Search results

The Abdur Razzaque Ansari Memorial Weavers Hospital (ARAM) came into effect on 7 April 1996, and is dedicated to the people of Jharkhand and weavers. To deal with the issues of inequity in healthcare services, ARAM was founded for the extension of affordable healthcare services to the needy in and around the area of Jharkhand. Visualised by a great social worker and legend Abdur Razzaque Ansari, it has been successfully run by his eldest son Mr Sayeed Ahmad Ansari for 28 years. This research uses mainly a case-study approach through secondary data from the hospital website and other websites citing ARAM and its functions. Consent to use data for the study was obtained from Mr. Sayeed Ahmad Ansari. Primary information was collected through the patients who availed facilities from the hospital. They were interviewed through a semi-structured questionnaire each taking 30-40 minutes. Taken over by Medanta Group on 8 July 2015 (earlier being managed by Apollo Hospitals Group for 20 years), it is the first super speciality community hospital in Eastern India. Treating over 50,000 patients yearly with state-of-the-art medical equipment and providing discounts to lower-income groups, people from the weaver’s community, freedom fighters and members of ICSI have intrigued people from these sections for affordable treatment and facilities in and near Jharkhand. With a 200 bed-capacity, nine different disciplines and 12 departments spread across the city of Ranchi, the hospital caters to a massive population at a much-subsidised rate. Reaching out to rural villages through free medical camps and awareness campaigns, the hospital showcases how a successful model of healthcare cooperative can be replicated accordingly in similar developing and underdeveloped regions.

At the beginning of the 21st century, multiple and diverse social entities, including the public (consumers), private and nonprofit healthcare institutions, government (public health) and other industry sectors, began to recognize the limitations of the current fragmented healthcare system paradigm. Primary stakeholders, including employers, insurance companies, and healthcare professional organizations, also voiced dissatisfaction with unacceptable health outcomes and rising costs. Grand challenges and wicked problems threatened the viability of the health sector. American health systems responded with innovations and advances in healthcare delivery frameworks that encouraged shifts from intra- and inter-sector arrangements to multi-sector, lasting relationships that emphasized patient centrality along with long-term commitments to sustainability and accountability. This pathway, leading to a population health approach, also generated the need for transformative business models. The coproduction of health framework, with its emphasis on cross-sector alignments, nontraditional partner relationships, sustainable missions, and accountability capable of yielding return on investments, has emerged as a unique strategy for facing disruptive threats and challenges from nonhealth sector corporations. This chapter presents a coproduction of health framework, goals and criteria, examples of boundary spanning network alliance models, and operational (integrator, convener, aggregator) strategies. A comparison of important organizational science theories, including institutional theory, network/network analysis theory, and resource dependency theory, provides suggestions for future research directions necessary to validate the utility of the coproduction of health framework as a precursor for paradigm change.

Barriers to adequate healthcare in rural areas remain a grand challenge for local healthcare systems. In addition to patients' travel burdens, lack of health insurance, and lower health literacy, rural healthcare systems also experience significant resource shortages, as well as issues with recruitment and retention of healthcare providers, particularly specialists. These factors combined result in complex change management-focused challenges for rural healthcare systems. Change management initiatives are often resource intensive, and in rural health organizations already strapped for resources, it may be particularly risky to embark on change initiatives. One way to address these change management concerns is by leveraging socio-technical simulation models to estimate techno-economic feasibility (e.g., is it technologically feasible, and is it economical?) as well as socio-utility feasibility (e.g., how will the changes be utilized?). We present a framework for how healthcare systems can integrate modeling and simulation techniques from systems engineering into a change management process. Modeling and simulation are particularly useful for investigating the amount of uncertainty about potential outcomes, guiding decision-making that considers different scenarios, and validating theories to determine if they accurately reflect real-life processes. The results of these simulations can be integrated into critical change management recommendations related to developing readiness for change and addressing resistance to change. As part of our integration, we present a case study showcasing how simulation modeling has been used to determine feasibility and potential resistance to change considerations for implementing a mobile radiation oncology unit. Recommendations and implications are discussed.

There is a renewed interest among economists and policymakers in striking a perfect balance between the market, state, and the community for equitable and sustained development. Inclusive development is the need of the hour and healthcare cooperatives provide the perfect means to deliver that. The cooperatives can and should have an important role to play in this scenario. However, there is an important need to provide an enabling environment for the genesis and growth of Healthcare Cooperatives in India and to learn from the best models and practices across the world. The chapter discusses the effectiveness of healthcare cooperatives.

The years following the 9/11/2001 terrorists attacks saw a marked increase in community and hospital emergency preparedness, from communications across community networks, development of policies and procedures, to attainment and training in the use of biological warfare resources. Regular drills ensured emergency and health care personnel were trained and prepared to address the next large-scale crisis, especially from terrorist and bioterrorist attacks. This chapter looks at some of the more familiar global health issues over the past two decades and the lessons learned from hospital responses to inform hospital management in preparation for future incidents.

This study is a narrative review of the literature related to lessons learned from four major events in the time period from 2002 to 2023 – SARS, MERS, Ebola, and COVID-19.

The initial search yielded 25,913 articles; 57 articles were selected for inclusion in the study.

Comparison of key issues and lessons learned among the four major events described in this article – SARS, MERS, Ebola, and COVID-19 – highlight that several lessons are “relearned” with each event. Other key issues, such as supply shortages, staffing availability, and hospital capacity to simultaneously provide care to noninfectious patients came to the forefront during the COVID-19 pandemic. A primary, ongoing concern for hospitals is how to maintain their preparedness given competing priorities, resources, and staff time. This concern remains post-COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic created a broad array of challenges for hospitals. These challenges included restrictions on admissions and procedures, patient surges, rising costs of labor and supplies, and a disparate impact on already disadvantaged populations. Many of these intersecting challenges put pressure on hospitals' finances. There was concern that financial pressure would be particularly acute for hospitals serving vulnerable populations, including safety-net (SN) hospitals and critical access hospitals (CAHs). Using data from hospitals in Washington State, we examined changes in operating margins for SN hospitals, CAHs, and other acute care hospitals in 2020 and 2021. We found that the operating margins for all three categories of hospitals fell from 2019 to 2020, with SNs and CAHs sustaining the largest declines. During 2021, operating margins improved for all three hospital categories but SN operating margins still remained negative. Both changes in revenue and changes in expenses contributed to observed changes in operating margins. Our study is one of the first to describe how the financial effects of COVID-19 differed for SNs, CAHs, and other acute care hospitals over the first two years of the pandemic. Our results highlight the continuing financial vulnerability of SNs and demonstrate how the factors that contribute to profitability can shift over time.

Digital healthcare once again emerges due to pandemic (Covid-19). Digital healthcare can be minimising the issue of accessibility, availability, accuracy and affordability of healthcare service during a pandemic. Digital healthcare playsa significant role to provide healthcare equity during the pandemic. This article presents the current trends and scenario of digital healthcare with a focus on health equity. The main objective of this chapter is to review the four aces of health equity in the digital healthcare literature. The scope and challenges faced by the policymakers to implementation of digital healthcare to improve health equity. This chapter considers the hybrid literature review based on the bibliometric and the systematic literature based on the various theme, sub-theme, concept and context-related health equity through digital healthcare. This study provides the previous and current research trends and preposition for the future researcher, healthcare professional, policymakers and digital healthcare innovators to invent the tool which leads the health equity through the digital healthcare in the healthcare.