents highlight the lack of theoretical knowledge and practical experience and provide a guide to the information required to develop future models or methods for disinvestment in the local context. A conceptual framework was developed. Three mechanisms that provide opportunities to introduce disinvestment decisions into health service systems and processes were identified. Presented in order of complexity, time to achieve outcomes and resources required they include 1) Explicit consideration of potential disinvestment in routine decision-making, 2) Proactive decision-making about disinvestment driven by available evidence from published research and local data, and 3) Specific exercises in priority setting and system redesign.

conclusionThis framework identifies potential opportunities to initiate disinvestment activities in a systematic integrated approach that can be applied across a whole organisation using transparent, evidence-based methods. Incorporating considerations for disinvestment into existing decision-making systems and processes might be achieved quickly with minimal cost; however establishment of new systems requires research into appropriate methods and provision of appropriate skills and resources to deliver them.

Indexed as

Biomedical TechnologyCosts and Cost AnalysisDecision Making, OrganizationalDelivery of Health CareEvidence-Based DentistryHealth ResourcesHealth ServicesHumansInvestmentsResource AllocationVictoriaDe-adoptDecision-makingDecommissionDe-implementDe-listDisinvestmentHealth Clinical PracticeImplementationResource allocationTCP

Identifiers

PMID28476159
PMCPMC5420107

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.