Search results

Little attention has been given to the mental and physical health impacts of COVID-19 on the academic public health workforce. Academic public health is an important support mechanism for public health practice, providing expertise and workforce training, conducting research, disseminating evidence-based scientific information to both public health and lay audiences, and serving as a supplementary workforce when additional resources are needed. These roles become more important during a public health emergency, particularly during a prolonged public health crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result of the COVID-19 response, the roles of academic public health have expanded to include developing and implementing contact tracing, surveillance, testing, and vaccination programs for universities and their surrounding communities, all while continuing to prepare students and support the public health practice workforce in their ongoing efforts. As in other responder groups, this has resulted in significant mental health effects and burnout among public health academicians. The authors suggest important steps that can be taken to improve the resilience of the academic public health workforce and to support their contributions during prolonged public health emergencies.

The purpose of this paper is to present a case study which details the successful development, design and deployment of a leadership course for academic medical department chairs. The course provides a needed local and contextual alternative to the lengthy and often theoretical MBA/MHA.

Faculty developers used a multi-tiered methodology for developing the physician leadership course. The methodology consisted of literature findings, needs assessment, stakeholder input and structured interviews with administrative leaders.

The research, stakeholder input and interviews revealed an increasing number of physician leaders with a general lack of fundamental administrative leadership skills. These shortfalls are largely because of underexposure to core management competencies during medical school and limited contextual knowledge outside their organization. There is an urgent need for leadership development opportunities aimed at current and future academic medical department chairs.

This research is limited by the assumptions that the curriculum meets the ever-changing needs of health-care leaders, the course’s focus on academic medical department chairs within the Texas Medical Center and the lack of long range follow-up data to substantiate the effectiveness of the curriculum content and course structure.

The Academic Medical Department Leadership course offers valuable management skills training which complements standard medical training. Much of the course structure and content is adaptable to physician administrative and leadership positions in all settings.

Although the Academic Medical Department Leadership course is a response to a local concern, the study offers a generalizable approach to addressing the demand for skilled physician leaders.

Academic health centres (AHCs) are organisations that pursue a “tripartite” mission to deliver high-quality care to patients, undertake clinical and laboratory research, and train future health professionals. The last decade has seen a global spread of AHC models and a growing interest in the role of AHCs in addressing health system equity. The purpose of this paper is to synthesise and critically appraise the evidence on the role of AHCs in improving health equity.

Peer-reviewed and grey literature published in English between 2000 and 2016 were searched. Articles that identified AHCs as the primary unit of analysis and that also addressed health equity concepts in relation to the AHC’s activity or role were included.

In total, 103 publications met the inclusion criteria of which 80 per cent were expert opinion. Eight descriptive themes were identified through which health equity concepts in relation to AHCs were characterised, described and operationalised: population health, addressing health disparities, social determinants of health, community engagement, global health, health system reform, value-based and accountable financing models, and role clarification/recalibration. There was consensus that AHCs can and should address health disparities, but there is a lack of empirical evidence to show that AHCs have a capacity to contribute to health equity goals or are demonstrating this contribution.

This review highlights the relevance of health equity concepts in discussions about the role and missions of AHCs. Future research should improve the quality of the evidence base by empirically examining health equity strategies and interventions of AHCs in multiple countries and contexts.

Sustainable health care combines three key factors: quality patient care, fiscally responsible budgeting and minimizing environmental impact. Although pollution is well understood as a health problem, US health planners have not fully recognized the need to reduce health‐care pollution. Minimizing health‐care pollution, moreover, requires reducing the throughput of energy and materials. Ultimately, sustaining healthy ecosystems requires that health‐care material and energy utilization be limited. However, traditional conceptions of health‐care ethics maintain a philosophy of rescue that makes limiting life‐saving resources, except at a patient’s request, morally worrisome. Moreover, the media image of health care as technologically intensive, together with the common medical view that nature is the enemy, render suspect philosophical perspectives respectful of Earth’s limits. Nevertheless, academic medical centers have advantages as sites for pursuing sustainability: students often uphold environmental ideals, a public health perspective, and an interest in providing services universally; basic biomedical research on campus permits innovative research combining health and environmental considerations; opportunities exist for including environmental concerns in health professional education; some academic medical centers have already stated environmental criteria for purchasing contracts; and health‐care professionals and institutions are increasingly addressing such environmental concerns as mercury use, latex allergies, dioxin pollution, and waste volume. To address these challenges, a visioning process is proposed, designed to formulate a practical plan by means of public, local, and professional participation in the process of articulating creative and morally sound proposals for change.

