Search results

Policymakers implementing pay-for-performance schemes within general practice should seek to design schemes which work with rather than against the professional values and goals of general practitioners. In this way, schemes are more likely to enhance the practitioners' engagement. The purpose of this paper is to show how this was done in two case studies of pay-for-performance design and present the lessons from this study for policymakers.

A Most Similar Systems collective case study of the design of two pay-for-performance schemes for general practitioners, the United Kingdom's Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) and the New Zealand’s Performance Management Programme (PMP) was undertaken, involving 26 semi-structured interviews with policymakers, documentary and literature analysis.

Innovation in processes was found in both case studies which facilitated engagement by general practitioners in the formulation and implementation of these schemes. These were careful selection of highly skilled design teams, use of principle-based negotiation techniques and academic mediation of indicator selection. In addition, in England the majority of members in the combined QOF design team were general practitioners. The evidence from these two case studies reinforces approaches to scheme design which seek to harness rather than challenge medical professional values and which maximise the participation of general practitioners in the design process. Achieving funder/practitioner collaboration should be a key goal in the policymaking process.

Pay-for-performance scheme designers can improve their ability to engage general practitioners in scheme design and scheme uptake by adopting approaches which actively engage general practitioners as designers and users of such schemes.

This study compares two contemporaneous processes of pay-for-performance scheme design and implementation in similar systems of general practice funding and delivery at the national level, offering a rare quasi-experimental opportunity for learning lessons from comparative analysis.

This paper seeks to address how and why trust relations in the NHS may be changing and presents a theoretical framework for exploring them in future empirical research.

This paper provides a conceptual analysis. It proposes that public and patient trust in health care in the UK appears to be shaped by a variety of factors. From a macro perspective, any changes in levels of public trust in health care institutions appear to derive partly from top‐down policy initiatives that have altered the way in which health services are organised and partly from broader social and cultural processes. A variety of policy initiatives, including the introduction of clinical governance and the resulting use of performance management to scrutinise and change clinical activity, increasing patient choice and involvement in decision‐making regarding their care, are examined for how they have changed the context for trust relations within the NHS.

It is argued that these policy initiatives have produced a new context for trust relations within the NHS, shifting the inter‐dependence and distribution of power between patients, clinicians, and mangers and changing their vulnerability to each other and to health care institutions. The paper presents a theoretical framework based on current policy discourses which illustrates how new forms of trust relations may be emerging in this new context of health care delivery, reflecting a change in motivations for trust from affect based to cognition based trust as patients, clinicians and managers become more active partners in trust relations. The framework suggests that trust relations in all three types of relationship in the “new” modernised NHS might, in general, be particularly characterised by an emphasis on communication, providing information and the use of “evidence” to support decisions in a reciprocal, negotiated alliance.

The paper examines the drivers for change in trust in health care relations in the UK and develops a theoretical framework for the emergence of new trust relations that can be subsequently explored through empirical research.

Principal-agent theory (PAT) has been used to understand relationships among different professional groups and explain performance management between organisations, but is rarely used for research within primary care. The purpose of this paper is to explore whether PAT can be used to attain a better understanding of performance management in primary care.

Purposive sampling was used to identify a range of general practices in the North-west of England. Interviews were carried out with directors, managers and clinicians in commissioning and regional performance management organisations and within general practices, and the data analysed using matrix analysis techniques to produce a case study of performance management.

There are various elements of the principal-agent framework that can be applied in primary care. Goal alignment is relevant, but can only be achieved through clear, strategic direction and consistent interpretation of objectives at all levels. There is confusion between performance measurement and performance management and a tendency to focus on things that are easy to measure whilst omitting aspects of care that are more difficult to capture. Appropriate use of incentives, good communication, clinical engagement, ownership and trust affect the degree to which information asymmetry is overcome and goal alignment achieved. Achieving the right balance between accountability and clinical autonomy is important to ensure governance and financial balance without stifling innovation.

The principal-agent theoretical framework can be used to attain a better understanding of performance management in primary care; although it is likely that only partial goal alignment will be achieved, dependent on the extent and level of alignment of a range of factors.

