Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 1/2004

Open Access 01-12-2004 | Research

Health care priority setting: principles, practice and challenges

Authors: Craig Mitton, Cam Donaldson

Published in: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation | Issue 1/2004

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Health organizations the world over are required to set priorities and allocate resources within the constraint of limited funding. However, decision makers may not be well equipped to make explicit rationing decisions and as such often rely on historical or political resource allocation processes. One economic approach to priority setting which has gained momentum in practice over the last three decades is program budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA).

Methods

This paper presents a detailed step by step guide for carrying out a priority setting process based on the PBMA framework. This guide is based on the authors' experience in using this approach primarily in the UK and Canada, but as well draws on a growing literature of PBMA studies in various countries.

Results

At the core of the PBMA approach is an advisory panel charged with making recommendations for resource re-allocation. The process can be supported by a range of 'hard' and 'soft' evidence, and requires that decision making criteria are defined and weighted in an explicit manner. Evaluating the process of PBMA using an ethical framework, and noting important challenges to such activity including that of organizational behavior, are shown to be important aspects of developing a comprehensive approach to priority setting in health care.

Conclusion

Although not without challenges, international experience with PBMA over the last three decades would indicate that this approach has the potential to make substantial improvement on commonly relied upon historical and political decision making processes. In setting out a step by step guide for PBMA, as is done in this paper, implementation by decision makers should be facilitated.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Farrar S, Ryan M, Ross D, Ludbrook A: Using discrete choice modelling in priority setting: an application to clinical service developments. Social Science and Medicine 2000, 50: 63–75. 10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00268-3PubMedCrossRef Farrar S, Ryan M, Ross D, Ludbrook A: Using discrete choice modelling in priority setting: an application to clinical service developments. Social Science and Medicine 2000, 50: 63–75. 10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00268-3PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Lomas J, Woods J, Veenstra G: Devolving authority for health care in Canada's provinces: 1. An introduction to the issues. Canadian Medical Association Journal 1997,156(3):371–377.PubMedCentralPubMed Lomas J, Woods J, Veenstra G: Devolving authority for health care in Canada's provinces: 1. An introduction to the issues. Canadian Medical Association Journal 1997,156(3):371–377.PubMedCentralPubMed
3.
go back to reference Mitton C, Donaldson C: Setting priorities in Canadian regional health authorities: a survey of key decision makers. Health Policy 2002,60(1):39–58. 10.1016/S0168-8510(01)00190-7PubMedCrossRef Mitton C, Donaldson C: Setting priorities in Canadian regional health authorities: a survey of key decision makers. Health Policy 2002,60(1):39–58. 10.1016/S0168-8510(01)00190-7PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Birch S, Chambers S: To each according to need: a community-based approach to allocating health care resources. Canadian Medical Association Journal 1993, 149: 607–612.PubMedCentralPubMed Birch S, Chambers S: To each according to need: a community-based approach to allocating health care resources. Canadian Medical Association Journal 1993, 149: 607–612.PubMedCentralPubMed
5.
go back to reference Donaldson C, Mitton C, Currie G: Managing Medicare: the pre-requisite to spending or reform. The Health Papers No. 157. Toronto: CD Howe Institute 2002. Donaldson C, Mitton C, Currie G: Managing Medicare: the pre-requisite to spending or reform. The Health Papers No. 157. Toronto: CD Howe Institute 2002.
6.
go back to reference Mitton C, Donaldson C: Tools of the trade: a comparative analysis of approaches to priority setting in health care. Health Services Management Research 2003, 16: 96–105. 10.1258/095148403321591410PubMedCrossRef Mitton C, Donaldson C: Tools of the trade: a comparative analysis of approaches to priority setting in health care. Health Services Management Research 2003, 16: 96–105. 10.1258/095148403321591410PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Mooney G, Gerard K, Donaldson C, Farrar S: Priority Setting in Purchasing: Some Practical Guidelines. (Research paper number 6) Scotland: National Association of Health Authorities and Trusts 1992. Mooney G, Gerard K, Donaldson C, Farrar S: Priority Setting in Purchasing: Some Practical Guidelines. (Research paper number 6) Scotland: National Association of Health Authorities and Trusts 1992.
