Search results

The study aims to address a critical gap in existing healthcare payment schemes and care service pricing by recognizing the influential role of patients' decisions on self-management efforts. These decisions not only impact health outcomes but also shape the demand for care, subsequently influencing care costs. Despite the significance of this interplay, current payment schemes often overlook these dynamics. The research focuses on investigating the implications of a novel behavior-based payment scheme, designed to align incentives and establish a direct connection between patients' decisions and care costs. The primary objective is to comprehensively understand whether and how this innovative payment scheme structure influences key stakeholders, including patients, care providers, insurers and overall social welfare.

In this paper, we propose a game-theoretical model to incorporate the performance of self-management with the demand for healthcare service, compare the patient's effort decision for self-management and provider's price decision for healthcare service under a behavior-based scheme with that under two implemented widely payment schemes, that is, co-payment scheme and co-insurance scheme.

Our findings confirm that the behavior-based scheme incentives patient self-management more than current schemes while reducing their possibility of seeking healthcare service, which indirectly induces the provider to lower the price of the service. The stakeholders' utility under various payment schemes is sensitive to the cost of treatment and the perceived health utility of patients. Especially, patient health awareness is not always benefited provider profit, as it motivates patient self-management while diminishing the demand for care.

We provide a novel framework for characterizing behavior-based payment schemes. Our results confirm the need for modification of the current payment scheme to incentivize patient self-management.

Although online health communities (OHCs) and online patient reviews can help to eliminate health information asymmetry and improve patients' health management, how patients write online reviews within OHCs is poorly understood. Thus, it is very necessary to determine the factors influencing patients' online review behavior in OHCs, including the emotional response and reviewing effort.

Based on expectation-disconfirmation theory, this study proposes a theoretical model to analyze the effects of service quality perception (i.e. outcome quality and process quality perceptions) and disconfirmation (i.e. outcome quality and process quality disconfirmations) on patients' emotional response and reviewing effort. The authors test the research model by using empirical data collected from a popular Chinese OHC and applying ordinary least squares (OLS) regression and zero-truncated negative binomial (ZTNB) regression models.

Both service quality perception and disconfirmation have a positive effect on patients' positive emotional intensity in textual reviews, and disease severity enhances these relationships of process quality. Moreover, there is an asymmetric U-shaped relationship among service quality perception, disconfirmation and reviewing effort. Patients who perceive low service quality have higher reviewing effort, while service quality disconfirmation has the opposite relationship. Specifically, patients' effort in writing textual reviews is lowest when perceived outcome quality is 3.5 (on a five-point scale), perceived process quality is 4 or outcome quality and process quality disconfirmations are −1.

This study is the first to examine patients' online review behavior and its motivations and contributes to the literature on online reviews and service quality. In addition, the findings of this study have important management implications for service providers and OHC managers.

In China, healthcare services have historically been expensive and difficult to access, with resources being unfairly distributed, often being centralized in large hospitals in major cities. In rural regions, hospitals often suffer from limited supplies, including human capital and equipment. E-health technologies have received significant attention from governments and citizens, with online healthcare communities (OHCs) providing easier communication between patients and doctors. Although doctors play a pivotal role in the success of OHCs, they are often unsure how to attract patients, with limited research focusing on this. The purpose of this paper is to explore how doctors can take initiatives in OHCs, from the joint perspectives of individual effort (i.e. intrapersonal factor) and identity in medical teams (MTs) (i.e. interpersonal factor), based on attribution theory.

Hierarchical linear regression was conducted on data from 3,170 doctors participating in 865 online MTs, to examine the effects of individual effort and identity in MTs on individual performance. Individual effort included central effort (log-in frequency to OHC) and peripheral effort (articles published on doctors' homepages). Identity in MTs was represented as the identity of team leader and multiple team membership (MTM).

This study found that the main variables – central and peripheral effort, and leader and MTM identity – all had significant and positive impacts on the service quantity (SQ) of both written and telephone consultations. Although positive effects could be experienced in most conditions that were congruent with the logic of identity theory, the interaction terms demonstrated complex influences. Specifically, leader identity did not moderate the effect of article effort in written consultation, while MTM identity could not moderate the relationship between frequency effort and SQ in telephone-consultation services. Further, the leader identity negatively moderated the relationship between article effort and SQ in telephone consultations. Thus, for doctors with the leader identity, the impact of article effort on SQ was weaker. In summary, both aspects were proved to play important roles in individual SQ.

