Suchergebnisse

The public sector is facing turbulent times and this also challenges the health professions who are expected to serve both the interests of the citizens and the cost-containment and austerity policies of governments. This article seeks to explore the changing role of the health professions. I introduce an approach on 'citizen professionals' as active players in the policy process and mediators between the state/policymakers and the citizens/patients. The aim is to highlight a transformative potential of professionalism and the connectedness with other sets of governance, like management. Empirical material from a German case study and a comparative European study serve to illustrate the arguments, drawing on policy analysis and secondary sources. The results bring the complexity of transformations and new emergent forms of professionalism into view that cannot be understood in traditional categories of conflict, exclusion and jurisdiction. Exploring the potential of the health professions to creatively respond to new challenges may reveal new opportunities for innovating healthcare policy beyond market and management. ; O setor público enfrenta tempos atribulados, constituindo isto igualmente um desafio para as profissões de saúde, de quem se espera que sirvam tanto os interesses dos cidadãos quanto as políticas de contenção de custos e de austeridade dos governos. Este artigo procura explorar o papel em mudança das profissões de saúde. Introduzo uma abordagem aos profissionais cidadãos como agentes ativos no processo de produção de políticas e como mediadores entre o Estado/produtores de políticas e os cidadãos/utentes. O objetivo é salientar um potencial de profissionalismo transformador e a interligação com outras instâncias de governança, como a gestão. Elaborado a partir da análise de produção de políticas e de fontes secundárias, os argumentos aduzidos são ilustrados com base em material empírico relativo a um estudo de caso alemão e a um estudo comparativo europeu. Os resultados fazem sobressair a ...

In den nächsten Wochen und Monaten werden entscheidende Weichen für die Forschung und Forschungsförderung in Europa gestellt, und hierbei geht es auch um die Zukunft der sozialwissenschaftlichen Forschung. In diesem Artikel werden zentrale Entwicklungen vorgestellt. Wir konzentrieren uns auf die Herausforderungen und Chancen für die sozialwissenschaftliche Forschungsförderung und stellen in diesem Kontext auch das forschungspolitische Netzwerk Initiative for Science in Europe vor, das als interdisziplinäre Plattform interessante neue Handlungsoptionen für die Soziologie bietet. Weiter geht es um die Schlüsselthemen des nächsten Global Research Council, der sich mit der Umstellung der wissenschaftlichen Publikationen auf »open access« und mit der Entwicklung von Leitlinien zur Forschungsethik beschäftigen wird. European research and research funding are facing a number of important decisions with far reaching implications for the social sciences. This article introduces key issues of the European debate with a focus on the challenges and chances that future funding programmes create in the social sciences. Within this context, the network Initiative for Science in Europe is also introduced that provides new opportunities for sociology. Furthermore important are »open access« and »research integrity«, the key topics of the next Global Research Council.

Background: As health workforce policy is gaining momentum, data sources and monitoring systems have significantly improved in the European Union and internationally. Yet data remain poorly connected to policy-making and implementation and often do not adequately support integrated approaches. This brings the importance of governance and the need for innovation into play. Case: The present case study introduces a regional health workforce monitor in the German Federal State of Rhineland-Palatinate and seeks to explore the capacity of monitoring to innovate health workforce governance. The monitor applies an approach from the European Network on Regional Labour Market Monitoring to the health workforce. The novel aspect of this model is an integrated, procedural approach that promotes a 'learning system' of governance based on three interconnected pillars: mixed methods and bottom-up data collection, strong stakeholder involvement with complex communication tools and shared decision- and policy-making. Selected empirical examples illustrate the approach and the tools focusing on two aspects: the connection between sectoral, occupational and mobility data to analyse skill/qualification mixes and the supply–demand matches and the connection between monitoring and stakeholder-driven policy. Conclusion: Regional health workforce monitoring can promote effective governance in high-income countries like Germany with overall high density of health workers but maldistribution of staff and skills. The regional stakeholder networks are cost-effective and easily accessible and might therefore be appealing also to low- and middle-income countries.

