Search results

Effective use of data across public health organisations (PHOs) is essential for the provision of health services. While health technology and data use in clinical practice have been investigated, interactions with data in non-clinical practice have been largely neglected. The purpose of this paper is to consider what constitutes data, and how people in non-clinical roles in a PHO interact with data in their practice.

This mixed methods study involved a qualitative exploration of how employees of a large PHO interact with data in their non-clinical work roles. A quantitative survey was administered to complement insights gained through qualitative investigation.

Organisational boundaries emerged as a defining issue in interactions with data. The results explain how data work happens through observing, spanning and shifting of boundaries. The paper identifies five key issues that shape data work in relation to boundaries. Boundary objects and processes are considered, as well as the roles of boundary spanners and shifters.

The study was conducted in a large Australian PHO, which is not completely representative of the unique contexts of similar organisations. The study has implications for research in information and organisational studies, opening fields of inquiry for further investigation.

Effective systems-wide data use can improve health service efficiencies and outcomes. There are also implications for the provision of services by other health and public sectors.

The study contributes to closing a significant research gap in understanding interactions with data in the workplace, particularly in non-clinical roles in health. Research analysis connects concepts of knowledge boundaries, boundary spanning and boundary objects with insights into information behaviours in the health workplace. Boundary processes emerge as an important concept to understand interactions with data. The result is a novel typology of interactions with data in relation to organisational boundaries.

As part of a national plan to govern professional and organizational development in Norwegian specialist healthcare, the country’s hospital clinics are tasked with constructing development plans. Using the development plan as a case, the paper analyzes how managers navigate and legitimize the planning process among central actors and deals with the contingency of decisions in such strategy work.

This study applies a qualitative research design using a case study method. The material consists of public documents, observations and single interviews, covering the process of constructing a development plan at the clinical level.

The findings suggest that the development plan was shaped through a multilevel translation process consisting of different contending rationalities. At the clinical level, the management had difficulties in legitimizing the process. The underlying tension between top-down and bottom-up steering challenged involvement and made it difficult to manage the contingency of decisions.

The findings are relevant to public sector managers working on strategy documents and policymakers identifying challenges that might hinder the fulfillment of political intentions.

This paper draws on a case from Norway; however, the findings are of general interest. The study contributes to the academic discussion on how to consider both the health authorities’ perspective and the organizational perspective to understand the manager’s role in handling the contingency of decisions and managing paradoxes in the decision-making process.

Healthcare tribalism refers to the phenomenon through which different groups in a healthcare setting strictly adhere to their profession-based silo, within which they exhibit stereotypical behaviours. In turn, this can lead to deleterious downstream effects upon productivity and care delivered to patients. This study highlights a clinician-led governance model, implemented at a National Health Service (NHS) trust, to investigate whether it successfully overcame tribalism and helped drive innovation.

This was a convergent mixed-methods study including qualitative and quantitative data collected in parallel. Qualitative data included 27 semi-structured interviews with representatives from four professional groups. Quantitative data were collected through a verbally administered survey and scored on a 10-point scale.

The trust arranged its services under five autonomous business units, with a clinician and a manager sharing the leadership role at each unit. According to interviewees replies, this equivalent authority was cascaded down and enabled breaking down professional siloes, which in turn aided in the adoption of an innovative clinical model restructure.

This study contributes to the literature by characterizing a real-world example in which healthcare tribalism was mitigated while reflecting on the advantages yielded as a result.

Previous studies from all over the world identified major differences in the perspectives of different healthcare professional groups. In the United Kingdom, clinicians largely felt cut off from decision-making and dissatisfied with their managerial role. The study findings explain a governance model that allowed harmony and inclusion of different professions. Given the long-standing strains on healthcare systems worldwide, stakeholders can leverage the study findings for guidance in developing and implementing innovative managerial approaches.

The purpose of this paper is to increase the understanding of organizational challenges when decision-makers try to comply with technological developments and increasing demands for a more rational distribution of health care services. This paper explores two decision-making processes from 2007–2019 in the area of vascular surgery at a regional and a local level in Norway.

The study draws upon extensive document analyses, semi-structured interviews and field conversations. The empirical material was analyzed in several steps through an inductive approach and described and explained through a theoretical framework based on rational choice (i.e. bounded rationality), political behavior and institutionalism. These perspectives were used in a complementary way.

Both decision-making processes were resource-intensive, long-lasting and produced few organizational changes for the provision of vascular services. Stakeholders at both levels outmaneuvered the health care planners, though by different means. Regionally, the decision-making ended up in a political process, while locally the decision-making proceeded as a strategic game between different departments and professional fields.

Decision-makers need to prepare thoroughly for convincing others of the benefits of new ways of organizing clinical care. By providing meaningful opportunities for public involvement, by identifying and anticipating political agendas and by building alliances between stakeholders with divergent values and aims decision-makers may extend the realm of feasible solutions.

This paper contributes to the understanding of why decision-making processes can be particularly challenging in a field characterized by rapid technological development, new treatment options and increasing demands for more rational distribution of services.

