No description available.

In Ontario, access to publicly funded home care services is managed by Community Care Access Centres (CCACs). CCAC case managers are responsible for assessing all potential clients and prioritizing the allocation of services. The objectives of this thesis were to: 1) describe the types of decisions made by CCAC organizations and by individual case managers concerning the allocation of nursing, personal support and homemaking services to long-term adult clients with no mental health issues; and 2) to describe and assess the factors and values that influence these decisions. We conducted two case studies in which qualitative data were collected through 39 semi-structured interviews and a review of relevant documents from an urban and a rural area CCAC. A modified thematic analysis was used to identify themes related to the types of priority setting decisions and the associated factors and values. An internet-based survey was then designed based on these results and answered by 177 case managers from 8 of the 14 CCACs. The survey contained discrete choice experiments to examine the relative importance of client attributes and values to prioritization choices related to personal support and homemaking services, as well as questions that examined case managers’ attitudes towards priority setting. We found that both the rural and the urban CCACs utilized similar forms of priority setting and that case managers made the majority of these decisions during their daily interactions with clients. Numerous client, CCAC, and external factors related to the values of safety, independence and client-focused care were considered by case managers during needs assessment and service plan development. The relative importance of the selected client attributes in defining need for personal support and homemaking services was tested and found to be significantly affected by the location of the case manager (rural or urban area), years of experience in home care, and recent experience providing informal care. Case managers allocated services in the spirit of equal service for equal need and in consideration of operational efficiency. We also identified a number of case manager-related, client-related and external factors that interfered with the achievement of horizontal equity.

In Ontario, access to publicly funded home care services is managed by Community Care Access Centres (CCACs). CCAC case managers are responsible for assessing all potential clients and prioritizing the allocation of services. The objectives of this thesis were to: 1) describe the types of decisions made by CCAC organizations and by individual case managers concerning the allocation of nursing, personal support and homemaking services to long-term adult clients with no mental health issues; and 2) to describe and assess the factors and values that influence these decisions. We conducted two case studies in which qualitative data were collected through 39 semi-structured interviews and a review of relevant documents from an urban and a rural area CCAC. A modified thematic analysis was used to identify themes related to the types of priority setting decisions and the associated factors and values. An internet-based survey was then designed based on these results and answered by 177 case managers from 8 of the 14 CCACs. The survey contained discrete choice experiments to examine the relative importance of client attributes and values to prioritization choices related to personal support and homemaking services, as well as questions that examined case managers’ attitudes towards priority setting. We found that both the rural and the urban CCACs utilized similar forms of priority setting and that case managers made the majority of these decisions during their daily interactions with clients. Numerous client, CCAC, and external factors related to the values of safety, independence and client-focused care were considered by case managers during needs assessment and service plan development. The relative importance of the selected client attributes in defining need for personal support and homemaking services was tested and found to be significantly affected by the location of the case manager (rural or urban area), years of experience in home care, and recent experience providing informal care. Case managers allocated services in the spirit of equal service for equal need and in consideration of operational efficiency. We also identified a number of case manager-related, client-related and external factors that interfered with the achievement of horizontal equity.

Thesis (D.P.H.)--University of Michigan.

Thesis (D.P.H.)--University of Michigan.