Background Since the early 1980s all European countries have given priority to reforming the management of health services. A distinctive feature of these reforms has also been the drive to co-opt professionals themselves into the management of services, taking on full time or part time (hybrid) management or leadership roles. However, although these trends are well documented in the literature, our understanding of the nature and impact of reforms and how they are re-shaping the relationship between medicine and management remains limited. Most studies have tended to be nationally specific, located within a single discipline and focused primarily on describing new management practices. This article serves as an Introduction to a special issue of BMC Health Services Research which seeks to address these concerns. It builds on the work of a European Union funded COST Action (ISO903) which ran between 2009 and 2013, focusing specifically on the changing relationship between medicine and management in a European context.

Background: Since the early 1980s all European countries have given priority to reforming the management of health services. A distinctive feature of these reforms has also been the drive to co-opt professionals themselves into the management of services, taking on full time or part time (hybrid) management or leadership roles. However, although these trends are well documented in the literature, our understanding of the nature and impact of reforms and how they are re-shaping the relationship between medicine and management remains limited. Most studies have tended to be nationally specific, located within a single discipline and focused primarily on describing new management practices. This article serves as an Introduction to a special issue of BMC Health Services Research which seeks to address these concerns. It builds on the work of a European Union funded COST Action (ISO903) which ran between 2009 and 2013, focusing specifically on the changing relationship between medicine and management in a European context. Main text: Prior to describing the contributions to the special issue, this Introduction sets the scene by exploring four main questions which have characterised much of the recent literature on medicine and management. First is the question of what we understand by the changing relationship between medicine and management and in particular which this means for the emergence of so called 'hybrid' clinical leader roles? A second question concerns the forces that have driven change, in particular those relating to the wider project of management reforms. Third, we raise questions of how medical professionals have responded to these changes and what factors have shaped their responses. Lastly we consider what some of the outcomes of greater medical involvement in management and leadership might be, both in terms of intended and unintended outcomes. Conclusions: The paper concludes by summarising the contributions to the special issue and highlighting the need to extend research in this area by ...

The present study explores the situation of migrant carers in long-term care (LTC) in European Union Member States and the disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic from a public health perspective. The aim is to bring LTC migrant carers into health workforce research and highlight a need for trans-sectoral and European heath workforce governance. We apply an exploratory approach based on secondary sources, document analysis and expert information. A framework comprising four major dimensions was developed for data collection and analysis: LTC system, LTC health labour market, LTC labour migration policies and specific LTC migrant carer policies during the COVID-19 crisis March to May 2020. Material from Austria, Italy, Germany, Poland and Romania was included in the study. Results suggest that undersupply of carers coupled with cash benefits and a culture of family responsibility may result in high inflows of migrant carers, who are channelled in low-level positions or the informal care sector. COVID-19 made the fragile labour market arrangements of migrant carers visible, which may create new health risks for both the individual carer and the population. Two important policy recommendations are emerging: to include LTC migrant carers more systematically in public health and health workforce research and to develop European health workforce governance which connects health system needs, health labour markets and the individual migrant carers.

A new wave of support for populist parties and movements represents a serious threat to universal healthcare coverage in traditional liberal democracies and beyond. This article aims to contribute empirical material on the relationships between healthcare governance, professions and populism. It applies an explanatory cross-country comparative approach and uses mixed methods, including micro-level data garnered from international comparative databases and documents. Denmark, England, Germany, Italy and Turkey have been selected for comparison, reflecting different types of healthcare systems and populist movements. The results reveal variety in the ways populist discourses impact in healthcare. Abundant economic resources, network-based governance, high levels of trust in healthcare providers and doctors participating as insiders in the policy process seem to work as a bulwark against populist attacks on healthcare and professional expertise. On the other hand, poorly resourced NHS systems with doctors as outsiders in the policy process and major NPM reforms together with low to medium levels of trust in healthcare providers may be fertile ground for populist discourse to flourish. Our explanatory data provide hints of correlations, which may inform further studies to investigate causality. Yet the research highlights that healthcare governance and professions matter, and brings into view capacity for counteracting populist attacks on universal healthcare and professional knowledge.

