Katherine Kenny, Alex Broom, Michelle Peterie, Juliet Bennett, Jennifer Broom
{"title":"活动文化,培养抵抗力。","authors":"Katherine Kenny, Alex Broom, Michelle Peterie, Juliet Bennett, Jennifer Broom","doi":"10.1177/10497323241271915","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The problem of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is often viewed through biomedical and/or behavioral lenses, with the underlying economic principles and \"headwinds\" shaping resistance less visible. In this paper, we focus on how healthcare funding models structure the ways AMR is perceived and addressed as an institutional priority. Specifically, we explore how activity-based funding reflects and operationalizes ingrained assumptions about what is valuable and/or worthwhile within the organizational ecology of the hospital. Drawing on interviews with 36 executives from several hospital clinical care settings across two Australian states, we illuminate the ways the activity-based funding paradigm works against efforts to combat AMR. Concerningly, we further observe how activity-based funding models can inadvertently position rising rates of resistance as a benefit-at least in the short term-as the new and intensified interventions required to address resistant infections require more \"activity\" and thus deliver higher reimbursement at the level of annualized budgets. In failing to recognize the (social and economic) value of <i>reduced</i> activity, activity-based funding risks contributing to AMR, rather than working to resolve it.</p>","PeriodicalId":48437,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Health Research","volume":" ","pages":"10497323241271915"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cultures of Activity, Cultivating Resistance.\",\"authors\":\"Katherine Kenny, Alex Broom, Michelle Peterie, Juliet Bennett, Jennifer Broom\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10497323241271915\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The problem of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is often viewed through biomedical and/or behavioral lenses, with the underlying economic principles and \\\"headwinds\\\" shaping resistance less visible. In this paper, we focus on how healthcare funding models structure the ways AMR is perceived and addressed as an institutional priority. Specifically, we explore how activity-based funding reflects and operationalizes ingrained assumptions about what is valuable and/or worthwhile within the organizational ecology of the hospital. Drawing on interviews with 36 executives from several hospital clinical care settings across two Australian states, we illuminate the ways the activity-based funding paradigm works against efforts to combat AMR. Concerningly, we further observe how activity-based funding models can inadvertently position rising rates of resistance as a benefit-at least in the short term-as the new and intensified interventions required to address resistant infections require more \\\"activity\\\" and thus deliver higher reimbursement at the level of annualized budgets. In failing to recognize the (social and economic) value of <i>reduced</i> activity, activity-based funding risks contributing to AMR, rather than working to resolve it.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48437,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Qualitative Health Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"10497323241271915\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Qualitative Health Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323241271915\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Health Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323241271915","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
人们通常从生物医学和/或行为学的角度来看待抗菌药耐药性(AMR)问题,而影响耐药性的基本经济原则和 "逆风 "因素却不那么明显。在本文中,我们将重点关注医疗保健筹资模式是如何将 AMR 视为机构优先事项并加以解决的。具体来说,我们探讨了以活动为基础的资金如何反映和操作医院组织生态中关于什么是有价值和/或值得的根深蒂固的假设。通过对澳大利亚两个州多家医院临床护理机构的 36 名管理人员进行访谈,我们揭示了以活动为基础的资助模式是如何与抗击 AMR 的努力背道而驰的。令人担忧的是,我们进一步观察了基于活动的资助模式如何在无意中将耐药率的上升定位为一种好处--至少在短期内是这样--因为应对耐药感染所需的新的强化干预措施需要更多的 "活动",从而在年度预算水平上提供更高的补偿。由于没有认识到减少活动的(社会和经济)价值,基于活动的供资方式有可能助长 AMR,而不是努力解决这一问题。
The problem of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is often viewed through biomedical and/or behavioral lenses, with the underlying economic principles and "headwinds" shaping resistance less visible. In this paper, we focus on how healthcare funding models structure the ways AMR is perceived and addressed as an institutional priority. Specifically, we explore how activity-based funding reflects and operationalizes ingrained assumptions about what is valuable and/or worthwhile within the organizational ecology of the hospital. Drawing on interviews with 36 executives from several hospital clinical care settings across two Australian states, we illuminate the ways the activity-based funding paradigm works against efforts to combat AMR. Concerningly, we further observe how activity-based funding models can inadvertently position rising rates of resistance as a benefit-at least in the short term-as the new and intensified interventions required to address resistant infections require more "activity" and thus deliver higher reimbursement at the level of annualized budgets. In failing to recognize the (social and economic) value of reduced activity, activity-based funding risks contributing to AMR, rather than working to resolve it.
期刊介绍:
QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH is an international, interdisciplinary, refereed journal for the enhancement of health care and to further the development and understanding of qualitative research methods in health care settings. We welcome manuscripts in the following areas: the description and analysis of the illness experience, health and health-seeking behaviors, the experiences of caregivers, the sociocultural organization of health care, health care policy, and related topics. We also seek critical reviews and commentaries addressing conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and ethical issues pertaining to qualitative enquiry.