This thesis examines the problem of utilitarian ageism in Quality-Adjusted Life Years and contrasts it with the biblical principles of community and honor that are to characterize treatment of the elderly. Chapter 1 provides a general orientation into the issue of health care allocation. Attention is given to the history of modern health care allocation and describes its rapid evolution. Chapter 2 provides a more detailed analysis of health care allocation demonstrating the necessity for some system of allocation in modern American health care. It concludes by presenting the QALY model as a potential basis for modern health care allocation decision making. Chapter 3 examines the problems of QALYs as a basis for health care allocation. After the use of quality of life and health life years is evaluated the relationship between utilitarianism and QALYs is explored, focusing on QALYs' discrimination against elderly. Chapter 4 examines the biblical perspectives of elder care, identifying the principles of honor and community as foundational. The underlining principles of justice and biblical love provide a foundation for biblical elder care. Chapter 5 compares the QALY and biblical models. The comparison is accomplished by noting the contrasts in philosophical foundations, economic strategies and priorities in the distribution of limited health care resources. Chapter 6 concludes by contending that QALY calculations are ageist and therefore an unjust basis on which to base decisions regarding the distribution of limited health care resources. This work contends that a potentially less efficient, but a better moral basis for resource allocation are the biblical principles of honor and community. These two principles enable a more holistic approach to dealing with the needy elderly in health care allocation. / This item is only available to students and faculty of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. If you are not associated with SBTS, this dissertation may be purchased from <a href="http://disexpress.umi.com/dxweb">http://disexpress.umi.com/dxweb</a> or downloaded through ProQuest's Dissertation and Theses database if your institution subscribes to that service.

Abstract not available

Thesis--Hannover, 1999. / Includes index and bibliographies.

Human beings have two apparently conflicting fundamental rights. On the one hand, individuals have a right to health care as the United Nations declared in 1948. On the other hand, individuals have a right to liberty; that is, the freedom to make one's own health related choices, even poor ones. One goal of this essay is to show how to reconcile these two apparently conflicting core American values. This reconciliation is important, because a universal health care system that is fair and just must account for individual rights in tandem with attempts to address matters of social justice. In order for this reconciliation to occur, matters of individual responsibility, social responsibility, and social justice must be central to health care reform. / by Jennifer Lynn Mantoni. / Vita. / Thesis (M.A.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2011. / Includes bibliography. / Electronic reproduction. Boca Raton, Fla., 2011. Mode of access: World Wide Web.