8.
9.
go back to reference Shackley P, Ryan M: Involving consumers in health care decision making. Health Care Analysis 1995,3(3):196–204.PubMedCrossRef Shackley P, Ryan M: Involving consumers in health care decision making. Health Care Analysis 1995,3(3):196–204.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Mabin V, King G, Menzies M, Joyce K: Public sector priority setting using decision support tools. Australian Journal of Public Administration 2001,60(2):44–59. 10.1111/1467-8500.00208CrossRef Mabin V, King G, Menzies M, Joyce K: Public sector priority setting using decision support tools. Australian Journal of Public Administration 2001,60(2):44–59. 10.1111/1467-8500.00208CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Astley J, Wake-Dyster W: Evidence-based priority setting. Australian Health Review 2001,24(2):32–39.PubMedCrossRef Astley J, Wake-Dyster W: Evidence-based priority setting. Australian Health Review 2001,24(2):32–39.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Peacock S: An Evaluation of Program Budgeting and Marginal Analysis Applied in South Australian Hospitals. Melbourne: Center for Health Program Evaluation, Monash University 1998. Peacock S: An Evaluation of Program Budgeting and Marginal Analysis Applied in South Australian Hospitals. Melbourne: Center for Health Program Evaluation, Monash University 1998.
14.
go back to reference Singer P, Martin D, Giacomini M, Purdy L: Priority setting for new technologies in medicine: qualitative case study. British Medical Journal 2000, 321: 1316–1318. 10.1136/bmj.321.7272.1316PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Singer P, Martin D, Giacomini M, Purdy L: Priority setting for new technologies in medicine: qualitative case study. British Medical Journal 2000, 321: 1316–1318. 10.1136/bmj.321.7272.1316PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Ruta DA, Donaldson C, Gilray I: Economics, public health and health care purchasing: the Tayside experience of programme budgeting and marginal analysis. J Health Serv Res Policy 1996,1(4):185–193.PubMed Ruta DA, Donaldson C, Gilray I: Economics, public health and health care purchasing: the Tayside experience of programme budgeting and marginal analysis. J Health Serv Res Policy 1996,1(4):185–193.PubMed
16.
go back to reference Donaldson C, Mooney G: Needs assessment, priority setting, and contracts for health care: an economic view. British Medical Journal 1991, 303: 1529–1530.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Donaldson C, Mooney G: Needs assessment, priority setting, and contracts for health care: an economic view. British Medical Journal 1991, 303: 1529–1530.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference McIver S, Baines D, Ham C, McLeod H: Setting Priorities and managing demand in the NHS. Birmingham: Health Services Management Centre 2001. McIver S, Baines D, Ham C, McLeod H: Setting Priorities and managing demand in the NHS. Birmingham: Health Services Management Centre 2001.
18.
go back to reference Ratcliffe J, Donaldson C, Macphee S: Programme budgeting and marginal analysis: a case study of maternity services. Journal of Public Health medicine 1996,18(2):175–182.PubMedCrossRef Ratcliffe J, Donaldson C, Macphee S: Programme budgeting and marginal analysis: a case study of maternity services. Journal of Public Health medicine 1996,18(2):175–182.PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Litva A, Coast J, Donovan J, Eyles J, Shepherd M, Tacchi J, Abelson J, Morgan K: 'The public is too subjective': public involvement at different levels of health-care decision making. Social Science and Medicine 2002, 54: 1825–37. 10.1016/S0277-9536(01)00151-4PubMedCrossRef Litva A, Coast J, Donovan J, Eyles J, Shepherd M, Tacchi J, Abelson J, Morgan K: 'The public is too subjective': public involvement at different levels of health-care decision making. Social Science and Medicine 2002, 54: 1825–37. 10.1016/S0277-9536(01)00151-4PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Mitton C, Donaldson C: Setting priorities and allocating resources in health regions: lessons from a project evaluating program budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA). Health Policy 2003, 64: 335–348. 10.1016/S0168-8510(02)00198-7PubMedCrossRef Mitton C, Donaldson C: Setting priorities and allocating resources in health regions: lessons from a project evaluating program budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA). Health Policy 2003, 64: 335–348. 10.1016/S0168-8510(02)00198-7PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Health care priority setting: principles, practice and challenges
Authors
Craig Mitton
Cam Donaldson
Publication date
01-12-2004
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation / Issue 1/2004
Electronic ISSN: 1478-7547
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-7547-2-3