Search results

The emergence of an evidence-based medicine logic represents a major change in the large and complex field of American healthcare. In this analytical case study, the authors show that the intellectual school of evidence-based medicine became an important meso-structure that facilitated the growth of the new logic in American healthcare. The new intellectual school was a community of scholars who generated shared rules and resources through intergenerational mentoring. The school engaged in advocacy to advance new intellectual paradigms for conceptualizing healthcare quality that, when connected with material practices in the field of American healthcare, came to form a new institutional logic.

As the new Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) achieves full implementation in 2014–2015, public perceptions regarding improvement in access and quality of care due to the ACA provide a fertile area for sociological research. The aim of this chapter is to determine if race is independently associated with perceptions of quality of care and access to care after ACA implementation. And, secondarily, we examined if such a relationship remained stable after considering SES (education and income) alone and SES with other relevant individual characteristics.

Data come from a telephone survey of a representative sample of Georgia residents aged 18 years or older. For each domain of the dependent variables (quality of care and access to care), three models were fitted with a nested design. The first model included only race. The second model included only race and SES. Model 3 included race, SES, and the following individual characteristics: (1) self-rated health status; (2) sense of coherence (SOC; a construct used to explain why some people are more disposed than others to illness after stressful situations); (3) travel time to doctor’s office; (4) importance of short wait times as doctor’s office; (5) political affiliation; and (6) geographic location (rural/non-rural).

Race was significantly associated with both the quality of care and the access to care. Non-White respondents were more likely to perceive improvements to both as a result of the ACA. Likewise, respondents with either higher education or income were also more likely to perceive improvements in quality and access as a result of the ACA. However, these associations were partly explained by respondents’ self-reported political affiliations.

Results of this study show that public perceptions toward the ACA and its impact on quality and access to care seem to differ based on an individuals’ race, income level and political affiliation. This may be a reflection of the media blitzkrieg that surrounds the ACA rather than a direct consequence of the policy itself. A concerted effort to develop communication strategies and outreach efforts by race and SES that can better educate the general population on the ACA may alleviate some of the reservations that are inherent to any major policy implementation, especially in terms of healthcare quality and access.

Performance metrics have become widely used and much lamented – about tools for measuring healthcare quality. In this paper, the authors reflect on the development and use of performance metrics in healthcare regulation and clinical practice. Studying multi-actor settings of performance measurement systems in healthcare in Sweden and the Netherlands, the authors show how regulatory agencies (i.e., the inspectorate and national registries), patients, hospitals, and practitioners engage in the constitution of healthcare practices through developing performance indicators that form the input for ranking, ensuing intensive dialogues on what should be measured and accounted for, and to what effects. The authors analyze this process as caring for numbers. The authors discern two practices of caring for numbers: validating and contexting. Validating refers to the practices of making numbers reflect those practices they intend to depict; contexting is about how with the use of numbers specific contexts of healthcare are built. These processes together emphasize the performative character of numbers as well as the reflexive uses of performativity. The paper shows how collaborative and rather pragmatic practices of caring for numbers co-construct specific practices of healthcare. Though this reflexive entanglement of production and use of numbers actors not only constitute specific performance metrics and ranking practices but also perform healthcare.

This study sets out to shed light on those infrastructures underlying the ubiquitous, yet contested nature of governing by numbers. Investigating the 30-year long emergence of Germany’s “external quality assurance system” for hospitals, the authors show how methods for quantifying quality align with broader institutional and ideational shifts to form a calculative infrastructure for governance. Our study focuses on three phases of infrastructural development wherein methods for calculating quality, institutions for coordinating data and reform ideals converge with one another. The authors argue that the succession of these phases represents a gradual layering process, whereby old ways of enacting quality governance are not replaced, but augmented by new sets of calculative practices, institutions and ideas. Thinking about infrastructures as multi-layered complexes allows us to explore how they construct possibilities for control, remain stable over time and transform the fields in which they are embedded. Rather than governance being enacted according to a singular goal or value, we see an infrastructure that is flexible enough to support multiple modalities of control, including selective intervention, quality-based competition and automatized budgeting. Infrastructural change, instead of revolving around crises in measurement, is shaped by incubation periods – times of relative calm when political actors, medical practitioners, mathematicians, and many others explore and reflect past experiences, rather than follow erratic reforms fads. Finally, analysing infrastructures as multi-layered constructs underlines how they produce multiple images of care quality, which not only shift existing power relations, but also change the ways we understand and make sense of public services.

