English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Healthcare expenditure is increasing worldwide and value-based healthcare (VBHC) was introduced as a strategy to improve outcomes and prevent further rises in costs. Monitoring outcomes and costs forms the basis for the implementation of VBHC. Through the efforts already made in the area of outcome monitoring, providers have gained insight into their performance allowing for increasing patient value (PV), defined as patient-relevant outcomes divided by costs of healthcare delivery. However, diminished outcome variation in many benchmarks and the lack of connection between clinical outcomes and costs in clinical practise warrant the debate on the sustainability of current outcome monitoring practises. Cost parameters are currently scarcely incorporated in routine outcome monitoring and adding cost parameters would therefore yield improvement potential of PV. In this viewpoint, we discuss currently used methods for costs calculation within the scope of VBHC and propose a novel, patient-centred and less labour-intensive approach we believe can be used in conjunction with clinical outcome monitoring. That is, the selection of disease/treatment-specific cost drivers and their structural embedment in routine clinical outcome monitoring.

The next phase in the implementation of value-based healthcare: Adding patient-relevant cost drivers to existing outcome measure sets