Systems, design and value-for-money in the NHS: mission impossible?

Terry Young, Alec Morton, Sada Soorapanth

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

NHS organisations are being challenged to transform themselves sustainably in the face of increasing demands, but they have little room for error. To manage trade-offs and risks precisely, they must integrate two very different streams of expertise: systems approaches to service design and implementation, and economic evaluation of the type pioneered by NICE for pharmaceuticals and interventions. Neither approach is fully embedded in NHS service transformation, while the combination as an integrated discipline is still some way away.
We share three examples to show how design methods may be deployed within a value-for-money framework to plan operationally and in terms of clinical outcomes. They are real cases briefly described and the unreferenced ones are anonymised. They have been selected by one of us (TY) during his sabbatical research because each illustrates a commonly observed challenge. To meet these challenges, we argue that the health economics cost/QALY framework promulgated by NICE provides an under-appreciated lens for thinking about trade-offs and we highlight some systems tools which have also been under-utilised in this context.
LanguageEnglish
Pages156-159
Number of pages4
JournalFuture Healthcare Journal
Volume5
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2018

Fingerprint

Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Health Care Costs
Lenses
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Economics
Organizations
Research
Pharmaceutical Preparations
pharmaceutical
economics
expertise
costs
health
evaluation

Keywords

  • NHS
  • NICE
  • evaluation

Cite this

Young, Terry ; Morton, Alec ; Soorapanth, Sada. / Systems, design and value-for-money in the NHS : mission impossible?. In: Future Healthcare Journal. 2018 ; Vol. 5, No. 3. pp. 156-159.
@article{6ac337aaeffd41a3a55fe943099f73a7,
title = "Systems, design and value-for-money in the NHS: mission impossible?",
abstract = "NHS organisations are being challenged to transform themselves sustainably in the face of increasing demands, but they have little room for error. To manage trade-offs and risks precisely, they must integrate two very different streams of expertise: systems approaches to service design and implementation, and economic evaluation of the type pioneered by NICE for pharmaceuticals and interventions. Neither approach is fully embedded in NHS service transformation, while the combination as an integrated discipline is still some way away.We share three examples to show how design methods may be deployed within a value-for-money framework to plan operationally and in terms of clinical outcomes. They are real cases briefly described and the unreferenced ones are anonymised. They have been selected by one of us (TY) during his sabbatical research because each illustrates a commonly observed challenge. To meet these challenges, we argue that the health economics cost/QALY framework promulgated by NICE provides an under-appreciated lens for thinking about trade-offs and we highlight some systems tools which have also been under-utilised in this context.",
keywords = "NHS, NICE, evaluation",
author = "Terry Young and Alec Morton and Sada Soorapanth",
year = "2018",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.7861/futurehosp.5-3-156",
language = "English",
volume = "5",
pages = "156--159",
journal = "Future Healthcare Journal",
issn = "2055-3323",
number = "3",

}

Systems, design and value-for-money in the NHS : mission impossible? / Young, Terry; Morton, Alec; Soorapanth, Sada.

In: Future Healthcare Journal, Vol. 5, No. 3, 01.10.2018, p. 156-159.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Systems, design and value-for-money in the NHS

T2 - Future Healthcare Journal

AU - Young, Terry

AU - Morton, Alec

AU - Soorapanth, Sada

PY - 2018/10/1

Y1 - 2018/10/1

N2 - NHS organisations are being challenged to transform themselves sustainably in the face of increasing demands, but they have little room for error. To manage trade-offs and risks precisely, they must integrate two very different streams of expertise: systems approaches to service design and implementation, and economic evaluation of the type pioneered by NICE for pharmaceuticals and interventions. Neither approach is fully embedded in NHS service transformation, while the combination as an integrated discipline is still some way away.We share three examples to show how design methods may be deployed within a value-for-money framework to plan operationally and in terms of clinical outcomes. They are real cases briefly described and the unreferenced ones are anonymised. They have been selected by one of us (TY) during his sabbatical research because each illustrates a commonly observed challenge. To meet these challenges, we argue that the health economics cost/QALY framework promulgated by NICE provides an under-appreciated lens for thinking about trade-offs and we highlight some systems tools which have also been under-utilised in this context.

AB - NHS organisations are being challenged to transform themselves sustainably in the face of increasing demands, but they have little room for error. To manage trade-offs and risks precisely, they must integrate two very different streams of expertise: systems approaches to service design and implementation, and economic evaluation of the type pioneered by NICE for pharmaceuticals and interventions. Neither approach is fully embedded in NHS service transformation, while the combination as an integrated discipline is still some way away.We share three examples to show how design methods may be deployed within a value-for-money framework to plan operationally and in terms of clinical outcomes. They are real cases briefly described and the unreferenced ones are anonymised. They have been selected by one of us (TY) during his sabbatical research because each illustrates a commonly observed challenge. To meet these challenges, we argue that the health economics cost/QALY framework promulgated by NICE provides an under-appreciated lens for thinking about trade-offs and we highlight some systems tools which have also been under-utilised in this context.

KW - NHS

KW - NICE

KW - evaluation

UR - http://futurehospital.rcpjournal.org/

U2 - 10.7861/futurehosp.5-3-156

DO - 10.7861/futurehosp.5-3-156

M3 - Article

VL - 5

SP - 156

EP - 159

JO - Future Healthcare Journal

JF - Future Healthcare Journal

SN - 2055-3323

IS - 3

ER -