IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i10p3550-d173538.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Higher Sustainability and Lower Opportunistic Behaviour in Healthcare: A New Framework for Performing Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Gabriele Palozzi

    (Department of Management and Law, University of Rome Tor Vergata, 00133 Rome, Italy)

  • Sandro Brunelli

    (Department of Management and Law, University of Rome Tor Vergata, 00133 Rome, Italy)

  • Camilla Falivena

    (Department of Management and Law, University of Rome Tor Vergata, 00133 Rome, Italy)

Abstract

Innovative health technology deployment represents the primary challenge within the sustainability of public health systems. On one hand, new technologies may potentially improve access to care and the quality of services. On the other hand, their rapid evolution and broad implications on existing procedures increase the risk to adopt technologies that are not value for money. As a consequence, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is a critical process at each level of the National Health System. Focusing on the organisational level, this paper explores the current practices of Hospital-Based HTA (HB-HTA) in terms of management, control and behaviours of various actors involved. Among several tasks, decision-makers are appointed at managing the conflict of interest around health technology development, that could pave the way for corruption or other misleading behaviours. Accordingly, the purpose of the study is proposing a new strategic framework, named Health Technology Balanced Assessment (HTBA), to foster hospital-based health technology management aimed to align strategy and actions. The conceptual model is developed on three perspectives (clinical, economic and organisational) to make the actors involved in the assessment (clinicians, health professionals, hospital managers and patients) aware of the impact of new technology on the value chain. Besides supporting the decision-making process, such a tool represents support for the internal control system as a whole. By promoting structured evaluation, it increases transparency and accountability of public health organisations. Moreover, in the long run, the framework proposed will be useful to reach selected United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs) to enhance the quality of healthcare in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Gabriele Palozzi & Sandro Brunelli & Camilla Falivena, 2018. "Higher Sustainability and Lower Opportunistic Behaviour in Healthcare: A New Framework for Performing Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-19, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:10:p:3550-:d:173538
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/10/3550/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/10/3550/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Enrico Bracci & Christopher Humphrey & Jodie Moll & Ileana Steccolini, 2015. "Public sector accounting, accountability and austerity: more than balancing the books?," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 28(6), pages 878-908, August.
    2. Carolyn J. Fowler & Carolyn J. Cordery, 2015. "From community to public ownership: a tale of changing accountabilities," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 28(1), pages 128-153, January.
    3. Quan-Hoang Vuong & Tung-Manh Ho & Hong-Kong Nguyen & Thu-Trang Vuong, 2018. "Healthcare consumers’ sensitivity to costs: a reflection on behavioural economics from an emerging market," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-10, December.
    4. Douw, Karla & Vondeling, Hindrik & Oortwijn, Wija, 2006. "Priority setting for horizon scanning of new health technologies in Denmark: Views of health care stakeholders and health economists," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 334-345, May.
    5. JosÉ Figueira & Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrogott, 2005. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-0-387-23081-8, September.
    6. Amanda Ball & Jan Bebbington, 2008. "Editorial: Accounting and Reporting for Sustainable Development in Public Service Organizations," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(6), pages 323-326, December.
    7. Whitty, Jennifer A. & Littlejohns, Peter, 2015. "Social values and health priority setting in Australia: An analysis applied to the context of health technology assessment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(2), pages 127-136.
    8. Banta, David, 2003. "The development of health technology assessment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 121-132, February.
    9. Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2018. "The (ir)rational consideration of the cost of science in transition economies," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 2(1), pages 5-5, January.