This mixed-methods study reports on an outreach clinics program designed to deliver genetic services to medically underserved communities in Wisconsin.

We show the geographic distribution, funding patterns, and utilization trends for outreach clinics over a 20-year period. Interviews with program planners and outreach clinic staff show how external and internal constraints limited the program’s capacity. We compare clinic operations to the conceptual models guiding program design.

Our findings show that state health officials had to scale back financial support for outreach clinic activities while healthcare providers faced increasing pressure from administrators to reduce investments in charity care. These external and internal constraints led to a decline in the overall number of patients served. We also find that redistribution of clinics to the Milwaukee area increased utilization among Hispanics but not among African-Americans. Our interviews suggest that these patterns may be a function of shortcomings embedded in the planning models.

Planning models have three shortcomings. First, they do not identify the mitigation of health disparities as a specific goal. Second, they fail to acknowledge that partners face escalating profit-seeking mandates that may limit their capacity to provide charity services. Finally, they underemphasize the importance of seeking trusted partners, especially in working with communities that have been historically marginalized.

There has been little discussion about equitably leveraging genetic advances that improve healthcare quality and efficacy. The role of State Health Agencies in mitigating disparities in access to genetic services has been largely ignored in the sociological literature.

Contemporary organizations are facing an operating environment characterized by volatile, uncertain, complex, ambiguous, and “permanent whitewater.” To sustain high performance in this context, organizations must be able to change and develop as efficiently and effectively as possible. Within organizations, there are actors who catalyze and advance change in this manner; these actors are known as “champions.” Yet the scholar who wishes to conduct research concerning champions of change and organizational development is likely to be met by a highly fragmented literature. Varying notions of champions are scattered throughout extant research, where authors of articles cite different sources when conceptualizing champions; often superficially. Furthermore, many types of highly specific and nuanced non-generalizable champions have proliferated, making it difficult for practitioners and researchers to discover useful findings on how to go about making meaningful changes in their context. The purpose of this study was to address these problems for practitioners and researchers by engendering thoroughness, clarity, and coherence within champion scholarship. This was done by conducting the first comprehensive, critical yet insightful review of the champion literature within the organizational sciences using content analysis to re-conceptualize champions and develop a meaningful typology from which the field can be advanced. The chapter first suggests a return to Schön (1963) as the basis from which to conceptualize champions and, second, offers a typology consisting of 10 meta-champions of organizational change and development – Collaboration, Human Rights, Innovation, Product, Project, Service, Strategic, Sustainability, Technology, and Venture Champions – from which change practice and future research can benefit.

Purpose – The numbers of health care transparency initiatives are increasing. Despite the growing availability of quality data, there seems to be a shortage of evidence about the effects and effectiveness of such initiatives. The aim of this systematic review is to document the effects of transparency, defined as the public release of quality performance data, on hospital care outcomes.

Design/methodology/approach – Through a review of the literature, we chose 46 keywords to use in our searches and focused on empirical studies published in English between 2010 and 2015. The use of combinations of these keywords in searches of four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library) generated 13,849 publications. The removal of duplicates and exclusion of studies that were not empirical or not relevant to transparency and quality resulted in 39 studies to be reviewed.