This study provides empirical findings through focusing on the SQ of both written and telephone consultations in OHCs, thereby enabling healthcare providers to take initiatives and ultimately improve the efficiency and provision of delivered healthcare services. It is worth mentioning that doctors possessing the identity of team leader should be cautious that the more articles published by them may not lead to envisaged telephone-consultation performance, according to the negative moderating effect of leader identity on the relationship between article effort and SQ during telephone consultations.

This study contributes to the OHC literature by investigating how doctors' efforts and identity in OHCs affect individual performance, based on attribution theory and identity theory. Further, we provide healthcare practitioners with an improved understanding of these dimensions to improve autonomy regarding service provision in OHCs.

This paper considers some implications of recent developments relating to patient safety for understandings of trust in health care contexts.

Conceptual analysis focusing on patients' trust in health care providers and health care providers' trust in patients.

Growing awareness of the scale of the problem of iatrogenic harm has prompted concerns that patients' trust in health care providers may be threatened and/or become inappropriate or dysfunctional. In principle, however, patients' trust may be both well placed and compatible with current understandings of safety problems and efforts to address these. Contemporary understandings of patient safety suggest that, to be deemed trustworthy, health care providers should make vigorous efforts to improve patient safety, be honest about safety issues, enable patients to contribute effectively to their own safety, and provide appropriate care and support after safety incidents. Patients who trust health care providers need not be ignorant of patient safety problems and may be vigilant in the course of their care. Iatrogenic harms do not necessarily reflect breeches of trust (not all such harms are yet preventable), and patients who are harmed might in some circumstances appropriately forgive and resume trusting. Health care providers may feel vulnerable to patients in several respects. From their perspective, trustworthy patients will act competently to optimise the outcomes of their health care efforts and to preserve health care providers' good reputations where those are justified. Providers' trust in patients may strengthen patients' trust in them and facilitate safety improvement work.

Shows how, in principle, trust can be compatible with current understandings of patient safety issues and may enhance efforts to improve patient safety.

Increased attention to improve patient safety in healthcare has challenged healthcare managers to consider innovative approaches to meet this need. Organizational development (OD) programs have been used in both health services and other industries to address organizational training and development requirements, and can provide focused, timely, and effective education and training to a broad spectrum of program participants. In healthcare organizations, OD programs can serve an important institutional function by providing a framework through which patient safety can be emphasized as an organizational priority, and patient safety training can be delivered as part of OD efforts. In addition, organizations committed to creating a patient-focused safety culture can use OD initiatives strategically to support organizational culture change efforts. This chapter describes different approaches to including patient safety in an OD framework, drawing from both management theory and practice. Findings from three extensive qualitative studies of leadership development and corporate universities in healthcare provide specific examples of how healthcare organizations discuss patient safety improvement using this alternative approach. Considering the concepts and findings described in this chapter can help healthcare organizations make strides toward positive changes in organizational culture that will promote patient safety on the organizational agenda.

The spotlight has recently been placed on managers’ responsibility for patient-centred care as a result of Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust failings. In previous research, clinicians reported that managers do not have an adequate structured plan for implementing patient-centred care. The purpose of this paper is to assess the perceptions of European hospital management with respect to factors affecting the implementation of a patient-centred approach.

In total, 15 semi-structured interviews were conducted with hospital managers (n=10), expert country informants (n=2), patient organisations (n=2) and a user representative (n=1) from around Europe. Participants were purposively and snowball sampled. Interviews were analysed using framework analysis.

Most participants felt that current levels of patient-centred care are inadequate, but accounted that there were a number of macro, meso and micro challenges they faced in implementing this approach. These included budget constraints, political and historical factors, the resistance of clinicians and other frontline staff. Organisational culture emerged as a central theme, shaped by these multi-level factors and influencing the way in which patient-centred care was borne out in the hospital. Participants proposed that the needs of patients might be better met through increasing advocacy by patient organisations and greater staff contact with patients.

This study is the first of its kind to obtain management views from around Europe. It offers an insight into different models of how patient-centred care is realised by management. It indicates that managers see the value of a patient-centred approach but that they feel restricted by a number of factors at multiple levels.

The purpose of this study is to investigate how professionals learn from varying experiences with errors in health-care digitalization and develop and use negative knowledge and digital ignorance in efforts to improve digitalized health care.

A two-year qualitative field study was conducted in the context of a public health-care organization working with digital patient communication. The data consisted of participant observation, semistructured interviews and document data. Inductive coding and a theoretically informed generation of themes were applied.

