Suchergebnisse

Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the roles that employee-initiated Lean improvement projects play in health care. Lean ideas are introduced to improve flow in health care. Although variability is detrimental to flow performance, it is unclear whether Lean initiatives set out to reduce this variability and the associated buffers.


Design/methodology/approach
Longitudinal field research is combined with an exploratory field-quasi-experiment. First, a large set of Lean interventions were explored and their focus classified. Semi-structured interviews with practitioners supported the initial findings regarding the focus. Second, this study investigated whether a knowledge deficiency could explain the identified focus through a quasi-experiment in which the authors' stimulated knowledge on the roles of variability and buffers and then classified subsequent interventions.


Findings
The results reflected a narrow application of Lean, with most interventions directed at reducing direct waste. A quasi-experiment demonstrated that a small investment in knowledge enables the focus to shift toward buffers and variability issues – i.e. toward a more complete Lean approach.


Research limitations/implications
This research supports the commonly held view that there is a tendency to focus on waste. Furthermore, a lengthy experience of Lean does not guarantee interventions will focus on buffers and variability, issues with arguably a higher complexity compared to obvious waste. However, small investments in knowledge can broaden the focus of practitioners' interventions.


Originality/value
This study is one of the first to research the focus of Lean interventions through a data set spanning several years. The results are based on a unique data set covering a large number of documented Lean interventions.

Abstract Background Practicing safe behavior regarding patients is an intrinsic part of a physician's ethical and professional standards. Despite this, physicians practice behaviors that run counter to patient safety, including practicing defensive medicine, failing to report incidents, and hesitating to disclose incidents to patients. Physicians' risk of malpractice litigation seems to be a relevant factor affecting these behaviors. The objective of this study was to identify conditions that influence the relationship between malpractice litigation risk and physicians' behaviors. Methods We carried out an exploratory field study, consisting of 22 in-depth interviews with stakeholders in the malpractice litigation process: five physicians, two hospital board members, five patient safety staff members from hospitals, three representatives from governmental healthcare bodies, three healthcare law specialists, two managing directors from insurance companies, one representative from a patient organization, and one representative from a physician organization. We analyzed the comments of the participants to find conditions that influence the relationship by developing codes and themes using a grounded approach. Results We identified four factors that could affect the relationship between malpractice litigation risk and physicians' behaviors that run counter to patient safety: complexity of care, discussing incidents with colleagues, personalized responsibility, and hospitals' response to physicians following incidents. Conclusion In complex care settings procedures should be put in place for how incidents will be discussed, reported and disclosed. The lack of such procedures can lead to the shift and off-loading of responsibilities, and the failure to report and disclose incidents. Hospital managers and healthcare professionals should take these implications of complexity into account, to create a supportive and blame-free environment. Physicians need to know that they can rely on the hospital management after reporting an incident. To create realistic care expectations, patients and the general public also need to be better informed about the complexity and risks of providing health care.

The COVID-19 pandemic hit long-term care, and particularly nursing homes hard. We aimed to explore how crisis management goals and tasks evolve during such a prolonged crisis, using the crisis management tasks as identified by Boin and 't Hart as a starting point. This longitudinal, qualitative study comprises 47 interviews with seven Dutch nursing home directors and a focus group. We identified two phases to the crisis response: an acute phase with a linear, rational perspective of saving lives and compliancy to centralized decision-making and an adaptive phase characterized by more decentralized decision-making, reflection, and competing values and perspectives. This study confirms the usability of Boin and 't Hart's typology of crisis management tasks and shows that these tasks "changed color" in the second phase. We also revealed three types of additional work in managing such a crisis: resilience work, emotion work, and normative work.

Professionals are expected to justify their actions to clients, disciplinary committees and courts in multiple accountability systems. Although developed to reflect professional standards, is it possible that these systems induce proactive behaviours that counteract their goals and instead serve to protect the professional? This article examines the types of stimuli professionals acquire from the public and professional accountability contexts and how these stimuli motivate engagement in specific proactive behaviours. An interpretive grounded theory study was conducted; it included 31 in-depth interviews with physicians from eight hospitals. The study revealed that accountability systems trigger and motivate professionals to engage in self-serving, proactive job-crafting behaviours. Professionals simultaneously manage their perceived accountability pressures and their personal interests. Context-specific factors that motivate individuals to craft their jobs are identified, and we reveal four distinct stimuli–motivation–job-crafting patterns that are linked to specific performance episodes (i.e. work stages). Our findings emphasize the importance of taking specific work contexts (i.e. accountability) and work stages into account when studying job-crafting behaviours. This study contributes to understanding professionals' motivations and behaviours in the context of accountability, which is essential, as the quality and safety of their work are matters of public concern.