This paper aims to improve our understanding of performance measurement systems in the health and care sector, by focussing on employee reactions to core performance measurement practices. Targets and monitoring are hypothesised to be associated with employee perceptions of job control, supportive management and job demands, which in turn, are expected to be linked to employee-wellbeing and organisational commitment.

Matched employee workplace data are extracted from a nationally representative and publicly available survey. Structural equation models are estimated.

Performance measurement systems are neither perceived as resources nor additional demands. Setting many targets and a focus on productivity can lead to negative employee outcomes, since these positively correlate with perceptions of job demands, which negatively correlate with employee wellbeing. However, monitoring financial performance and monitoring employee performance may be helpful to managers, as these are positively associated with employee perceptions of job control and supportive management, which positively correlate with job satisfaction and organisational commitment and, negatively, with anxiety. Overall, common criticisms of performance measurement systems in healthcare are questioned.

Given the lack of consensus on how performance measurement systems can influence employee experiences and outcomes, this study combines theories that argue for performance measurement systems in managing operations with models developed by psychologists to describe how perceptions of the work conditions can affect employee attitude and wellbeing. A conceptual model is therefore developed and tested, and potential direct and indirect effects of performance measurement systems in the health sector are inferred.

With care clusters an established framework for mental health services it is timely to consider how to use them to deliver high quality, evidence based care that is socially inclusive and recovery oriented. This paper aims to describe conceptual thinking about these issues, specifically in relation to the challenges and balances inherent in the care packages approach. It seeks to describe work to develop an internet based, high‐level description of such packages for each care cluster.

The background to the project is described, along with a discussion of the conceptual and practice issues behind the work.

With mental health care now trying to make sense of local services in terms of care clusters the authors offer a high‐level framework to help people in this sensemaking. Coherent, socially inclusive and recovery oriented packages are set out on the website.

The work discussed in the article is highly innovative, being the first systematic attempt to provide evidence‐based, high‐level care packages for the care clusters model. Hence, a limitation is the challenge remaining to operationalise the work to real world care contexts.

The website sets out a framework to help local services and commissioners plan and organise their services, drawing on the best guidance and evidence and developing care packages on the basis of the right ethos of care.

In moving to services fully commissioned and organised around the care clusters model, there remain major conceptual and practice challenges to address including operationalising evidence‐based care packages and means of flexibly delivering individual care.

This is the first view of socially inclusive packages for each of the care clusters that also draw together the best of guidance and standards of care.

This paper considers the question: what would happen if healthcare providers, like their counterparts in the hospitality industry, adopted the principles of customer experience management (CEM) in order to facilitate a more holistic and personalized patient experience? It proposes an alternative vision of the patient experience by adding to an emerging hospitality–healthcare literature base, this time focusing upon CEM. A hospitality-oriented patient experience (HOPE) framework is introduced, designed to enhance the patient experience across all the touchpoints of the healthcare journey.

This is a conceptual paper that draws upon three distinct literatures: hospitality literature; healthcare literature; and CEM literature. It utilizes this literature to develop a framework, the HOPE framework, designed to offer an alternative lens to understanding the patient experience. The paper utilizes descriptions of three unique patient experiences, one linked to chronic pain, a second to gastro issues and a third to orthopedic issues, to illustrate how adopting the principles of hospitality management, within a healthcare context, could promote an enhanced patient experience.

The main theoretical contribution is the development of the HOPE framework that brings together research on CEM with research on cocreative customer practices in health care. By selecting and connecting key ingredients of two separate research streams, this vision and paradigm provide an alternative lens into ways of addressing the key challenges in the implementation of person-centered care in healthcare services. The HOPE framework offers an actionable roadmap for healthcare organizations to realize greater understanding and to operationalize new ways of improving the patient experience.

This paper applies the principles of hospitality and CEM to the domain of health care. In so doing it adds value to a hospitality literature primarily focused upon extensive employee–customer relationships. To a healthcare literature seeking to more fully understand a person-centered care model typically delivered by a care team consisting of professionals and family/friends. And to a CEM literature in hospitality, which seeks to facilitate favorable employee–customer interactions. Connecting these separate literature streams enables an original conceptual framework, a HOPE framework, to be introduced.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an up-to-date, comprehensive, independent and credible assessment of relevant academic and other literature since 2007, on the effectiveness and value for money of performance-related-pay (PRP) in the public sector.

