Jeffrey Braithwaite

CareTrack: Assessing the appropriateness of health care delivery in Australia

Objective: To determine the percentage of health care encounters at which a sample of adult Australians received appropriate care (ie, care in line with evidence‐based or consensus‐based guidelines).

'It's an Interesting Conversation I'm Hearing': The Doctor as Manager

The aim of this article is to outline in discursive-linguistic terms how doctor-managers (or ‘physician-executives’ as they are termed in the USA) manage the incommensurate dimensions of their boundary position between profession and organization. In order to achieve this we undertook a discourse analytical study of both recorded, situated talk and open interview data focusing on one doctor-manager navigating between profession and organization. The doctor-manager at the centre of this study locates himself on the boundary of at least three discourses which, in many respects, are incommensurate. These are the profession-specific discourse of clinical medicine, the resource-efficiency and systematization discourse of management, and an interpersonalizing discourse devoted to hedging and mitigating contradictions. While this multi-vocality in itself is not surprising, data show that the doctor-manager positions himself across these discourses and manages their inherent incommensurabilities before a heterogeneous audience and on occasions even within the one utterance. In this particular case, boundary management is achieved by weaving incommensurable positions together into the social and linguistic dynamics of a single, heteroglossic stream of talk. This highly complex and dialogic strategy enables the doctor-manager to dissimulate the disjunction between his reluctance to impose organizational rules on his medical colleagues and his perception that such rules, in the future (to some extent at least), will be the appropriate means for managing the clinical work, and through that the organization.

Bridges, brokers and boundary spanners in collaborative networks: a systematic review

BackgroundBridges, brokers and boundary spanners facilitate transactions and the flow of information between people or groups who either have no physical or cognitive access to one another, or alternatively, who have no basis on which to trust each other. The health care sector is a context that is rich in isolated clusters, such as silos and professional “tribes,” in need of connectivity. It is a key challenge in health service management to understand, analyse and exploit the role of key agents who have the capacity to connect disparate groupings in larger systems.MethodsThe empirical, peer reviewed, network theory literature on brokerage roles was reviewed for the years 1994 to 2011 following PRISMA guidelines.ResultsThe 24 articles that made up the final literature set were from a wide range of settings and contexts not just healthcare. Methods of data collection, analysis, and the ways in which brokers were identified varied greatly. We found four main themes addressed in the literature: identifying brokers and brokerage opportunities, generation and integration of innovation, knowledge brokerage, and trust. The benefits as well as the costs of brokerage roles were examined.ConclusionsCollaborative networks by definition, seek to bring disparate groups together so that they can work effectively and synergistically together. Brokers can support the controlled transfer of specialised knowledge between groups, increase cooperation by liaising with people from both sides of the gap, and improve efficiency by introducing “good ideas” from one isolated setting into another.There are significant costs to brokerage. Densely linked networks are more efficient at diffusing information to all their members when compared to sparsely linked groups. This means that while a bridge across a structural hole allows information to reach actors that were previously isolated, it is not the most efficient way to transfer information. Brokers who become the holders of, or the gatekeepers to, specialised knowledge or resources can become overwhelmed by the role and so need support in order to function optimally.

Effects of Two Commercial Electronic Prescribing Systems on Prescribing Error Rates in Hospital In-Patients: A Before and After Study

In a before-and-after study, Johanna Westbrook and colleagues evaluate the change in prescribing error rates after the introduction of two commercial electronic prescribing systems in two Australian hospitals.

Towards safer, better healthcare: harnessing the natural properties of complex sociotechnical systems

Objectives: To sustain an argument that harnessing the natural properties of sociotechnical systems is necessary to promote safer, better healthcare. Methods: Triangulated analyses of discrete literature sources, particularly drawing on those from mathematics, sociology, marketing science and psychology. Results: Progress involves the use of natural networks and exploiting features such as their scale-free and small world nature, as well as characteristics of group dynamics like natural appeal (stickiness) and propagation (tipping points). The agenda for change should be set by prioritising problems in natural categories, addressed by groups who self select on the basis of their natural interest in the areas in question, and who set clinical standards and develop tools, the use of which should be monitored by peers. This approach will facilitate the evidence-based practice that most agree is now overdue, but which has not yet been realised by the application of conventional methods. Conclusion: A key to health system transformation may lie under-recognised under our noses, and involves exploiting the naturally-occurring characteristics of complex systems. Current strategies to address healthcare problems are insufficient. Clinicians work best when their expertise is mobilised, and they flourish in groupings of their own interests and preference. Being invited, empowered and nurtured rather than directed, micro-managed and controlled through a hierarchy is preferable.