The findings show that both health-care and digital communication professionals learn through experiences with digital “rule-” and “knowledge-based” errors in patient communication and develop negative knowledge and awareness of digital ignorance. In their joint efforts, they use negative knowledge to “bend the rules” and to explore digital ignorance in efforts to improve patient communication.

This study provides insight into the importance of collaboration between professionals with varying experience of errors in digitalizing patient communication. Such collaboration is required to acknowledge own shortcomings and create complementary negative knowledge to improve digital patient communication. This is particularly important when working with innovative digitalization in health care.

Patient-centric exchanges, a major type of Health Information Exchange (HIE), empower patients to aggregate and manage their health information. This exchange model helps patients access, modify and share their medical information with multiple healthcare organizations. Although existing studies examine patient engagement, more research is required to investigate patients' attitudes and willingness to play an active role in patient-centered information exchange. The study's main objective is to develop a model based on the belief-attitude-intention paradigm to empirically examine the effects of patients' attitudes toward engagement in care on their willingness to participate in patient-centric HIE.

The authors conducted an online survey study to identify the antecedents and consequences of patients' attitudes toward engagement in care. To empirically test the research model, the authors collected data from a national sample (n = 357) of individuals in the United States. The data were analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM).

The proposed model categorizes the antecedents to patients' attitudes toward engagement in patient-related and healthcare system factors. The results show that patient-related factors (perceived health literacy and perceived coping ability) and health system factors (perceived experience with the healthcare organization and perceived patient-provider interaction) significantly shape patient attitude toward care management engagement. The results indicate that patients' attitudes toward engaging in their healthcare significantly contribute to their willingness to participate in medical information sharing through patient-centric HIE initiatives. Moreover, the authors’ findings also demonstrate that the link between patient engagement and willingness to participate in HIE is stronger for individuals who perceive lower levels of privacy and security concerns.

The authors validate the proposed model explaining patients' perceptions about their characteristics and the healthcare system significantly influence their attitude toward engaging in their care. This study also suggests that patients' favorable attitude toward engagement can bring patient-centric HIE efforts onto a path to success. The authors’ research attempts to shed light on the importance of patients' roles in adopting patient-centric HIE initiatives. Theoretical and practical contributions of this study are noticeable since they could result in a deeper understanding of the concept of patient engagement and how it may affect healthcare services in an evolving digital world. The authors’ findings can help healthcare organizations provide public citizen-centric services by introducing user-oriented approaches in healthcare delivery systems.

Patients, when using healthcare services, (co)create value by integrating their own resources with those of a range of stakeholders. These resource integration activities, however, require different types of skills and effort from the patients, and different types of interactions with stakeholders, while also having different effects on patients' well-being. The purpose of the present study is to develop a better understanding of why some patients are better able or willing to perform resource integration activities that impact their well-being. To reach this objective, barriers and facilitators of these activities in their interactions with various stakeholders were identified.

The study uses a multiple case study design. Individual patients having received a lung transplant, together with their entourage (family, medical professionals, other patients) each represent a case. In-depth interviews were conducted with the patients and with various categories of stakeholders in their service delivery network who were relevant to their experience and with whom they integrated their resources.

The study identifies three levels on which barriers and facilitators of the resource integration process occur: the individual, relational and systemic level. Factors on these levels affect different aspects of the process.

This study takes a systems perspective and investigates how various systemic factors and stakeholders conduce or inhibit healthcare service users to perform resource integration activities, especially focusing on those activities that strongly affect their well-being.

Purpose – Patient safety and adverse events continue to present significant challenges to the US health care delivery system. Mandated reporting of adverse events can be a mechanism to “coerce” hospitals to identify, evaluate, and ultimately improve the quality and safety of patient care. The objective of this study is to determine if the coercion of mandated reporting impacts hospital patient safety scores.

Methods – We utilize the US News and World Report 2012–2013 Best Hospital Rankings which includes patient safety data from US teaching hospitals. The dependent variable is a composite measure of six indicators of patient safety during and after surgery. The independent variable is state mandated reporting of hospital adverse events. Three control variables are included: Magnet accreditation status, surgical volume, and the percentage of surgical admissions.

Findings – Using ordered logistic regression (n = 670 hospitals) we find a positive, but not significant, relationship between state mandated reporting and better patient safety scores.

Implications – This finding suggests that regulatory policy may not actually prompt performance improvement, and our data point to the need for further study of both formal and informal processes to manage patient safety within the hospital.

Originality – While increased reporting of adverse events has been linked to hospitals providing safer care, no research to date has examined whether or not state-level mandates actually lead to improvements in patient safety.