Introdução: Triagem para admissão em unidades de terapia intensiva (UTIs) é realizada rotineiramente e é comumente baseada somente no julgamento clínico, o que pode mascarar vieses e preconceitos. Neste estudo, foram avaliadas a reprodutibilidade e validade de um algoritmo de apoio a decisões de triagem em UTI. Também foi avaliado o efeito da implementação de um instrumento de auxílio à tomada de decisão para a priorização de vagas de UTI nas decisões de admissão em UTI. Foi avaliada, ainda, a acurácia da predição prognóstica dos médicos na população de pacientes em deterioração clínica aguda. Métodos: Para o primeiro objetivo do estudo, um algoritmo computadorizado para auxiliar as decisões de priorização de vagas em UTI foi desenvolvido para classificar pacientes nas categorias do sistema de priorização da \"Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM)\". Nove médicos experientes (experts) avaliaram quarenta vinhetas clínicas baseadas em pacientes reais. A referência foi definida como as prioridades classificadas por dois investigadores com acesso ao prontuário completo dos pacientes. As concordâncias entre as prioridades do algoritmo com as prioridades da referência e com as prioridades dos experts foram avaliadas. As correlações entre a prioridade do algoritmo e o julgamento clínico de adequação da admissão na UTI em contexto com e sem escassez de vagas também foram avaliadas. A validade foi ainda avaliada através da aplicação do algoritmo, retrospectivamente em uma coorte de 603 pacientes com solicitação de vagas de UTI, para correlação com desfechos clínicos. Para o segundo objetivo do estudo, um estudo prospectivo, quaseexperimental foi conduzido, antes (maio/2014 a novembro/2014, fase 1) e após (novembro/2014 a maio/2015, fase 2) a implementação de um instrumento de auxílio à tomada de decisão, que foi baseado no algoritmo descrito acima. Foi avaliado o impacto da implementação do instrumento de auxílio à tomada de decisão na ocorrência de admissões potencialmente inapropriadas na UTI em uma coorte de pacientes com solicitações urgentes de vaga de UTI. O desfecho primário foi a proporção de solicitações de vaga potencialmente inapropriadas que foram admitidas na UTI em até 48 horas após a solicitação. Solicitações de vaga potencialmente inapropriadas foram definidas como pacientes prioridade 4B, conforme diretrizes da SCCM de 1999, ou prioridade 5, conforme diretrizes da SCCM de 2016. Foram realizadas análises multivariadas com teste de interação entre fase e prioridades para avaliação dos efeitos diferenciados em cada estrato de prioridade. Para o terceiro objetivo do estudo, a predição prognóstica realizada pelo médico solicitante foi registrada no momento da solicitação de vaga de UTI. Resultados: No primeiro objetivo do estudo, a concordância entre as prioridades do algoritmo e as prioridades da referência foi substancial, com uma mediana de kappa de 0,72 (IQR 0,52-0,77). As prioridades do algoritmo evidenciaram uma maior reprodutibilidade entre os pares [kappa = 0,61 (IC95% 0,57-0,65) e mediana de percentagem de concordância = 0,64 (IQR 0,59-0,70)], quando comparada à reprodutibilidade entre os pares das prioridades dos experts [kappa = 0,51 (IC95% 0,47-0,55) e mediana de percentagem de concordância = 0,49 (IQR 0,44-0,56)], p=0,001. As prioridades do algoritmo também foram associadas ao julgamento clínico de adequação da admissão na UTI (vinhetas com prioridades 1, 2, 3 e 4 seriam admitidas no último leito de UTI em 83,7%, 61,2%, 45,2% e 16,8% dos cenários, respectivamente, p < 0,001) e com desfechos clínicos reais na coorte retrospectiva, como admissão na UTI, consultas com equipe de cuidados paliativos e mortalidade hospitalar. No segundo objetivo do estudo, 2374 solicitações urgentes de vaga de UTI foram avaliadas, das quais 1184 (53,8%) pacientes foram admitidos na UTI. A implementação do instrumento de auxílio à tomada de decisão foi associada com uma redução de admissões potencialmente inapropriadas na UTI, tanto utilizando a classificação de 1999 [adjOR (IC95%) = 0,36 (0,13-0,97), p = 0,043], quanto utilizando a classificação de 2016 [adjOR (IC95%) = 0,35 (0,13-0,96, p = 0,041)]. Não houve diferença em mortalidade entre as fases 1 e 2 do estudo. No terceiro objetivo do estudo, a predição prognóstica do médico solicitante foi associada com mortalidade. Ocorreram 593 (34,4%), 215 (66,4%) e 51 (94,4%) óbitos nos grupos com prognóstico de sobrevivência sem sequelas graves, sobrevivência com sequelas graves e nãosobrevivência, respectivamente (p < 0,001). Sensibilidade foi 31%, especificidade foi 91% e a área sob a curva ROC foi de 0,61 para predição de mortalidade hospitalar. Após análise multivariada, a gravidade da doença aguda, funcionalidade prévia e admissão na UTI foram associadas com uma maior chance de erro prognóstico, enquanto que uma predição de pior prognóstico foi associada a uma menor chance de erro prognóstico. O grau de expertise do médico solicitante não teve efeito na predição prognóstica. Discussão/Conclusão: Neste estudo, um algoritmo de apoio a decisões de triagem em UTI demonstrou boa reprodutibilidade e validade. Além disso, a implementação de um instrumento de auxílio à tomada de decisões para priorização de vagas de