The rhetoric of sector-wide approaches for health development

The past decade has witnessed an increasing concerns over the effectiveness of project-based development assistance and the promotion of sector-wide approaches (SWAps) to health as a means to increase donor collaboration, consolidate local management of resources and undertake the policy and systems reform necessary to achieve a greater impact on health issues. The concept has gained the support of both the World Bank and the World Health Organisation, as well as key bilateral donors, and dominates current initiatives in development assistance for health. This paper examines the proposal of SWAps as rhetoric, and seeks to understand how that rhetoric functions, despite the variable application of its constituent elements and the range of contexts in which it operates. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Managing new product development in the Chinese steel industry: An empirical investigation

This study explores several important aspects of the management of new product development (NPD) in the Chinese steel industry. Specifically it explores NPD success factors, the importance of management functions to new product success and measures of new product success from the perspective of the industry's practitioners. Based on a sample of 190 industrial practitioners from 18 Chinese steel companies, the study provides a mixed picture as China makes the transition from a centrally-controlled to market-based economy. On one hand, respondents ranked understanding users' needs as the most important factor influencing the performance of the new products. Further, formulating new product strategy and strengthening market research are perceived as the most important managerial functions in NPD. However, technical performance measures are regarded as more important and are more widely used in industry than market-based or financial measures of success.

An audit tool for intellectual property management: IP management in the Queensland Department of Primary Industries

Smart State is a Queensland Government initiative that recognises the central role of knowledge-based economic growth. In this context, the management of intellectual property (IP) within Queensland and Australian government research and development agencies has changed dramatically over recent years. Increasing expectations have been placed on utilising public sector IP to both underpin economic development and augment taxes by generating new revenues. Public sector research and development (R&D) management has come under greater scrutiny to commercialise and/or corporatise their activities. In a study of IP management issues in the Queensland Public Sector we developed a framework to facilitate a holistic audit of IP management in government agencies. In this paper we describe this framework as it pertains to one large public sector Agriculture R&D Agency, the Queensland Department of Primary Industries (QDPI). The four overlapping domains of the framework are: IP Generation; IP Rights; IP Uptake; and Corporate IP Support. The audit within QDPI, conducted in 2000 near the outset of Smart State, highlighted some well developed IP management practices within QDPI's traditional areas of focus of innovation (IP Generation) and IP ownership and licensing (IP Rights). However, further management practice developments are required to improve the domains of IP Uptake and Corporate IP Support.

Warranty and optimal reliability improvement through product development

For products sold with warranty, the warranty servicing cost can be reduced by improving product reliability through a development process. However, this increases the unit manufacturing cost. Optimal development must achieve a trade-off between these two costs. The outcome of the development process is uncertain and needs to be taken into account in the determination of the optimal development effort. The paper develops a model where this uncertainty is taken into account. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Development of a quality use of medicines coding system to rate clinical pharmacists' medication review recommendations

Objective: To develop a 'quality use of medicines' coding system for the assessment of pharmacists' medication reviews and to apply it to an appropriate cohort. Method: A 'quality use of medicines' coding system was developed based on findings in the literature. These codes were then applied to 216 (111 intervention, 105 control) veterans' medication profiles by an independent clinical pharmacist who was supported by a clinical pharmacologist with the aim to assess the appropriateness of pharmacy interventions. The profiles were provided for veterans participating in a randomised, controlled trial in private hospitals evaluating the effect of medication review and discharge counselling. The reliability of the coding was tested by two independent clinical pharmacists in a random sample of 23 veterans from the study population. Main outcome measure: Interrater reliability was assessed by applying Cohen's kappa score on aggregated codes. Results: The coding system based on the literature consisted of 19 codes. The results from the three clinical pharmacists suggested that the original coding system had two major problems: (a) a lack of discrimination for certain recommendations e. g. adverse drug reactions, toxicity and mortality may be seen as variations in degree of a single effect and (b) certain codes e. g. essential therapy were in low prevalence. The interrater reliability for an aggregation of all codes into positive, negative and clinically non-significant codes ranged from 0.49-0.58 (good to fair). The interrater reliability increased to 0.72-0.79 (excellent) when all negative codes were excluded. Analysis of the sample of 216 profiles showed that the most prevalent recommendations from the clinical pharmacists were a positive impact in reducing adverse responses (31.9%), an improvement in good clinical pharmacy practice (25.5%) and a positive impact in reducing drug toxicity (11.1%). Most medications were assigned the clinically non-significant code (96.6%). In fact, the interventions led to a statistically significant difference in pharmacist recommendations in the categories; adverse response, toxicity and good clinical pharmacy practice measured by the quality use of medicine coding system. Conclusion: It was possible to use the quality use of medicine coding system to rate the quality and potential health impact of pharmacists' medication reviews, and the system did pick up differences between intervention and control patients. The interrater reliability for the summarised coding system was fair, but a larger sample of medication regimens is needed to assess the non-summarised quality use of medicines coding system.