Search results

Benchmarking is increasingly considered a useful management instrument to improve performance in healthcare. The purpose of this paper is to assess if a nationwide long-term benchmarking collaborative between operating room (OR) departments of university medical centres in the Netherlands leads to benefits in OR management and to evaluate if the initiative meets the requirements of the 4P-model.

The evaluation was based on the 4P-model (purposes, performance indicators, participating organisations, performance management system), developed in former studies. A mixed-methods design was applied, consisting of document study, observations, interviews as well as analysing OR performance data using SPSS statistics.

Collaborative benchmarking has benefits different from mainly performance improvement and identification of performance gaps. It is interesting that, since 2004, the OR benchmarking initiative still endures after already existing for ten years. A key benefit was pointed out by all respondents as “the purpose of networking”, on top of the purposes recognised in the 4P-model. The networking events were found to make it easier for participants to contact and also visit one another. Apparently, such informal contacts were helpful in spreading knowledge, sharing policy documents and initiating improvement. This benchmark largely met all key conditions of the 4P-model.

The current study has the limitations accompanied with any qualitative research and particularly related to interviewing. Qualitative research findings must be viewed within the context of the conducted case study. The experiences in this university hospital context in the Netherlands might not be transferable to other (general) hospital settings or other countries. The number of conducted interviews is restricted; nevertheless, all other data sources are extensive.

A collaborative approach in benchmarking can be effective because participants use its knowledge-sharing infrastructure which enables operational, tactical and strategic learning. Organisational learning is to the advantage of overall OR management. Benchmarking seems a useful instrument in enabling hospitals to learn from each other, to initiate performance improvements and catalyse knowledge-sharing.

The main goal of the current research was to investigate whether and how leaders in health care organizations can stimulate incident reporting and error management by “walking the safety talk” (enacted priority of safety).

Open interviews (N=26) and a cross-sectional questionnaire (N=183) were conducted at the Rotterdam Eye Hospital (REH) in The Netherlands.

As hypothesized, leaders’ enacted priority of safety was positively related to incident reporting and error management, and the relation between leaders’ enacted priority of safety and error management was mediated by incident reporting. The interviews yielded rich data on (near) incidents, the leaders’ role in (non)reporting, and error management, grounding quantitative findings in concrete case descriptions.

We support previous theorizing by providing empirical evidence showing that (1) enacted priority of safety has a stronger relationship with incident reporting than espoused priority of safety and (2) the previously implied positive link between incident reporting and error management indeed exists. Moreover, our findings extend our understanding of behavioral integrity for safety and the mechanisms through which it operates in medical settings.

Our findings indicate that for the promotion of incident reporting and error management, active reinforcement of priority of safety by leaders is crucial.

Social sciences researchers, health care researchers and health care practitioners can utilize the findings of the current paper in order to help leaders create health care systems characterized by higher incident reporting and more constructive error handling.

The purpose of this paper is to study the quality indicator appropriateness and use it for international quality comparison on diabetic retinopathy (DR) patient care process in one American and one Dutch eye hospital.

A 17-item DR quality indicator set was composed based on a literature review and systematically applied in two hospitals. Qualitative analysis entailed document study and 12 semi-structured face-to-face interviews with ophthalmologists, managers, and board members of the two hospitals.

While the medical-clinical approach to DR treatment in both hospitals was similar, differences were found in quality of care perception and operationalization. Neither hospital systematically used outcome indicators for DR care. On the process level, the authors found larger differences. Similarities and differences were found in the structure of both hospitals. The hospitals’ particular contexts influenced the interpretation and use of quality indicators.

Although quality indicators and quality comparison between hospitals are increasingly used in international settings, important local differences influence their application. Context should be taken into account. Since that context is locally bound and directly linked to hospital setting, caution should be used interpreting the results of quality comparison studies.

International quality comparison is increasingly suggested as a useful way to improve healthcare. Little is known, however, about the appropriateness and use of quality indicators in local hospital care practices.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the implementation of a broad-scale team resource management (TRM) program on safety culture in a Dutch eye hospital, detailing the program’s content and procedures. Aviation-based TRM training is recognized as a useful approach to increase patient safety, but little is known about how it affects safety culture.

Pre- and post-assessments of the hospitals’ safety culture was based on interviews with ophthalmologists, anesthesiologists, residents, nurses, and support staff. Interim observations were made at training sessions and in daily hospital practice.

The program consisted of safety audits of processes and (team) activities, interactive classroom training sessions by aviation experts, a flight simulator session, and video recording of team activities with subsequent feedback. Medical professionals considered aviation experts inspiring role models and respected their non-hierarchical external perspective and focus on medical-technical issues. The post-assessment showed that ophthalmologists and other hospital staff had become increasingly aware of safety issues. The multidisciplinary approach promoted social (team) orientation that replaced the former functionally-oriented culture. The number of reported near-incidents greatly increased; the number of wrong-side surgeries stabilized to a minimum after an initial substantial reduction.