UTI foi associada a uma redução de admissões potencialmente inapropriadas na UTI. Também foi encontrado que a predição prognóstica dos médicos solicitantes foi associada a mortalidade hospitalar, porém a acurácia foi pobre, principalmente devido a uma baixa sensibilidade para detectar risco de morte / Introduction: Intensive care unit (ICU) admission triage is performed routinely and is often based solely on clinical judgment, which could mask biases. In this study, we sought to evaluate the reliability and validity of an algorithm to aid ICU triage decisions. We also aimed to evaluate the effect of implementing a decision-aid tool for ICU triage on ICU admission decisions. We also evaluated the accuracy of physician\'s prediction of hospital mortality in in acutely deteriorating patients. Methods: For the first objective of the study, a computerized algorithm to aid ICU triage decisions was developed to classify patients into the Society of Critical Care Medicine\'s prioritization system. Nine senior physicians evaluated forty clinical vignettes based on real patients. Reference standard was defined as the priorities ascribed by two investigators with full access to patient\'s records. Agreement of algorithm-based priorities with the reference standard and with intuitive priorities provided by the physicians were evaluated. Correlations between algorithm prioritization and physician\'s judgment of appropriateness of ICU admission in scarcity and non-scarcity settings were also evaluated. Validity was further assessed by retrospectively applying this algorithm to 603 patients with requests for ICU admission for association with clinical outcomes. For the second objective of the study, a prospective, quasi-experimental study was conducted, before (May 2014 to November 2014, phase 1) and after (November 2014 to May 2015, phase 2) the implementation of a decision-aid tool for ICU admission triage, which was based on the aforementioned algorithm. We assessed the impact of the implementation of the decision-aid tool in potentially inappropriate ICU admissions in a cohort of patients referred for urgent ICU admission. Primary outcome was the proportion of potentially inappropriate ICU referrals that were admitted to the ICU in 48 hours following referral. Potentially inappropriate ICU referrals were defined as priority 4B patients, as described by the 1999 Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) guidelines and as priority 5 patients, as described by the 2016 SCCM guidelines. We conducted multivariate analyses and evaluated the interaction between phase and triage priorities to assess for differential effects in each priority strata. For the third objective of the study, physicians\' prognosis and other variables were recorded at the moment of ICU referral. Results: On the first objective of the study, agreement between algorithm-based priorities and the reference standard was substantial, with a median kappa of 0.72 (IQR 0.52-0.77). Algorithm-based priorities demonstrated higher interrater reliability [overall kappa of 0.61 (95%CI 0.57-0.65) and median percent agreement of 0.64 (IQR 0.59-0.70)] than physician\'s intuitive prioritization [overall kappa of 0.51 (95%CI 0.47-0.55) and median percent agreement of 0.49 (IQR 0.44-0.56)], p=0.001. Algorithm-based priorities were also associated with physicians\' judgment of appropriateness of ICU admission (priorities 1, 2, 3 and 4 vignettes would be admitted to the last ICU bed in 83.7%, 61.2%, 45.2% and 16.8% of the scenarios, respectively, p < 0.001) and with actual ICU admission, palliative care consultation and hospital mortality in the retrospective cohort. On the second objective of the study, of 2374 urgent ICU referrals, 1184 (53.8%) patients were admitted to the ICU. Implementation of the decision-aid tool was associated with a reduction of potentially inappropriate ICU admissions using the 1999 [adjOR (95% CI) = 0.36 (0.13-0.97), p = 0.043] or 2016 [adjOR (95%CI) = 0.35 (0.13-0.96, p = 0.041)] definitions. There was no difference on mortality between phases 1 and 2. On the third objective of the study, physician\'s prognosis was associated to hospital mortality. There were 593 (34.4%), 215 (66.4%) and 51 (94.4%) deaths in the groups ascribed a prognosis of survival without disabilities, survival with severe disabilities or no survival, respectively (p < 0.001). Sensitivity was 31%, specificity was 91% and the area under the ROC curve was 0.61 for prediction of mortality. After multivariable analysis, severity of illness, performance status and ICU admission were associated to an increased likelihood of incorrect classification, while worse predicted prognosis was associated to a lower chance of incorrect classification. Physician\'s level of expertise had no effect on predictive ability. Discussion/Conclusion: In this study, a ICU admission triage algorithm demonstrated good reliability and validity. Moreover, the implementation of a decision-aid tool for ICU triage was associated with a reduction of potentially inappropriate ICU admissions. It was also found that physician\'s prediction was associated to hospital mortality, but overall accuracy was poor, mainly due to low sensitivity to detect mortality risk