This paper describes managed care, competition and high health care costs and reductions in funding as the major market forces that affect US academic health centers. As academic health centers continue to preserve their missions of providing patient care, educating and training health professionals and conducting research, they are negatively impacted by these market changes, thus, resulting in increased expenses and lowered revenue. A key component to surviving in difficult times is market‐focused management. This paper develops a model to show the path of senior level management teams in their decision making. Through the performance of essential managerial roles, senior level managers are responsible for strategies that result in the long‐term viability and growth of academic health centers.

One of the major issues faced by academic health science centers (AHSCs) is the need for mechanisms to foster the integration of research, clinical, and educational activities to achieve the vision of evidence-informed decision making (EIDM) and optimal client care. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

This paper synthesizes literature on organizational learning and collaboration, evidence-informed organizational decision making, and learning-based organizations to derive insights concerning the nature of effective workplace learning in AHSCs.

An evidence-informed model of collaborative workplace learning is proposed to aid the alignment of research, clinical, and educational functions in AHSCs. The model articulates relationships among AHSC academic functions and sub-functions, cross-functional activities, and collaborative learning processes, emphasizing the importance of cross-functional activities in enhancing collaborative learning processes and optimizing EIDM and client care. Cross-functional activities involving clinicians, researchers, and educators are hypothesized to be a primary vehicle for integration, supported by a learning-oriented workplace culture. These activities are distinct from interprofessional teams, which are clinical in nature. Four collaborative learning processes are specified that are enhanced in cross-functional activities or teamwork: co-constructing meaning, co-learning, co-producing knowledge, and co-using knowledge.

The model provides an aspirational vision and insight into the importance of cross-functional activities in enhancing workplace learning. The paper discusses the conceptual and empirical basis to the model, its contributions and limitations, and implications for AHSCs.

The model’s potential utility for health care is discussed, with implications for organizational culture and the promotion of cross-functional activities.

What sets health sciences librarians apart from other academic librarians when it comes to partnering with health-focused innovators? Do health-related innovators have different information needs or space requirements? This chapter illustrates some of the major issues and topics health sciences librarians consider as they offer information services to entrepreneurs and innovators. Health sciences innovators must be aware of relevant policies and laws such as HIPAA, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. They also need to meet federal safety regulations required by the Food and Drug Administration; moreover, device materials must be biocompatible. Those developing therapeutic games and apps in this arena need to ensure their products are supported by current literature and scientific evidence. In many cases, these new technologies require clinical trials and testing to ensure their safety and efficacy. Health sciences librarians guide innovators to relevant resources, knowledge, and experts on these and other topics. This navigator role is extremely valuable to students, who may not understand the healthcare landscape and its processes. Additionally, librarians assist innovators with identifying dissemination venues for their scholarly output. They provide instruction and guidance on how to write and tailor conference proposals to meet specific professional association criteria. A retired health sciences library director shares her experiences. Tips and lessons learned are highlighted so others may gain an understanding of the unique information needs of health innovators.

This paper aims to provide a history of graduate healthcare management education in the USA with an emphasis on the comparison of business schools and health science settings. It seeks to explain why different organizational cultures exist and how this affects education.

The approach relies on literature review and descriptive analysis using secondary data. Institutional economics helps provide perspective on different academic cultures and orientations.

Healthcare management education originated in the early twentieth century. Business schools at the University of Chicago and Northwestern were early pioneers. By mid‐century, schools of public health and medicine entered and came to dominate with strong graduate programs at Berkeley, Michigan and other leading universities. More recently, business schools have differentiated away from the generic MBA and expanded into this market. Advocates of health science settings commonly see healthcare as different from other forms of management. The externally funded model of medical education relying on patient and grant revenues dominates the health sciences. This can lead to preference for faculty who generate funds and a neglect of core academic areas that historically have not relied on grants and contracts.

This history of health management education provides insight for students, researchers, educators and administrators. It underscores comparative advantage of different academic settings.

This paper serves to fill a gap in the management literature. It provides history and perspective about academic settings not readily available.

Residential academic campuses generally support a skewed population profile that favours a younger population, mainly the student community, and thereby marginalize the needs of the older people staying within the campus. Health delivery systems are often not in accordance with the needs of staff members co-habiting with their aged parents and relatives as well as older staff members themselves. This poses a serious problem, especially in India, where filial piety is a norm and many employees cohabit with their parents. Moreover, the Government of India has reformulated its retirement policy under which the age for superannuation of teaching staff has been enhanced. This in turn, has raised the older-younger ratio in campuses in recent years. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

To address these issues, a household survey was carried out on older people staying in a residential academic campus of India followed by a focus group discussion with family caregivers of the older people.

It was found that older people were a marginalized group in campus, as health delivery system and allied facilities were not consistent with their needs. As a result, they and their family caregivers faced various challenges.

This is the first study exploring the possibility of academic campuses in India to emerge as alternate sites for supporting older care.