Efficiency, effectiveness, equity (E3). Evaluating hospital performance in three dimensions

Abstract

There are well-established frameworks for comparing the performance of health systems cross-nationally on multiple dimensions. A sub-set of such comprehensive schema is taken up by criteria specifically applied to health service delivery, including hospital performance. We focus on evaluating hospital performance, using the New Zealand public hospital sector over the period 2001-2009 as a pragmatic and illustrative case study for cross-national application. We apply a broad three-dimensional matrix--efficiency, effectiveness, equity--each based on two measures, and we undertake ranking comparisons of 35 hospitals. On the efficiency dimension--relative stay, day surgery--we find coefficients of variation of 10.8% and 8.5% respectively in the pooled data, and a slight trend towards a narrowing of inter-hospital variation over time. The correlation between these indicators is low (.20). For effectiveness--post-admission mortality, unplanned readmission--the coefficient of variation is generally higher (24.1% and 12.2%), and the trend is flat. The correlation is again low (.21). The equity dimension is assessed by quantifying the degree of ethnic and socio-economic variation for each hospital. The coefficient of variation is much higher--40.7-66.5% for ethnicity, 55.8-84.4% for socio-economic position--the trend over time is mixed, and the correlation is moderate (.41). On averaging the rank of hospitals across all measures it is evident that there is limited consistency across the three constituent dimensions. While it is possible to assess hospital performance across three dimensions using an illustrative set of standard measures derived from routine data, there appears to be little consistency in hospital rankings on these New Zealand data for the period 2001-2009. However, the methodology of using rankings derived from readily available data--possibly allied with multiple or composite indicator models--has potential for the cross-national comparison of hospital profiles, and assessments in three dimensions provide a more holistic and rounded account of performance.

Extending Miles & Snow's strategy choice typology to the German hospital sector

“…This measure reflects the state of the art in nonprofit hospital research in terms of conceptualizing and operationalizing organizational success and its multidimensionality [50]. We chose to collect both subjective and objective measurements of financial and non-financial indicators to account for measurement issues related to both data sources.…”

Efficiency performance of China's health care delivery system

“…In both Chinese and international contexts, existing efficiency studies on health have mainly focused on the institutional level, rather than the system level, that is, taking institutions as analysis units . Hollingsworth reviewed 317 studies on efficiency measurement in the context of health services delivery and found that most studies focused on health institutions .…”

Measuring next of kin satisfaction with hospital cancer care: Using a mixed‐method approach as basis for improving quality and safety

“…Many healthcare organizations have recognized that user involvement can improve services quality and safety (Doyle, Lennox, & Bell, 2013;Lawton et al, 2017). Several studies argue that clinical effectiveness, patient safety and patient experiences have to be considered when working on improving care quality (Davis et al, 2013;Doyle et al, 2013;Wells, Campbell, Kumar, Clark, & Jean-Pierre, 2018). Other studies highlight the importance of using patient and stakeholder experiences as a basis for improvement (Davies & Cleary, 2005;Groene et al, 2014;O'Hara, Aase, & Waring, 2018).…”