The study was observational and the hospital’s variety of efforts to improve safety culture prevented us from establishing a causal relation between improvement and any one specific intervention.

Aviation-based TRM training can be a useful to stimulate safety culture in hospitals. Safety and quality improvements are not single treatment interventions but complex socio-technical interventions. A multidisciplinary system approach and focus on “team” instead of “profession” seems both necessary and difficult in hospital care.

The purpose of this paper is to explore in a specific hospital care process the applicability in practice of the theories of quality costing and value chains.

In a retrospective case study an in‐depth evaluation of the use of a quality cost model (QCM) and the applicability of Porter's care delivery value chain (CDVC) was performed in a specific care process: glaucoma care over the period 2001 to 2006 in the Rotterdam Eye Hospital in The Netherlands.

The case study shows a reduction of costs per product by increasing the number of outpatient visits and surgery combined with a higher patient satisfaction. Reduction of costs of non‐compliance by using the QCM is small, due to the absence of (external) financial incentives for both the hospital and individual physicians. For CDVC to be supportive to an integrated quality and cost management the notion “patient value” needs far more specification as mutually agreed on by the stakeholders involved and related reimbursement needs to depend on realised outcomes.

The case study just focused on one specific care process in one hospital. To determine effects in other areas of health care, it is important to study the use and applicability of the QCM and the CDVC in other care processes and settings.

QCM and a CDVC can be useful tools for hospital management to manage the outcomes on both quality and costs, but impact is dependent on the incentives in the context of the existing organisational and reimbursement system and asks for an agreed on operationalisation among the various stakeholders of the notion of patient value.

Wrong lens implants have been associated with the highest frequency of medical errors in cataract surgery. The purpose of this paper is to explore the use of the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) framework to sustainably reduce wrong intraocular lens (IOL) implants in cataract surgery.

In this mixed-methods study, the SEIPS framework was used to analyse a series of (near) misses of IOL implants in a national tertiary specialty hospital in Singapore. A series of interventions was developed and applied in the case hospital. Risk assessment audits were done before the interventions (2012; n=6,111 surgeries), during its implementation (n=7,475) and in the two years post-interventions (2013-2015; n=39,390) to compare the wrong IOL-rates.

Although the absolute number of incidents was low, the incident rate decreased from 4.91 before to 2.54 per 10,000 cases after. Near miss IOL error decreased from 5.89 before to 3.55 per 1,000 cases after. The number of days between two IOL incidents increased from 35 to an initial peak of 385 before stabilizing on 56. The large variety of available IOL types and vendors was found as the main root cause of wrong implants that required reoperation.

The SEIPS framework seems to be helpful to assess components involved and develop sustainable quality and safety interventions that intervene at different levels of the system.

The SEIPS model is supportive to address differences between person and system root causes comprehensively and thereby foster quality and patient safety culture.

The purpose of this paper is to amend and extend the emerging research that has utilized an employee-focused approach to examining the service recovery process. In doing so, the authors examine the influences of supervisor and coworker support for error management on two measures of employee service performance: service recovery performance and helping behaviors during service failure and recoveries. Specifically, this study examines the linear and non-linear interaction effects of supervisor and coworker support for error management on the outcome variables.

To examine the proposed relationships, the authors conducted a field study that utilized survey data from a sample of 243 restaurant employees and their immediate supervisors. Employee ratings of supervisor and coworker support for error management were matched with the data gathered for the two dependent variables (i.e. supervisory ratings of service recovery performance and helping behaviors). Structural equation modeling was used to examine the linear interaction effects on the outcome variables. To examine the non-linear interaction effects on the outcome variables the authors utilized polynomial regression and response surface modeling.

The results showed that the interaction effects of supervisor and coworker support for error management was significantly positively related to both service recovery performance and helping behaviors. In addition, an alternative analysis of the shape of the interaction effects using polynomial regression and response surface modeling showed that the moderating effects may be better conceptualized as non-linear.

These findings offer new insights about the roles and impact of various forms of support in the service recovery process. First, the current study focuses specifically on supervisor and coworker support for error management and the impact on employees’ service recovery performance and helping behaviors. Second, this research investigates the interaction effects of these two forms of support on service recovery performance and helping behaviors. Third, along with linear interaction effects, the current work examines non-linear interaction effects. These relationships examined in this study have not been tested before. Thus, the findings of this research make a unique contribution to research in service management. The findings of this study provide more prescriptive insights about the means to prevent and respond effectively to service errors.