Findings – Our review of the literature confirmed the growth of health care transparency efforts, led by the United States, and found mixed results regarding the effects of transparency on hospital care outcomes. For example, mortality, the most frequently researched performance measure (n = 15), exhibited this mixed pattern by having studies showing a reduction (n = 4), increase (n = 1), mixed findings (n = 4), and no significant relationship (n = 6) as a result of public release. We also found a limited number of articles related to unintended consequences of public reporting. When compared with earlier systematic reviews, there seems to be a trend in the reduction of unintended consequences. Therefore, we recommend exploration of this potential trend in future studies empirically.

Practical Implications – The research findings summarized in this systematic review can be used to understand the results of existing transparency efforts and to develop future transparency initiatives that may better enhance hospital quality performance.

Originality/value – This is the latest and most comprehensive systematic review summarizing the effects of transparency of quality metrics on hospital care outcomes.

Although it is widely acknowledged that health care delivery systems are complex adaptive systems, there are gaps in understanding the application of systems engineering approaches to systems analysis and redesign in the health care domain. Commonly employed methods, such as statistical analysis of risk factors and outcomes, are simply not adequate to robustly characterize all system requirements and facilitate reliable design of complex care delivery systems. This is especially apparent in institutional-level systems, such as patient safety programs that must mitigate the risk of infections and other complications that can occur in virtually any setting providing direct and indirect patient care. The case example presented here illustrates the application of various system engineering methods to identify requirements and intervention candidates for a critical patient safety problem known as failure to rescue. Detailed descriptions of the analysis methods and their application are presented along with specific analysis artifacts related to the failure to rescue case study. Given the prevalence of complex systems in health care, this practical and effective approach provides an important example of how systems engineering methods can effectively address the shortcomings in current health care analysis and design, where complex systems are increasingly prevalent.

The need for continuous improvement in the quality of products and services calls for methodology and strategy that will enhance performance in businesses. When there is a reduction in waste during production, it will give room for a better product and services which at the same time improves the profits of the organization. On the other hand, technology is a means by which processes and skills are introduced into the production of goods and services to achieve organizational goals, and this has been proven effective during COVID-19 lockdown. Technology is more of a scientific investigation that brings transformation into business performance, mostly in the manufacturing industry. This study was ventilated through analysis of relevant themes and premised on the narrative discourse of the structures of the study. This chapter examined how Six Sigma, waste reduction methods and technology, brings change and success in the business performance in the manufacturing system. The chapter discusses the impact of technology and the application of Six Sigma in achieving sustainable business processes during COVID-19 in Nigeria's manufacturing system. The study concludes that Six Sigma is a veritable approach to elicit worthy results in any period especially during a pandemic when everything is no longer working perfectly. Six Sigma and disruptive technology have helped the majority of organizations to stay above board in accomplishing their business performance.

Recent national policy adoptions of the social determinants of health approach present enormous challenges to practitioners designing health promotion programs aimed at eliminating health disparities. This chapter provides a framework for understanding the social determinant rationale embedded in Healthy People 2020 and introduces the concept of place as an important consideration.

This chapter presents a conceptual explanation of social determinant thinking and describes the potential impact for traditional health promotion activities that target the at-risk populations.

Two major resources, the Health Impact Assessment Toolkit and the HHS Disparities Action Plan, have emerged as frameworks for developing a health in all policies approach that will enable health practitioners to enhance their social determinant interventions.

Current social determinant approaches and models need to be strategically tailored to interventions aiming to reduce health disparities. Additional research focusing on how these approaches are integrated within the existing health promotion program frameworks is required.

Very few health practitioners have had the opportunity to integrate a social determinant approach that emphasizes the concept of place and explores the consequences of using a health in all policies approach. This chapter serves as a practical introduction and outlines the major challenges.

The tipping point for the inclusion of social determinants of health in addressing health disparities occurred with the publication of Healthy People 2020. As this innovation begins to diffuse throughout the country, health practitioners will benefit by reviews and applications of the new rationale and model.