Search results

Health care in the United States is on the verge of substantial change. Health reform legislation, and the goals it seeks to pursue, are likely to drive transformational change across many corners of the health care system. Preparing for and navigating these changes will, in turn, require health care leaders to learn new approaches to many of the core parts of their jobs (Clark, Savitz, & Pingree, 2010; Shortell & Casalino, 2010). The sheer magnitude of change and uncertainty also seems a likely driver of the uptick in CEO retirement, which rose almost to an annual rate of 18% in 2009, the highest rate increase since the American College of Health care Executives began tracking the statistic in 1981 (American College of Healthcare Executives, 2010). Taken together, these trends suggest the need for leadership development and succession planning has never been greater.

In the US, a growing number of organizations and industries are seeking to affirm their commitment to and efforts around diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) as recent events have increased attention to social inequities. As health care organizations are considering new ways to incorporate DEI initiatives within their workforce, the anticipated result of these efforts is a reduction in health inequities that have plagued our country for centuries. Unfortunately, there are few frameworks to guide these efforts because few successfully link organizational DEI initiatives with health equity outcomes. The purpose of this chapter is to review existing scholarship and evidence using an organizational lens to examine how health care organizations can advance DEI initiatives in the pursuit of reducing or eliminating health inequities. First, this chapter defines important terms of DEI and health equity in health care. Next, we describe the methods for our narrative review. We propose a model for understanding health care organizational activity and its impact on health inequities based in organizational learning that includes four interrelated parts: intention, action, outcomes, and learning. We summarize the existing scholarship in each of these areas and provide recommendations for enhancing future research. Across the body of knowledge in these areas, disciplinary and other silos may be the biggest barrier to knowledge creation and knowledge transfer. Moving forward, scholars and practitioners should seek to collaborate further in their respective efforts to achieve health equity by creating formalized initiatives with linkages between practice and research communities.

We draw upon and integrate two organizational theory perspectives to develop a conceptual model of how managed care influences the treatment practices of outpatient drug treatment providers. First, using resource dependence theory, we suggest that treatment practices will vary as a function of an organization's dependence on managed care and the scope and stringency of oversight mechanisms used by managed care firms. Second, we apply institutional theory to suggest that the expectations of the professional staff and sources of legitimacy will also directly influence treatment practices. Finally, we draw upon previous integrative frameworks and argue that institutional factors will also indirectly influence treatment by moderating the negative effects of managed care dependence and oversight.

As health care delivery becomes increasingly focused on patient-centered models, interventions such as patient navigation that have the potential to improve care coordination garner interest from health care managers and clinicians. The ability to understand how and to what extent patient navigation is successful in addressing coordination issues, however, is hampered by multiple definitions, vague boundaries, and different contextual implementations of patient navigation. Using a systematic review strategy and classification method, we review both the conceptual and empirical literature regarding navigation in multiple clinical contexts. We then describe and conceptualize variation in how patient navigation has been defined, implemented, and theorized to affect outcomes. This review suggests that patient navigation varies along multiple dimensions and that the variation is related to differing resources, constraints, and goals. We propose a conceptual model to frame further research and suggest that research in this area must carefully account for this variation in order to accurately assess the benefits of patient navigation and provide actionable knowledge for managers.

Purpose – To develop a framework for studying financial incentive program implementation mechanisms, the means by which physician practices and physicians translate incentive program goals into their specific office setting. Understanding how new financial incentives fit with the structure of physician practices and individual providers’ work may shed some insight on the variable effects of physician incentives documented in numerous reviews and meta-analyses.

Design/Methodology/Approach – Reviewing select articles on pay-for-performance evaluations to identify and characterize the presence of implementation mechanisms for designing, communicating, implementing, and maintaining financial incentive programs as well as recognizing participants’ success and effects on patient care.

Findings – Although uncommonly included in evaluations, evidence from 26 articles reveals financial incentive program sponsors and participants utilized a variety of strategies to facilitate communication about program goals and intentions, to provide feedback about participants’ progress, and to assist practices in providing recommended services. Despite diversity in programs’ geographic locations, clinical targets, scope, and market context, sponsors and participants deployed common strategies. While these methods largely pertained to communication between program sponsors and participants and the provision of information about performance through reports and registries, they also included other activities such as efforts to engage patients and ways to change staff roles.

Limitations – This review covers a limited body of research to develop a conceptual framework for future research; it did not exhaustively search for new articles and cannot definitively link particular implementation mechanisms to outcomes.

Practical Implications – Our results underscore the effects implementation mechanisms may have on how practices incorporate new programs into existing systems of care which implicates both the potential rewards from small changes as well as the resources which may be required to obtain buy-in and support.

Originality/Value – We identify gaps in previous research regarding actual changes occurring in physician practices in response to physician incentive programs. We offer suggestions for future evaluation by proposing a framework for understanding implementation. Our model will assist future scholars in translating site-specific experiences with incentive programs into more broadly relevant guidance for practices by facilitating comparisons across seemingly disparate programs.