Diffusion of innovations, defined as the adoption and implementation of new ideas, processes, products, or services in health care, is both particularly important and especially challenging. One known problem with adoption and implementation of new technologies is that, while organizations often make innovations immediately available, organizational actors are more wary about adopting new technologies because these may impact not only patients and practices but also reimbursement. As a result, innovations may remain underutilized, and organizations may miss opportunities to improve and advance. As innovation adoption is vital to achieving success and remaining competitive, it is important to measure and understand factors that impact innovation diffusion. Building on a survey of a national sample of 654 clinicians, our study measures the extent of diffusion of value-enhancing care delivery innovations (i.e., technologies that not only improve quality of care but has potential to reduce care cost by diminishing waste, Faems et al., 2010) for 13 clinical specialties and identifies healthcare-specific individual characteristics such as: professional purview, supervisory responsibility, financial incentive, and clinical tenure associated with innovation diffusion. We also examine the association of innovation diffusion with perceived value of one type of care delivery innovation – artificial intelligence (AI) – for assisting clinicians in their clinical work. Responses indicate that less than two-thirds of clinicians were knowledgeable about and aware of relevant value-enhancing care delivery innovations. Clinicians with broader professional purview, more supervisory responsibility, and stronger financial incentives had higher innovation diffusion scores, indicating greater knowledge and awareness of value-enhancing, care delivery innovations. Higher levels of knowledge of the innovations and awareness of their implementation were associated with higher perceptions of the value of AI-based technology. Our study contributes to our knowledge of diffusion of innovation in healthcare delivery and highlights potential mechanisms for speeding innovation diffusion.

The primary objective of this paper is to show a systematic and methodological approach for the digitalization of critical clinical pathways (CPs) within the healthcare domain.

The methodology entails the integration of service design (SD) and action research (AR) methodologies, characterized by iterative phases that systematically alternate between action and reflective processes, fostering cycles of change and learning. Within this framework, stakeholders are engaged through semi-structured interviews, while the existing and envisioned processes are delineated and represented using BPMN 2.0. These methodological steps emphasize the development of an autonomous, patient-centric web application alongside the implementation of an adaptable and patient-oriented scheduling system. Also, business processes simulation is employed to measure key performance indicators of processes and test for potential improvements. This method is implemented in the context of the CP addressing transient loss of consciousness (TLOC), within a publicly funded hospital setting.

The methodology integrating SD and AR enables the detection of pivotal bottlenecks within diagnostic CPs and proposes optimal corrective measures to ensure uninterrupted patient care, all the while advancing the digitalization of diagnostic CP management. This study contributes to theoretical discussions by emphasizing the criticality of process optimization, the transformative potential of digitalization in healthcare and the paramount importance of user-centric design principles, and offers valuable insights into healthcare management implications.

The study’s relevance lies in its ability to enhance healthcare practices without necessitating disruptive and resource-intensive process overhauls. This pragmatic approach aligns with the imperative for healthcare organizations to improve their operations efficiently and cost-effectively, making the study’s findings relevant.

The purpose of this study is to describe participation in decision-making among service users with severe mental illness.

Service users want to participate in decision-making and in the planning of their care. There are widely known methods, such as shared decision-making, that could be used to facilitate service user participation. Three focus group interviews were conducted with the participation of 14 persons with mental illness and/or substance abuse who were service users at two Swedish Homes for Care and Residence (HVB). Data were analyzed by qualitative content analysis.

Two themes emerged: service users’ involvement in decisions is hampered by the professionals’ approach and adequate information and experience of participation means greater empowerment.

Although it is known that service users would like to have more influence, and that methods like shared decision-making are recommended to empower service users and improve the decision process, research on these matters is limited.

This study reveals that there is a need of more systematic decisional support, such as shared decision-making, so that service users can be seen as important persons not only in guidelines and policy documents but also in clinical practice.

The findings indicate that service users do not participate in decisions systematically, although policies, guidelines and laws providing that service users should be offered an active part in decision-making with regard to their care and treatment.

Although it is known that service users would like to have more influence, and that methods like shared decision-making are recommended to empower service users and improve their decision process, research on these matters is limited. The findings indicate that service users do not participate in decisions systematically, even though policies, guidelines and laws are in place stipulating that service users should be offered an active part in decision-making with regard to their own care and treatment. The results of this project bring improvement opportunities to light.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the influence of peer mentoring on critical care nursing students’ learning outcomes in critical care units.

A qualitative exploratory research design was used to conduct the study. Ten critical care nursing students were recruited from critical care units in the five private and two public hospitals. Descriptions of their experiences were gained through individual face-to-face interviews.

The study reinforces peer mentoring as a vital strategy in helping the critical care nursing students to attain their learning outcomes. However, peer mentoring was not consistent in all hospitals and there were no structured support systems to ensure that peer mentoring was formalized. Making peer mentoring a vital component in the registered nurses core competencies would enable efficiency and guarantee the viability of peer mentoring.

Mentors for the critical care nursing students were not included in the study.

The study identified a need for incorporating a formalized mentorship programme into the core competencies of all qualified critical care nurses, the unit mentor to familiarise themselves with the prescribed learning objectives of the critical care nursing student and an allocation of supernumerary time for the critical care nursing student and mentors to allow for formal mentoring responsibilities to take place.

The study reinforces peer mentoring as a vital strategy in helping the critical care nursing students to attain their learning outcomes and conscietises registered nurses of their responsibility as mentors.