PRP was studied using both economics-based literature and literature from the organisational and management field (including human resources, management sociology and psychology). An initial search of databases identified 7,401 documents regarding PRP in the public sector, which was reduced to 57 final papers included in the study (27 in the health sector, 16 in the education sector and 16 in the civil service) after abstract and full paper screening.

The review found some evidence that PRP schemes can be effective across the three domains of the public sector for which there was evidence available (health, education and the civil service), but findings within and between the sectors are mixed, with scheme effectiveness often dependent on scheme design and organisational context.

The research highlights the importance of considering both economics-based and organisational literature when discussing PRP in the public sector, and the implications for motivation and PRP design.

The results indicated that the design of PRP schemes could influence their effectiveness and outcomes, and the research suggests how the challenges of designing and implementing PRP schemes can be overcome in the public sector.

The review highlights that when implementing PRP schemes there may be gender differences in their overall effectiveness (especially in education) and there must be consideration for how fairly the PRP scheme is perceived.

The paper uses literature from economics and behavioural sciences when looking at the motivational implications for PRP in the public sector.

Purpose: In this chapter, we examine the National Health Service (NHS) and Adult Social Care (ASC) in England, focussing on policies that have been introduced since 2000 and considering the challenges that providers face in their quest to provide a high standard and affordable health service in the near future.

Methodology/Approach: We discuss recent policy developments and published analysis covering innovations within major aspects of health care (primary, secondary and tertiary) and ASC, before considering future challenges faced by providers in England, highlighted by a 2017 UK Parliament Select Committee.

Findings: The NHS and ASC system have experienced tightening budgets and serious financial pressure, with historically low real-terms growth in health funding from central government and local authorities. Policymakers have tried to overcome these challenges with several policy innovations, but many still remain. With large-scale investment and reform, there is potential for the health and social care system to evolve into a modern service capable of dealing with the needs of an ageing population. However, if these challenges are not met, then it is set to continue struggling with a lack of appropriate facilities, an overstretched staff and a system not entirely appropriate for its patients.

There is robust evidence that good teamwork is essential to the delivery of high‐quality healthcare. This paper reports on a leadership intervention to improve team‐working in multidisciplinary clinical teams and the health outcomes of those populations served by them. The Shared Leadership for Change initiative was funded and managed by The Health Foundation as part of its portfolio of leadership awards. The initiative sought to support the development of ‘shared’ leadership in the teams through the intervention of specially trained and supported leadership development consultants who worked with clinical teams delivering diabetes care working across primary and secondary sectors. The paper explains the rationale underpinning the approach, describes how the intervention was operationalied, and presents findings on its impact to date. The authors conclude by advocating that given the right context this intervention is an effective approach that leads to improved clinical team effectiveness and better multidisciplinary working in modern healthcare. The difficulties of ascribing any improvements in clinical outcomes or the patient experience to the interventions are also explored.

The objective of this paper was to systematically review published studies to determine if disability limits access to health care and to attempt to identify what body functions, structures and activities and participation, as well as contextual factors (environmental and personal factors), interact with the health condition to limit this access. The AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline and psychINFO databases were searched for original study articles in English, dating from 1974 to 2008. Review articles and expert opinion were excluded. Each study had two independent reviews by either a general practitioner or specialist in rehabilitation medicine. Each study was critically appraised according to the National Service Framework for Long‐term Conditions (Department of Health, 2005a) methodology and recorded on standardised data extraction sheets. Studies of poor quality were excluded. Sixty studies were included. No randomised controlled trials were identified. Studies broadly fell into the following three main groups: database studies (n=27), quantitative surveys (n=20) and qualitative interviews (n=13). Disabled people are restricted in accessing health care and report less satisfaction with their medical care. Many of the identified studies were from the United States (US) and based on subjective reporting. More objective evidence is needed, especially in the UK, to clarify the true level of access to health care in people with disabilities. The complex, interdependent factors in providing health care to disabled people require complex solutions.