Changing priority setting practice: The role of implementation in practice change

- We examine PBMA implementation over 3-years in a community care context.
- Desire for more clarity and for PBMA adaptations emerged as overarching themes.
- Participants desired greater clarity of their roles in implementing PBMA.
- Organizational readiness and capacity are vital to effective PBMA implementation.
- Independently functional PBMA stages may facilitate implementation.

BackgroundProgramme budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA) is a priority setting approach that assists decision makers in choosing among resource demands. This paper describes and evaluates the process of implementing PBMA in a Canadian regional health authority, and draws out key lessons learned from this experience.MethodsQualitative data were collected through semi-structured participant interviews (twelve post year-1; nine post year-2), meeting attendance, and document review. Interview transcripts were analyzed using a constant comparison technique. Other data were analyzed to evaluate PBMA implementation.ResultsDesire for more clarity and for PBMA adaptations emerged as overarching themes. Participants desired greater clarity of their roles and how PBMA should be used to achieve PBMA's potential benefits. They argued that each PBMA stage should be useful independent of the others so that implementation could be adapted. To help improve clarity and ensure that resources were available to support PBMA, participants requested an organizational readiness and capacity assessment.ConclusionWe suggest tactics by which PBMA may be more closely aligned with real-world priority setting practice. Our results also contribute to the literature on PBMA use in various healthcare settings. Highlighting implementation issues and potential responses to these should be of interest to decision makers implementing PBMA and other evidence-informed practices.