Cargando…

Redefining value: a discourse analysis on value-based health care

BACKGROUND: Today’s remarkable popularity of value-based health care (VBHC) is accompanied by considerable ambiguity concerning the very meaning of the concept. This is evident within academic publications, and mirrored in fragmented and diversified implementation efforts, both within and across cou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Steinmann, Gijs, van de Bovenkamp, Hester, de Bont, Antoinette, Delnoij, Diana
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7488985/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32928203
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05614-7
_version_ 1783581798090932224
author Steinmann, Gijs
van de Bovenkamp, Hester
de Bont, Antoinette
Delnoij, Diana
author_facet Steinmann, Gijs
van de Bovenkamp, Hester
de Bont, Antoinette
Delnoij, Diana
author_sort Steinmann, Gijs
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Today’s remarkable popularity of value-based health care (VBHC) is accompanied by considerable ambiguity concerning the very meaning of the concept. This is evident within academic publications, and mirrored in fragmented and diversified implementation efforts, both within and across countries. METHOD: This article builds on discourse analysis in order to map the ambiguity surrounding VBHC. We conducted a document analysis of publicly accessible, official publications (n = 22) by actors and organizations that monitor and influence the quality of care in the Netherlands. Additionally, between March and July 2019, we conducted a series of semi-structured interviews (n = 23) with national stakeholders. RESULTS: Our research revealed four discourses, each with their own perception regarding the main purpose of VBHC. Firstly, we identified a Patient Empowerment discourse in which VBHC is a framework for strengthening the position of patients regarding their medical decisions. Secondly, in the Governance discourse, VBHC is a toolkit to incentivize providers. Thirdly, within the Professionalism discourse, VBHC is a methodology for healthcare delivery. Fourthly, in the Critique discourse, VBHC is rebuked as a dogma of manufacturability. We also show, however, that these diverging lines of reasoning find common ground: they perceive shared decision-making to be a key component of VBHC. Strikingly, this common perception contrasts with the pioneering literature on VBHC. CONCLUSIONS: The four discourses will profoundly shape the diverse manners in which VBHC moves from an abstract concept to the practical provision and administration of health care. Moreover, our study reveals that VBHC’s conceptual ambiguity largely arises from differing and often deeply rooted presuppositions, which underlie these discourses, and which frame different perceptions on value in health care. The meaning of VBHC – including its perceived implications for action – thus depends greatly on the frame of reference an actor or organization brings to bear as they aim for more value for patients. Recognizing this is a vital concern when studying, implementing and evaluating VBHC.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7488985
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74889852020-09-16 Redefining value: a discourse analysis on value-based health care Steinmann, Gijs van de Bovenkamp, Hester de Bont, Antoinette Delnoij, Diana BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Today’s remarkable popularity of value-based health care (VBHC) is accompanied by considerable ambiguity concerning the very meaning of the concept. This is evident within academic publications, and mirrored in fragmented and diversified implementation efforts, both within and across countries. METHOD: This article builds on discourse analysis in order to map the ambiguity surrounding VBHC. We conducted a document analysis of publicly accessible, official publications (n = 22) by actors and organizations that monitor and influence the quality of care in the Netherlands. Additionally, between March and July 2019, we conducted a series of semi-structured interviews (n = 23) with national stakeholders. RESULTS: Our research revealed four discourses, each with their own perception regarding the main purpose of VBHC. Firstly, we identified a Patient Empowerment discourse in which VBHC is a framework for strengthening the position of patients regarding their medical decisions. Secondly, in the Governance discourse, VBHC is a toolkit to incentivize providers. Thirdly, within the Professionalism discourse, VBHC is a methodology for healthcare delivery. Fourthly, in the Critique discourse, VBHC is rebuked as a dogma of manufacturability. We also show, however, that these diverging lines of reasoning find common ground: they perceive shared decision-making to be a key component of VBHC. Strikingly, this common perception contrasts with the pioneering literature on VBHC. CONCLUSIONS: The four discourses will profoundly shape the diverse manners in which VBHC moves from an abstract concept to the practical provision and administration of health care. Moreover, our study reveals that VBHC’s conceptual ambiguity largely arises from differing and often deeply rooted presuppositions, which underlie these discourses, and which frame different perceptions on value in health care. The meaning of VBHC – including its perceived implications for action – thus depends greatly on the frame of reference an actor or organization brings to bear as they aim for more value for patients. Recognizing this is a vital concern when studying, implementing and evaluating VBHC. BioMed Central 2020-09-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7488985/ /pubmed/32928203 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05614-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Steinmann, Gijs
van de Bovenkamp, Hester
de Bont, Antoinette
Delnoij, Diana
Redefining value: a discourse analysis on value-based health care
title Redefining value: a discourse analysis on value-based health care
title_full Redefining value: a discourse analysis on value-based health care
title_fullStr Redefining value: a discourse analysis on value-based health care
title_full_unstemmed Redefining value: a discourse analysis on value-based health care
title_short Redefining value: a discourse analysis on value-based health care
title_sort redefining value: a discourse analysis on value-based health care
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7488985/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32928203
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05614-7
work_keys_str_mv AT steinmanngijs redefiningvalueadiscourseanalysisonvaluebasedhealthcare
AT vandebovenkamphester redefiningvalueadiscourseanalysisonvaluebasedhealthcare
AT debontantoinette redefiningvalueadiscourseanalysisonvaluebasedhealthcare
AT delnoijdiana redefiningvalueadiscourseanalysisonvaluebasedhealthcare