Health service accreditation as a predictor of clinical and organisational performance: a blinded, random, stratified study

Background Despite the widespread use of accreditation in many countries, and prevailing beliefs that accreditation is associated with variables contributing to clinical care and organisational outcomes, little systematic research has been conducted to examine its validity as a predictor of healthcare performance. Objective To determine whether accreditation performance is associated with self-reported clinical performance and independent ratings of four aspects of organisational performance. Design Independent blinded assessment of these variables in a random, stratified sample of health service organisations. Settings Acute care: large, medium and small health-service organisations in Australia. Study participants Nineteen health service organisations employing 16 448 staff treating 321 289 inpatients and 1 971 087 non-inpatient services annually, representing approximately 5% of the Australian acute care health system. Main measures Correlations of accreditation performance with organisational culture, organisational climate, consumer involvement, leadership and clinical performance. Results Accreditation performance was significantly positively correlated with organisational culture (rho=0.618, p=0.005) and leadership (rho=0.616, p=0.005). There was a trend between accreditation and clinical performance (rho=0.450, p=0.080). Accreditation was unrelated to organisational climate (rho=0.378, p=0.110) and consumer involvement (rho=0.215, p=0.377). Conclusions Accreditation results predict leadership behaviours and cultural characteristics of healthcare organisations but not organisational climate or consumer participation, and a positive trend between accreditation and clinical performance is noted.

Narrative synthesis of health service accreditation literature

Aims To systematically identify and synthesise health service accreditation literature. Methods A systematic identification and narrative synthesis of health service accreditation literature published prior to 2012 were conducted. The search identified 122 empirical studies that examined either the processes or impacts of accreditation programmes. Study components were recorded, including: dates of publication; research settings; levels of study evidence and quality using established rating frameworks; and key results. A content analysis was conducted to determine the frequency of key themes and subthemes examined in the literature and identify knowledge-gaps requiring research attention. Results The majority of studies (n=67) were published since 2006, occurred in the USA (n=60) and focused on acute care (n=79). Two thematic categories, that is, ‘organisational impacts’ and ‘relationship to quality measures’, were addressed 60 or more times in the literature. ‘Financial impacts’, ‘consumer or patient satisfaction’ and ‘survey and surveyor issues’ were each examined fewer than 15 times. The literature is limited in terms of the level of evidence and quality of studies, but highlights potential relationships among accreditation programmes, high quality organisational processes and safe clinical care. Conclusions Due to the limitations of the literature, it is not prudent to make strong claims about the effectiveness of health service accreditation. Nonetheless, several critical issues and knowledge-gaps were identified that may help stimulate and inform discussion among healthcare stakeholders. Ongoing effort is required to build upon the accreditation evidence-base by using high quality experimental study designs to examine the processes, effectiveness and financial value of accreditation programmes and their critical components in different healthcare domains.

An open letter to The BMJ editors on qualitative research

Seventy six senior academics from 11 countries invite The BMJ ’s editors to reconsider their policy of rejecting qualitative research on the grounds of low priority. They challenge the journal to develop a proactive, scholarly, and pluralist approach to research that aligns with its stated mission

A prospective, multi-method, multi-disciplinary, multi-level, collaborative, social-organisational design for researching health sector accreditation [LP0560737]

BackgroundAccreditation has become ubiquitous across the international health care landscape. Award of full accreditation status in health care is viewed, as it is in other sectors, as a valid indicator of high quality organisational performance. However, few studies have empirically demonstrated this assertion. The value of accreditation, therefore, remains uncertain, and this persists as a central legitimacy problem for accreditation providers, policymakers and researchers. The question arises as to how best to research the validity, impact and value of accreditation processes in health care. Most health care organisations participate in some sort of accreditation process and thus it is not possible to study its merits using a randomised controlled strategy. Further, tools and processes for accreditation and organisational performance are multifaceted.Methods/designTo understand the relationship between them a multi-method research approach is required which incorporates both quantitative and qualitative data. The generic nature of accreditation standard development and inspection within different sectors enhances the extent to which the findings of in-depth study of accreditation process in one industry can be generalised to other industries. This paper presents a research design which comprises a prospective, multi-method, multi-level, multi-disciplinary approach to assess the validity, impact and value of accreditation.DiscussionThe accreditation program which assesses over 1,000 health services in Australia is used as an exemplar for testing this design. The paper proposes this design as a framework suitable for application to future international research into accreditation. Our aim is to stimulate debate on the role of accreditation and how to research it.

Unintended consequences of performance measurement in healthcare: 20 salutary lessons from the English National Health Service.

The objective of the study is to review the evidence on the consequences associated with the introduction of national performance measurement systems in the National Health Service (NHS), with the aim of informing the development of similar national performance measurement programmes proposed for Australia. Narrative review of the published evidence on the unintended and adverse consequences of performance measurement systems in the NHS is the data source. We identified 20 different dysfunctional consequences of national performance measurement systems in the NHS in four headings. These are poor measurement (measurement fixation, tunnel vision, myopia, ossification, anachronism and quantification privileging), misplaced incentives and sanctions (complacency, silo‐creation, overcompensation, undercompensation, insensitivity and increased inequality), breach of trust (misrepresentation, gaming, misinterpretation, bullying, erosion of trust and reduced staff morale), and politicisation of performance systems (political grandstanding and creating a diversion). Performance measurement programmes can contribute to systems improvement, delivering benefits to health services and patients, as evidenced by the dramatic reduction in waiting times in the NHS following the incorporation of targets and indicators for waiting times. Nevertheless, experience from the NHS shows that in addition to generating desired improvements, performance measures can induce a range of unintended and dysfunctional consequences. We recommend Australia to heed the lessons of the NHS, and strive to balance effective performance measurement and management against the potential drawbacks and adverse consequences. Any national performance measures need to be piloted and carefully evaluated to assess potential benefits and pitfalls.