Background Women's participation in medicine and the need for gender equality in healthcare are increasingly recognised, yet little attention is paid to leadership and management positions in large publicly funded academic health centres. This study illustrates such a need, taking the case of four large European centres: Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin (Germany), Karolinska Institutet (Sweden), Medizinische Universität Wien (Austria), and Oxford Academic Health Science Centre (United Kingdom). Case The percentage of female medical students and doctors in all four countries is now well within the 40–60% gender balance zone. Women are less well represented among specialists and remain significantly under-represented among senior doctors and full professors. All four centres have made progress in closing the gender leadership gap on boards and other top-level decision-making bodies, but a gender leadership gap remains relevant. The level of achieved gender balance varies significantly between the centres and largely mirrors country-specific welfare state models, with more equal gender relations in Sweden than in the other countries. Notably, there are also similar trends across countries and centres: gender inequality is stronger within academic enterprises than within hospital enterprises and stronger in middle management than at the top level. These novel findings reveal fissures in the 'glass ceiling' effects at top- level management, while the barriers for women shift to middle-level management and remain strong in academic positions. The uneven shifts in the leadership gap are highly relevant and have policy implications. Conclusion Setting gender balance objectives exclusively for top-level decision-making bodies may not effectively promote a wider goal of gender equality. Academic health centres should pay greater attention to gender equality as an issue of organisational performance and good leadership at all levels of management, with particular attention to academic enterprises and newly created ...

Background: Women's participation in medicine and the need for gender equality in healthcare are increasingly recognised, yet little attention is paid to leadership and management positions in large publicly funded academic health centres. This study illustrates such a need, taking the case of four large European centres: Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin (Germany), Karolinska Institutet (Sweden), Medizinische Universität Wien (Austria), and Oxford Academic Health Science Centre (United Kingdom). Case:The percentage of female medical students and doctors in all four countries is now well within the 40–60% gender balance zone. Women are less well represented among specialists and remain significantly under-represented among senior doctors and full professors. All four centres have made progress in closing the gender leadership gap on boards and other top-level decision-making bodies, but a gender leadership gap remains relevant. The level of achieved gender balance varies significantly between the centres and largely mirrors country-specific welfare state models, with more equal gender relations in Sweden than in the other countries. Notably, there are also similar trends across countries and centres: gender inequality is stronger within academic enterprises than within hospital enterprises and stronger in middle management than at the top level. These novel findings reveal fissures in the 'glass ceiling' effects at top-level management, while the barriers for women shift to middle-level management and remain strong in academic positions. The uneven shifts in the leadership gap are highly relevant and have policy implications. Conclusion: Setting gender balance objectives exclusively for top-level decision-making bodies may not effectively promote a wider goal of gender equality. Academic health centres should pay greater attention to gender equality as an issue of organisational performance and good leadership at all levels of management, with particular attention to academic enterprises and newly created management structures. Developing comprehensive gender-sensitive health workforce monitoring systems and comparing progress across academic health centres in Europe could help to identify the gender leadership gap and utilise health human resources more effectively.

Background Women's participation in medicine and the need for gender equality in healthcare are increasingly recognised, yet little attention is paid to leadership and management positions in large publicly funded academic health centres. This study illustrates such a need, taking the case of four large European centres: Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin (Germany), Karolinska Institutet (Sweden), Medizinische Universität Wien (Austria), and Oxford Academic Health Science Centre (United Kingdom). Case The percentage of female medical students and doctors in all four countries is now well within the 40–60% gender balance zone. Women are less well represented among specialists and remain significantly under-represented among senior doctors and full professors. All four centres have made progress in closing the gender leadership gap on boards and other top-level decision-making bodies, but a gender leadership gap remains relevant. The level of achieved gender balance varies significantly between the centres and largely mirrors country-specific welfare state models, with more equal gender relations in Sweden than in the other countries. Notably, there are also similar trends across countries and centres: gender inequality is stronger within academic enterprises than within hospital enterprises and stronger in middle management than at the top level. These novel findings reveal fissures in the 'glass ceiling' effects at top-level management, while the barriers for women shift to middle-level management and remain strong in academic positions. The uneven shifts in the leadership gap are highly relevant and have policy implications. Conclusion Setting gender balance objectives exclusively for top-level decision-making bodies may not effectively promote a wider goal of gender equality. Academic health centres should pay greater attention to gender equality as an issue of organisational performance and good leadership at all levels of management, with particular attention to academic enterprises and newly created management structures. Developing comprehensive gender-sensitive health workforce monitoring systems and comparing progress across academic health centres in Europe could help to identify the gender leadership gap and utilise health human resources more effectively.