Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T04:19:39.925Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Proposition of a Shared and Value-Oriented Work Structure for Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment and Enterprise Risk Management Processes

Part of: Special Collection - Methods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 April 2019

Ana Paula Beck da Silva Etges ,
Veronique Grenon ,
Elaine Aparecida Felix ,
Joana Siqueira de Souza ,
Francisco José Kliemann Neto  and
Carisi Anne Polanczyk
Ana Paula Beck da Silva Etges*
Affiliation:
School of Technology, PUCRS, Porto Alegre, Brazil National Health Technology Assessment Institute, CNPq, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil Department of Industrial Engineering, UFRGS, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
Veronique Grenon
Affiliation:
The Risk Authority Stanford, Palo Alto, California
Elaine Aparecida Felix
Affiliation:
Department of Anesthesiology, School of Medicine, UFRGS, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
Joana Siqueira de Souza
Affiliation:
Department of Industrial Engineering, UFRGS, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
Francisco José Kliemann Neto
Affiliation:
Department of Industrial Engineering, UFRGS, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
Carisi Anne Polanczyk
Affiliation:
National Health Technology Assessment Institute, CNPq, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil Department of Cardiology, School of Medicine, UFRGS, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
*
Author for correspondence: Ana Paula Beck da Silva Etges, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

Healthcare organizations have invested efforts on hospital-based health technology assessment (HB-HTA) and enterprise risk management (ERM) processes for novel systems to obtain more accurate data on which to base strategic decisions. This study proposes to analyze how HB-HTA and ERM processes can share personal resources and skills to achieve principles with value-oriented results.

Methods

Literature on ERM and HB-HTA and data from interviews with healthcare managers compose the research data sources, which were submitted to a qualitative data analysis. It was oriented to identify the association between ERM and HB-HTA application in hospitals and the common principles between both processes, in addition to proposing the capability to share personal resources between both teams in a matrix.

Results

The common principles and personal background suggested for HB-HTA and ERM teams allowed the build of a matrix identifying how both teams can work in an integrated manner being more effective and value-oriented. The shared resource matrix reports how each professional (with a specific background) may interact with each activity associated to HB-HTA or ERM implementation guidelines.

Conclusions

The identification of common principles and capabilities between ERM and HB-HTA suggested advances with the literature from both research areas. The opportunity to share personal resources also contributes to the implementation of those processes in hospitals with less financial resources, approaching its own management to be more efficient with the care chain.

Keywords

Enterprise risk managementHealthcare managementRisk managementRisk educationCorporate governanceHTAHospital-based HTA
Type
Method
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 35 , Issue 3 , 2019 , pp. 195 - 203
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Ethics approval and consent: All interviewees were invited to the survey and agreed to have their data analyzed. As it is not involving patient data, animals, or personal human information, the approval by the ethics committee was not necessary. Availability of data and material: The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

