Development of a balanced scorecard as a strategic performance measurement system for clinical radiology as a cost center.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a goal-oriented indicator system based on the balanced scorecard (BSC) concept, which takes into account the perspectives of the referring physician and patient and emphasizes the focus on the internal processes of the radiology department. METHODS: Development of a BSC occurred in six steps: (Step 1) strengths/weaknesses and opportunities/risks (SWOT-) analysis of the radiology department, (Step 2) setting-specific objectives (model, core values, key objective) followed by the development of 4 perspectives, (Step 3) and definition of strategic issues oriented to the value-added chain of the processes of the radiology department. (Step 4) Creation of a "Strategy Map" with regard to the perspective and their cause-effect relationships. (Step 5) Development of an automated key performance indicator (KPI) cockpit for the monitoring, reporting, and management scorecard. RESULTS: A total of 10 success factors were identified using SWOT analysis. The core values include high quality in clinical, teaching, and research areas. The radiological value-added chain is composed of three processing steps. 1. registration, 2. examination, and 3. reading/X-ray demonstration. Three action programs were derived: 1. increase competency (e.g., specialist standard), 2. improve referring physician/patient satisfaction, 3. increase productivity. Daily process monitoring was added to the management cockpit as a monitoring scorecard. The scorecard comprises 18 KPIs and is automatically updated every month. The annual management scorecard comprises 10 KPIs. CONCLUSIONS: The BSC makes it possible to implement a strategy for radiology that is strongly oriented toward the requirements of the referring physicians and the demands of patients.

[Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Utility Analyses of Antireflux Medicine]. / Kosten-Effektivitäts- und Kosten-Nutzwert-Analysen der Antirefluxmedizin.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic antireflux surgery and medical therapy with proton pump inhibitors are gold standards of gastroesophageal reflux treatment. On account of limited resources and increasing healthcare needs and costs, in this analysis, not only optimal medical results, but also superiority in health economics of these 2 methods are evaluated. METHODS: We performed an electronic literature survey in MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, ISRCTN (International Standard Randomization Controlled Trial Number) as well as in the NHS Economic Evaluation Database, including studies published until 1/2017. Only studies considering the effect size of QALY (Quality-Adjusted Life Years) (with respect to different quality of life-scores) as primary outcome comparing laparoscopic fundoplication and medical therapy were included. Criteria of comparison were ICER (Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio) and ICUR (Incremental Cost-Utility Ratio). Superiority of the respective treatment option for each publication was worked out. RESULTS: In total, 18 comparative studies were identified in the current literature with respect to above-mentioned search terms, qualifying for the defined inclusion criteria. Six studies were finally selected for analyses. Out of 6 publications, 3 showed superiority of laparoscopic fundoplication over long-term medical management based on current cost-effectiveness data. Limitations were related to different time intervals, levels of evidence of studies and underlying resources/costs of analyses, healthcare systems and applied quality of life instruments. CONCLUSION: Future prospective, randomized trials should examine this comparison in greater detail. Additionally, there is a large potential for further research in the health economics assessment of early diagnosis and prevention measures of reflux disease and Barrett's esophagus/carcinoma.

The growing challenge of hospital investment.

Healthcare providers around the world are faced with challenges like limited financial scope, demographic changes, technical and medical progress, a rising transparency level and increasing patient claims which all lead to high pressure on healthcare markets. Reduced federal support intensifies this situation. But, financial capability and an adequate investment strategy are key success factors for hospitals in the future. Therefore, hospitals have to evaluate new ways of capital allocation. This article analyses five different opportunities for inpatient care facilities to meet their investment requirements and to underline their market position as a service enterprise.