    10. Sorenson, Corinna & Kanavos, Panos, 2011. "Medical technology procurement in Europe: A cross-country comparison of current practice and policy," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 43-50, April.
    11. Bebbington, Jan & Brown, Judy & Frame, Bob, 2007. "Accounting technologies and sustainability assessment models," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 224-236, March.
    12. Marie-Pierre Gagnon, 2014. "Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment: Developments to Date," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(9), pages 819-824, September.
    13. Alicia Renedo & Cicely Alice Marston & Dimitrios Spyridonidis & James Barlow, 2015. "Patient and Public Involvement in Healthcare Quality Improvement: How organizations can help patients and professionals to collaborate," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(1), pages 17-34, January.
    14. Hartz, Susanne & John, Jürgen, 2009. "Public health policy decisions on medical innovations: What role can early economic evaluation play?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 184-192, February.
    15. Cappellaro, Giulia & Fattore, Giovanni & Torbica, Aleksandra, 2009. "Funding health technologies in decentralized systems: A comparison between Italy and Spain," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(2-3), pages 313-321, October.
    16. Kidholm, Kristian & Ølholm, Anne Mette & Birk-Olsen, Mette & Cicchetti, Americo & Fure, Brynjar & Halmesmäki, Esa & Kahveci, Rabia & Kiivet, Raul-Allan & Wasserfallen, Jean-Blaise & Wild, Claudia & Sa, 2015. "Hospital managers’ need for information in decision-making – An interview study in nine European countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(11), pages 1424-1432.
    17. Neu, Dean & Everett, Jeff & Rahaman, Abu Shiraz & Martinez, Daniel, 2013. "Accounting and networks of corruption," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 505-524.
    18. Adrian Levy & Craig Mitton & Karissa Johnston & Brian Harrigan & Andrew Briggs, 2010. "International Comparison of Comparative Effectiveness Research in Five Jurisdictions," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 28(10), pages 813-830, October.
    19. Susan Newberry, 2015. "Public sector accounting: shifting concepts of accountability," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(5), pages 371-376, September.
    20. Wendy Hardyman & Kate L. Daunt & Martin Kitchener, 2015. "Value Co-Creation through Patient Engagement in Health Care: A micro-level approach and research agenda," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(1), pages 90-107, January.
    21. Fama, Eugene F & Jensen, Michael C, 1983. "Separation of Ownership and Control," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 301-325, June.
    22. Elias Moreno & Francisco Javier Giron & Francisco Jose Vazquez-Polo & Miguel Negrin, 2009. "A Bayesian Net Benefit Approach to Cost-effectiveness Analysis in Health Technology Assessment," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3), pages 323-345.
    23. Pranab Bardhan, 1997. "Corruption and Development: A Review of Issues," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 35(3), pages 1320-1346, September.
    24. van Eijk & Steen, 2014. "Why People Co-Produce: Analysing citizens' perceptions on co-planning engagement in health care services," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3), pages 358-382, April.
    25. Pat Barrett, 2014. "New development: Financial reform and good governance," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1), pages 59-66, January.
    26. Braithwaite, John, 2013. "Flipping markets to virtue with qui tam and restorative justice," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 458-468.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anca Antoaneta Vărzaru, 2022. "An Empirical Framework for Assessing the Balanced Scorecard Impact on Sustainable Development in Healthcare Performance Measurement," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-17, November.
    2. Roberto Moro Visconti & Laura Martiniello & Donato Morea & Elisa Gebennini, 2019. "Can Public-Private Partnerships Foster Investment Sustainability in Smart Hospitals?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-19, March.
    3. Alejandro Vega-Muñoz & Paloma Gónzalez-Gómez-del-Miño & Juan Felipe Espinosa-Cristia, 2021. "Recognizing New Trends in Brain Drain Studies in the Framework of Global Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-27, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stefano Landi & Salvatore Russo, 2019. "Co-production as an interpretative framework in the creation of value in public services," Working Papers 01, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    2. Davide Giacomini & Paola Zola & Diego Paredi & Mario Mazzoleni, 2020. "Environmental disclosure and stakeholder engagement via social media: State of the art and potential in public utilities," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 1552-1564, July.
