1
|
Kleefstra SM, Frederiks BJM, Tingen A, Reulings PGJ. The value of experts by experience in social domain supervision in the Netherlands: results from a 'mystery guests' project. BMC Health Serv Res 2024; 24:187. [PMID: 38336792 PMCID: PMC10858591 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-024-10692-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2023] [Accepted: 02/07/2024] [Indexed: 02/12/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND User involvement and participation in the supervision of the quality of care is an important topic for many healthcare inspectorates. It offers regulators an additional view on quality, increases the legitimacy and accountability of the inspectorate, empowers users and enhancing the public's trust in the inspectorate. To assess the accessibility of the local governmental social domain services the Joint Inspectorate Social Domain in the Netherlands worked together with people with intellectual disabilities performing as 'mystery guests' in an innovative project. This paper describes the findings of the evaluation of this project. METHODS People with intellectual disabilities living at home on their own may need some help with daily activities such as administrative tasks, raising children, household tasks, managing debts or finding work. In the Netherlands they have to arrange this help at their municipality. The goal of this project was to find out how easily people with intellectual disabilities could get help from their municipality. The participants were equal partners with the JISD inspectors from the beginning: in constructing an inspection framework, in acting as mystery guest with a fictive support request, reported back the results by storytelling. RESULTS The evaluation of the project showed that the JISD succeeded in their key aspect of the project: the goal to involve people with intellectual disabilities in a leading role from the beginning until the end. Their perspectives and preferences were the starting point of supervision. Pain points in accessibility became clear straight away and gave important insights for both inspectors as municipality professionals. Municipalities started to improve their services and evaluated the improvements with the clients. Furthermore, the impact on the participants themselves was also huge: they felt being taken seriously, valued and empowered. CONCLUSION Involving people with intellectual disabilities as participants in all phases of supervision processes contributes to more relevant and useful outcomes, creates mutual understanding of perspectives, as affirmed by both municipalities and inspectors, and creates empowerment of the participants. Furthermore, it fits perfectly within the United Nation Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities and the current development of 'value driven regulation'.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Brenda J M Frederiks
- Amsterdam UMC, department Ethics, Law and Medical Humanities, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Adriënne Tingen
- Department of patient care, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Qi M, Ren J. An overview and visual analysis of research on government regulation in healthcare. Front Public Health 2023; 11:1272572. [PMID: 38026398 PMCID: PMC10679357 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1272572] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2023] [Accepted: 10/25/2023] [Indexed: 12/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective During the period of COVID-19, government regulation (GR) played an important role in healthcare. This study examines the current research situation of GR in healthcare, discusses the research hotspots, the most productive authors and countries, and the most common journals, and analyzes the changes in GR in healthcare before and after the outbreak of COVID-19. Methods This study followed PRISMA guidelines to collect literature on GR in healthcare. And the VOSviewer software was used to perform a quantitative analysis of these documents to obtain a visual map, including year, country, institution, journal, author, and research topic. Results A total of 1,830 papers that involved 976 academic journals, 3,178 institutions, and 133 countries were identified from 1985 to 2023. The United States was the country with the highest production (n = 613), followed by the United Kingdom (n = 289). The institution with the largest number of publications was the University of London in the UK (n = 103); In the author collaboration network, the biggest cluster is Bomhoff M, Bouwman R, Friele R, et al. The top five journals in terms of the number of articles were BMC Health Services Research (n = 70), Plos One (n = 35), Health Policy (n = 33), Social Science & Medicine (n = 29), Health Policy and Planning (n = 29), and Frontiers in Public Health (n = 27). The existing literature mainly focused on "health policy," "public health," "China," "mental health," "India," "qualitative research," "legislation," and "governance," et al. Since 2020, research on "COVID-19" has also become a priority in the domain of healthcare. Conclusion This study reveals the overall performance of the literature on GR published in healthcare. Healthcare needs GR, especially in response to the COVID-19 epidemic, which has played an irreplaceable role. The outbreak of COVID-19 not only tested the health systems of various countries, but also changed GR in healthcare. With the end of COVID-19, whether these changes will end remains to be further studied.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jianming Ren
- School of Public Administration, Beihang University, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Aase I, Ree E, Johannessen T, Strømme T, Ullebust B, Holen-Rabbersvik E, Thomsen LH, Schibevaag L, van de Bovenkamp H, Wiig S. Talking about quality: how 'quality' is conceptualized in nursing homes and homecare. BMC Health Serv Res 2021; 21:104. [PMID: 33516206 PMCID: PMC7847031 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-021-06104-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2019] [Accepted: 01/20/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The delivery of high-quality service in nursing homes and homecare requires collaboration and shared understanding among managers, employees, users and policy makers from across the healthcare system. However, conceptualizing healthcare professionals' perception of quality beyond hospital settings (e.g., its perspectives, defining attributes, quality dimensions, contextual factors, dilemmas) has rarely been done. This study therefore explores the meaning of "quality" among healthcare managers and staff in nursing homes and homecare. METHODS The study applies a cross-sectional qualitative design with focus groups and individual interviews, to capture both depth and breadth of conceptualization of quality from healthcare professionals in nursing homes and homecare. We draw our data from 65 managers and staff in nursing homes and homecare services in Norway and the Netherlands. The participants worked as managers (n = 40), registered nurses (RNs) or assistant nurses (n = 25). RESULTS The analysis identified the two categories and four sub-categories: "Professional issues: more than firefighting" (subcategories "professional pride" and "competence") and "patient-centered approach: more than covering basic needs" (subcategories "dignity" and "continuity"). Quality in nursing homes and homecare is conceptualized as an ongoing process based on having the "right competence," good cooperation across professional groups, and patient-centered care, in line with professional pride and dignity for the patients. CONCLUSION Based on the understanding of quality among the healthcare professionals in our study, quality should encompass the softer dimensions of professional pride and competence, as well as a patient-centered approach to care. These dimensions should be factors in improvement activities and in daily practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ingunn Aase
- SHARE- Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway.