Background Healthcare purchasers such as health insurers and governmental bodies are expected to strategically manage chronic care chains. In doing so, purchasers can contribute to the goal of improving task division and collaboration between chronic care providers as has been recommended by numerous studies. However, healthcare purchasing research indicates that, in most countries, purchasers still struggle to fulfil a proactive, strategic approach. Consequently, a typical pattern occurs in which care improvement initiatives are instigated, but not transformed into regular care. By acknowledging that healthcare purchasers are embedded in a care chain of stakeholders who have different, sometimes conflicting, interests and, by taking an institutional logics lens, we seek to explain why achieving strategic purchasing and sustainable improvement is so elusive. Method and findings We present a longitudinal case study in which we follow a health insurer and care providers aiming to improve the care of patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) in a region of the Netherlands. Taking a theoretical lens of institutional logics, our aim was to answer 'how stakeholder pressures influence a purchaser's use of institutional logics when pursuing the right care at the right place'. The insurer by default predominantly expressed a bookkeeper's logic, reflecting a focus on controlling short-term care costs by managing individual providers. Over time, a contrasting orchestrator's logic emerged in an attempt to achieve chain-wide improvement, striving for better health outcomes and lower long-term costs. We established five types of stakeholder pressure to explain the shift in logic adoption: relationship pressures, cost pressures, medical demands, public health demands and uncertainty. Linking the changes in logic over time with stakeholder pressures showed that, firstly, the different pressures interact in influencing the purchaser. Secondly, we saw that the lack of intra-organisational alignment affects how ...

Background Healthcare purchasers such as health insurers and governmental bodies are expected to strategically manage chronic care chains. In doing so, purchasers can contribute to the goal of improving task division and collaboration between chronic care providers as has been recommended by numerous studies. However, healthcare purchasing research indicates that, in most countries, purchasers still struggle to fulfil a proactive, strategic approach. Consequently, a typical pattern occurs in which care improvement initiatives are instigated, but not transformed into regular care. By acknowledging that healthcare purchasers are embedded in a care chain of stakeholders who have different, sometimes conflicting, interests and, by taking an institutional logics lens, we seek to explain why achieving strategic purchasing and sustainable improvement is so elusive. Method and findings We present a longitudinal case study in which we follow a health insurer and care providers aiming to improve the care of patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) in a region of the Netherlands. Taking a theoretical lens of institutional logics, our aim was to answer 'how stakeholder pressures influence a purchaser's use of institutional logics when pursuing the right care at the right place'. The insurer by default predominantly expressed a bookkeeper's logic, reflecting a focus on controlling short-term care costs by managing individual providers. Over time, a contrasting orchestrator's logic emerged in an attempt to achieve chain-wide improvement, striving for better health outcomes and lower long-term costs. We established five types of stakeholder pressure to explain the shift in logic adoption: relationship pressures, cost pressures, medical demands, public health demands and uncertainty. Linking the changes in logic over time with stakeholder pressures showed that, firstly, the different pressures interact in influencing the purchaser. Secondly, we saw that the lack of intra-organisational alignment affects how ...

Changing together is learning together. A participatory action research project on the role of the internist in promoting a healthy lifestyle
This article describes the first three stages of an action research project. Following eight methodological principles of participatory action research, this article aims to give insight in the nature of the challenges and dilemmas involving internists, patients and patient representatives in the research process mention. Dilemmas included giving space versus limiting participation together with operating efficiently versus being flexible and honoring the input of all participants equally. It was a challenge to reflect not only on the content and procedures but also on everybody's role in the learning process. In conclusion, action research offers a critical base for a participative and reflective method but it is also a challenge for busy healthcare practices that focus on content and concrete action and less on the learning process. Because reflection on the learning process is important for scientific standards, we suggest to give monitoring and reflection a central place in the action research cycle.

Language matters. Response to the reply of Van Lieshout et al., 'Action research in lifestyle research is no sinecure'
In our response we further clarified how we interpreted and applied the contextuality, participation and reflexivity principles of action research. We also further explained our suggestions to adapt the framework/research cycle and how we understood the various terms used in the framework. As could be expected from a cultural perspective, language is not neutral and depends on the various authors' context and frame of reference.