    3. Viet-Phuong La & Thanh-Hang Pham & Manh-Toan Ho & Minh-Hoang Nguyen & Khanh-Linh P. Nguyen & Thu-Trang Vuong & Hong-Kong T. Nguyen & Trung Tran & Quy Khuc & Manh-Tung Ho & Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2020. "Policy Response, Social Media and Science Journalism for the Sustainability of the Public Health System Amid the COVID-19 Outbreak: The Vietnam Lessons," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-27, April.
    4. Colonnelli, Emanuele & Lagaras, Spyridon & Ponticelli, Jacopo & Prem, Mounu & Tsoutsoura, Margarita, 2022. "Revealing corruption: Firm and worker level evidence from Brazil," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(3), pages 1097-1119.
    5. Barry, Thierno Amadou & Lepetit, Laetitia & Strobel, Frank, 2016. "Bank ownership structure, lending corruption and the regulatory environment," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 732-751.
    6. Mark E. Lokanan & Prerna Sharma, 2023. "Two Decades of Accounting Fraud Research: The Missing Meso-Level Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, September.
    7. Henriques, C. Oliveira & Antunes, C. Henggeler, 2012. "Interactions of economic growth, energy consumption and the environment in the context of the crisis – A study with uncertain data," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 415-422.
    8. Marco Remondino, 2018. "Information Technology in Healthcare: HHC-MOTES, a Novel Set of Metrics to Analyse IT Sustainability in Different Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-20, August.
    9. Francesca Iandolo & Pietro Vito & Irene Fulco & Francesca Loia, 2018. "From Health Technology Assessment to Health Technology Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.
    10. Anesa, Mattia & Gillespie, Nicole & Spee, A. Paul & Sadiq, Kerrie, 2019. "The legitimation of corporate tax minimization," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 17-39.
    11. Kastanioti, Catherine & Kontodimopoulos, Nick & Stasinopoulos, Dionysis & Kapetaneas, Nikolaos & Polyzos, Nikolaos, 2013. "Public procurement of health technologies in Greece in an era of economic crisis," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(1), pages 7-13.
    12. Binh Bui & Charl de Villiers, 2021. "Recovery from Covid‐19 towards a low‐carbon economy: a role for accounting technologies in designing, implementing and assessing stimulus packages," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(3), pages 4789-4831, September.
    13. Cristiana Cattaneo & Chiara Oppi, 2023. "Multidimensionalit? e multidisciplinariet? nell?Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment: quale ruolo per il controller?," MANAGEMENT CONTROL, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2023(2), pages 187-211.
    14. José V. Frias‐Aceituno & Lazaro Rodriguez‐Ariza & I.M Garcia‐Sanchez, 2013. "The Role of the Board in the Dissemination of Integrated Corporate Social Reporting," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(4), pages 219-233, July.
    15. Gjalt de Jong & Phan Anh Tu & Hans van Ees, 2012. "Which Entrepreneurs Bribe and what do they Get from It? Exploratory Evidence from Vietnam," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 36(2), pages 323-345, March.
    16. Minh-Hoang Nguyen & Manh-Tung Ho & Viet-Phuong La & Quynh-Yen Thi. Nguyen & Manh-Toan Ho & Thu-Trang Vuong & Tam-Tri Le & Manh-Cuong Nguyen & Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2020. "A Scientometric Study on Depression among University Students in East Asia: Research and System Insufficiencies?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-25, February.
    17. Ciani, Oriana & Tarricone, Rosanna & Torbica, Aleksandra, 2012. "Diffusion and use of health technology assessment in policy making: What lessons for decentralised healthcare systems?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 194-202.
    18. Roberto Pietra & Andrea Melis, 2016. "“Governance and corruption: is history repeating itself?” Fostering a debate and inviting contributions from a multidisciplinary perspective," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 20(4), pages 689-701, December.
    19. Yi, Jingtao & Teng, Da & Meng, Shuang, 2018. "Foreign ownership and bribery: Agency and institutional perspectives," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 34-45.
    20. Tom Waas & Jean Hugé & Thomas Block & Tarah Wright & Francisco Benitez-Capistros & Aviel Verbruggen, 2014. "Sustainability Assessment and Indicators: Tools in a Decision-Making Strategy for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(9), pages 1-23, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:10:p:3550-:d:173538. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.