1.Sampietro-Colom, L, Lach, K, Wasserfallen, JB, et al. (2015) Guiding principles for good practices in hospital-based health technology assessment units. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 31,457–465.Google Scholar
2.Pereira, CCA, Rabello, RDS, Elias, FTS (2017) Hospital-based health technology assessment in Brazil: An overview of the initial experiences. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 33, 227–231.Google Scholar
3.Porter, ME, Larsson, S, Lee, TH (2016) Standardizing patient outcomes measurement. N Engl J Med 374, 504–506.Google Scholar
4.Attieh, R, Gagnon, MP (2012) Implementation of local/hospital-based health technology assessment initiatives in low- and middle-income countries. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 28, 445–451.Google Scholar
5.Bromiley, P, McShane, M, Nair, A, Rustambekov, E (2015) Enterprise risk management: Review, critique, and research directions. Long Range Plann 48, 265–276.Google Scholar
6.Damodaran, A. (2008) Gestão estratégica do risco. Hoboken, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.Google Scholar
7.Aven, E, Aven, T (2015) On the need for rethinking current practice that highlights goal achievement risk in an enterprise context. Risk Anal 35, 1706–1716.Google Scholar
8.COSO Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (2017) Enterprise risk management: Integrating with strategy and performance. https://www.coso.org/Pages/ERM-Framework-Purchase.aspx.Google Scholar
9.Etges APB da, S, Souza, JS, Kliemann Neto, FJ, Felix, EA (2018) A proposed enterprise risk management model for health organizations. J Risk Res doi:10.1080/13669877.2017.1422780.Google Scholar
10.AdHopHTA Project Partners (2015) The AdHopHTA Handbook: A handbook of hospital-based health technology assessment. http://www.adhophta.eu/handbook.Google Scholar
11.No authors listed (2005) Enterprise risk management. Part one: Defining the concept, recognizing its value. J Healthc Risk Manag 25, 11–13.Google Scholar
12.Etges, APBDS, Grenon, V, Lu, M, et al. (2018) Development of an enterprise risk inventory for healthcare. BMC Health Serv Res 18, 1–16.Google Scholar
13.Carroll, R (2009) Risk management handbook for health care organizations. vol. 30. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
14.Etges, APBdaS, Grenon, V, Souza, JS, Kliemann, FJN, Felix, EA (2018) Economic Enterprise risk management innovation program in healthcare (E2RMhealthcare). Value Health Reg Issues 17C, 102–108.Google Scholar
15.Martelli, N, Puc, C, Szwarcensztein, K, et al. (2017) Hospital-based health technology assessment in France: A focus on medical devices. Therapie 72, 115–123.Google Scholar
16.Gagnon, MP (2014) Hospital-based health technology assessment: Developments to date. Pharmacoeconomics 32, 819–824.Google Scholar
17.Demirdjian, G (2015) A 10-Year hospital-based health technology assessment program in a public hospital in Argentina. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 31, 103–110.Google Scholar
18.Abbasi, M, Khorasani, ZM, Etminani, K, Rahmanvand, R (2017) Determination of the most important risk factors of gestational diabetes in Iran by group analytical hierarchy process (GAHP). Iran J Reprod Med 15, 109–114.Google Scholar
19.Ajami, S, Ketabi, S (2012) Performance evaluation of medical records departments by analytical hierarchy process (AHP) approach in the selected hospitals in Isfahan: Medical records dep. & AHP. J Med Syst 36, 1165–1171.Google Scholar
20.Sun, WY, Tong, L, Li, DX, et al. (2015) Selection of reference standard during method development using the analytical hierarchy process. J Pharm Biomed Anal 107, 280–289.Google Scholar
21.Wahlster, P, Goetghebeur, M, Kriza, C, Niederländer, C, Kolominsky-rabas, P (2015) Balancing costs and benefits at different stages of medical innovation: A systematic review of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). BMC Health Serv Res 15, 262.Google Scholar
22.Morton, A (2014) Aversion to health inequalities in healthcare prioritisation: A multicriteria optimisation perspective. J Health Econ 36, 164–173.Google Scholar
23.Grenon, X, Pinget, C, Wasserfallen, JB (2016) Hospital-based health technology assessment (Hb-Hta): A 10-year survey at one unit. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 32, 116–121.Google Scholar
24.Cooper, R, Kaplan, RS (1991) Profit priorities from activity-based costing. Harv Bus Rev 69, 130–135.Google Scholar
25.Kaplan, RS, Anderson, SR (2007) Time-driven activity-based costing: A simpler and more powerful path to higher profits. vol. 82. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
26.Fraser, JRS, Simkins, BJ (2016) The challenges of and solutions for implementing enterprise risk management. Bus Horiz 59, 689–698.Google Scholar
27.Oppenberg, AA (2013) Our ASHRM journey continues: ERM for our patients’ safety. J Healthc Risk Manag 33, 1.Google Scholar
28.Haney, JR, Church, J, Cockerill, R (2013) Pursuing enterprise risk management: A local road map for Canadian healthcare leaders. Healthc Manag Forum 26, 145–149.Google Scholar
29.Kicklighter, L, Miller, VB (2011) The chalenge of change. J Healthc Risk Manag 31, 4–8.Google Scholar
30.Teoh, SY, Cheong, C (2008) Implicit enterprise risk management: An IT healthcare adoption case study. ACIS 2008 Proceedings - 19th Australasian Conference on Information Systems. 1011–1018.Google Scholar
31.Remus, B (2008) Addressing risk in the design of new healthcare services: A step-by-step methodology. J Healthc Risk Manag 28, 31–36.Google Scholar
32.Courson, WM (2008) Liability-driven investing: An enterprise risk management strategy. Healthc Financ Manage 62, 58–62.Google Scholar
33.Celona, J, Driver, J, Hall, E (2010) Value-driven ERM: Making ERM an engine for simultaneous value creation and value protection. J Healthc Risk Manag 30, 15–33.Google Scholar
34.Troyer, GT, Brashear, AD, Green, KJ (2005) Managing corporate governance risks in a nonprofit health care organization. J Healthc Risk Manag 25, 29–34.Google Scholar
35.Miller, VB, Miginsky, CS, Connelly, NC (2012) The risk manager's contribution to patient safety and risk management in the ambulatory or physician practice setting. J Healthc Risk Manag 31, 31–39.Google Scholar
36.Sodomka, P, Spake, MA, Rush, JJ Jr (2010) Enterprise-wide effort brings patient perspective into mix. J Healthc Manag 29, 28–32.Google Scholar
37.Gallagher, TH, Brundage, G, Kerry, M, et al. (2006) National survey: Risk managers ’ attitudes and experiences regarding patient safety and error disclosure. Am Soc Healthc Risk Manag 26, 11–16.Google Scholar
38.Martelli, N, Billaux, M, Borget, I, Pineau, J, Prognon, P, van den Brink, H (2015) Introduction of innovative medical devices at French university hospitals: An overview of hospital-based health technology assessment initiatives. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 31, 12–18.Google Scholar