Background: Client-centred care serves as the foundation for healthcare policy. Indeed, various instruments for assessing clients' experiences of care and support are increasingly used to provide insights into the quality, and client-centred nature, of the care and support provided, which, in turn, aids the development of subsequent improvements. The unique characteristics of care and support for people with intellectual disabilities (ID), such as the need for both lifelong and life-wide care and support across all aspects of clients' lives, led to an initiative within Dutch ID care to jointly develop a range of instruments to assess the experiences of clients receiving ID care and support. Individual clients' experiences and suggestions for improvement, which are embedded in clients' care plan cycles, constitute the foundation of this Range of Instruments. This paper provides a unique, bottom-up, exhaustive account of the process of developing the Range of instruments used to assess the experiences of clients in the field of Dutch ID care. Methods: Relevant documents at three levels (i.e. 1) national documents, such as policy papers and governmental reports, 2) documents and reports from the Dutch Association of Healthcare Providers for People with Disabilities (VGN) along with minutes from the meetings of the expert Committee who assessed the instruments, and 3) correspondence between the Committee and developers as well as the forms used in the assessment process for each instrument) were qualitatively analysed by two researchers who had no affiliation with the development of the Range of instruments used to assess clients' experiences in ID care and support. All of the documents were inductively coded using a thematic analytical approach. Informants who were either currently or previously involved in the development of these instruments were asked to provide clarification over the documents themselves and to explain the context in which they were produced. Results: The development of the range of instruments ...

Background: Client-centred care serves as the foundation for healthcare policy. Indeed, various instruments for assessing clients' experiences of care and support are increasingly used to provide insights into the quality, and client-centred nature, of the care and support provided, which, in turn, aids the development of subsequent improvements. The unique characteristics of care and support for people with intellectual disabilities (ID), such as the need for both lifelong and life-wide care and support across all aspects of clients' lives, led to an initiative within Dutch ID care to jointly develop a range of instruments to assess the experiences of clients receiving ID care and support. Individual clients' experiences and suggestions for improvement, which are embedded in clients' care plan cycles, constitute the foundation of this Range of Instruments. This paper provides a unique, bottom-up, exhaustive account of the process of developing the Range of instruments used to assess the experiences of clients in the field of Dutch ID care. Methods: Relevant documents at three levels (i.e. 1) national documents, such as policy papers and governmental reports, 2) documents and reports from the Dutch Association of Healthcare Providers for People with Disabilities (VGN) along with minutes from the meetings of the expert Committee who assessed the instruments, and 3) correspondence between the Committee and developers as well as the forms used in the assessment process for each instrument) were qualitatively analysed by two researchers who had no affiliation with the development of the Range of instruments used to assess clients' experiences in ID care and support. All of the documents were inductively coded using a thematic analytical approach. Informants who were either currently or previously involved in the development of these instruments were asked to provide clarification over the documents themselves and to explain the context in which they were produced. Results: The development of the range of instruments can be classified into four phases, namely: 1) supporting the bottom-up development of initiatives to assess clients' experiences, 2) focusing on learning and further development, 3) stimulating exchange between the developers and users of the instruments and the Committee responsible for assessing them, and 4) further development in response to the changing times and new landscape. Conclusions: The range of instruments were found to be appropriate for a variety of clients in ID care and support, specifically in terms of assessing their individual experiences and gaining insight into their suggestions for improvement, and effective in terms of collaboratively improving the quality of ID care and support. In so doing, these instruments potentially provide an avenue through which clients' experiences can be embedded in the process of ID care and support. Other specific features in the development of these instruments, namely their incremental adoption, ongoing evaluation and strong practice orientation, were also found to be suitable for other care contexts' attempts to respond to the top-down policy objectives of client-centeredness and translating outcomes into direct care practice.

After a service failure, citizens expect a recovery strategy that restores perceived justice and places a reasonable value on their loss. Offering monetary compensation is a strategy commonly used in private settings, but less so in public settings. To date, compensation effects have not been researched in public settings. To investigate citizens' evaluations of perceived justice, negative emotions and post‐recovery satisfaction we used a 2 (sector: public, private) by 2 (compensation promised: yes, no) by 2 (compensation offered: yes, no) factorial between‐subjects experimental design (student sample), and replicated this in a second study (US citizens sample). Results showed that compensation leads to similar positive effects in public and private settings, confirming earlier private setting research that applied justice theory. Explicitly promising compensation prior to a service encounter had no effect. However, promising compensation and not offering it led to decreased citizens' evaluations, which confirms expectancy disconfirmation theory.