Table 2 |
||
|
Specific points to consider when applying PBMA |
||
| Point to consider |
Ideal time to address |
Rationale |
|
|
||
| Strategically select the first PBMA exercise in a health organization in an area where
there is a confirmed champion and an 'easy-win' |
Prior to specific applications being selected |
Need champion for group buy-in and follow-through of recommendations; early success
will aid in the organizational uptake of the approach |
| Use an introductory session to communicate underlying economic concepts and specifically
what the application plan is |
At the outset of the process |
Panel members have to understand opportunity cost for buy-in; provides opportunity
to adjust the plan early on |
| Advisory panel meetings held at 2–4 week intervals |
Throughout the PBMA process |
Need adequate time to review literature and do background work but do not want a drawn
out process; complete in < 6 months |
| Consider using one-on-one meetings with advisory panel members to identify options
for resource release |
When discussing options for resource release |
Not all members will feel comfortable presenting a view in the larger group |
| Put less emphasis on having all the 'data' to support a decision and more on drawing
out opinions from the expert group |
Particularly in the later sessions of the process |
Data can only take the group so far and can be used as a crutch not to make a decision;
ultimately group need to have confidence in making their own recommendations |
| Earmark resources (i.e. staff time) to enact the panel recommendations |
Stated at the outset, carried out following the exercise |
Recommendations by themselves will not see action without dedicated resources to move
them forward |
| Reliance on 'softer' forms of evidence to support process such as expert opinions
and qualitative research, particularly when 'hard' evidence is not available |
Throughout PBMA process |
This is the type of information decision makers are familiar with and which is often
available in practice |
| Tap into public for development of criteria on which decisions are to be based |
At the outset of the process |
Public may not have technical knowledge to make specific trade-offs but certainly
can offer valuable insight on values and specific criteria |
|
|
||
|
Mitton and Donaldson Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2004 2:3 doi:10.1186/1478-7547-2-3 |
||