| | - Eline Ree
- SHARE- Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway
| | - Terese Johannessen
- SHARE- Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway
| | - Torunn Strømme
- SHARE- Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway
| | | | - Elisabeth Holen-Rabbersvik
- SHARE- Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway
- Department of Health and Nursing Sciences, University of Agder, Kristiansand Municipality, Kristiansand, Norway
| | | | - Lene Schibevaag
- SHARE- Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway
| | - Hester van de Bovenkamp
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Siri Wiig
- SHARE- Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Wiig S, Rutz S, Boyd A, Churruca K, Kleefstra S, Haraldseid-Driftland C, Braithwaite J, O'Hara J, van de Bovenkamp H. What methods are used to promote patient and family involvement in healthcare regulation? A multiple case study across four countries. BMC Health Serv Res 2020; 20:616. [PMID: 32631343 PMCID: PMC7336629 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-020-05471-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2019] [Accepted: 06/25/2020] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background In the regulation of healthcare, the subject of patient and family involvement figures increasingly prominently on the agenda. However, the literature on involving patients and families in regulation is still in its infancy. A systematic analysis of how patient and family involvement in regulation is accomplished across different health systems is lacking. We provide such an overview by mapping and classifying methods of patient and family involvement in regulatory practice in four countries; Norway, England, the Netherlands, and Australia. We thus provide a knowledge base that enables discussions about possible types of involvement, and advantages and difficulties of involvement encountered in practice. Methods The research design was a multiple case study of patient and family involvement in regulation in four countries. The authors collected 1) academic literature if available and 2) documents of regulators that describe user involvement. Based on the data collected, the authors from each country completed a pre-agreed template to describe the involvement methods. The following information was extracted and included where available: 1) Method of involvement, 2) Type of regulatory activity, 3) Purpose of involvement, 4) Who is involved and 5) Lessons learnt. Results Our mapping of involvement strategies showed a range of methods being used in regulation, which we classified into four categories: individual proactive, individual reactive, collective proactive, and collective reactive methods. Reported advantages included: increased quality of regulation, increased legitimacy, perceived justice for those affected, and empowerment. Difficulties were also reported concerning: how to incorporate the input of users in decisions, the fact that not all users want to be involved, time and costs required, organizational procedures standing in the way of involvement, and dealing with emotions. Conclusions Our mapping of user involvement strategies establishes a broad variety of ways to involve patients and families. The four categories can serve as inspiration to regulators in healthcare. The paper shows that stimulating involvement in regulation is a challenging and complex task. The fact that regulators are experimenting with different methods can be viewed positively in this regard.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Siri Wiig
- SHARE-Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway.
| | - Suzanne Rutz
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.,Dutch Health and Youth Care Inspectorate, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Alan Boyd
- Alliance Manchester Business, University of Manchester, Manchester, England
| | - Kate Churruca
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
| | - Sophia Kleefstra
- Dutch Health and Youth Care Inspectorate, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Cecilie Haraldseid-Driftland
- SHARE-Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway
| | - Jeffrey Braithwaite
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
| | - Jane O'Hara
- School of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, England
| | - Hester van de Bovenkamp
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
van Dael J, Reader TW, Gillespie A, Neves AL, Darzi A, Mayer EK. Learning from complaints in healthcare: a realist review of academic literature, policy evidence and front-line insights. BMJ Qual Saf 2020; 29:684-695. [PMID: 32019824 PMCID: PMC7398301 DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009704] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2019] [Revised: 12/24/2019] [Accepted: 12/26/2019] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
Introduction A global rise in patient complaints has been accompanied by growing research to effectively analyse complaints for safer, more patient-centric care. Most patients and families complain to improve the quality of healthcare, yet progress has been complicated by a system primarily designed for case-by-case complaint handling. Aim To understand how to effectively integrate patient-centric complaint handling with quality monitoring and improvement. Method Literature screening and patient codesign shaped the review’s aim in the first stage of this three-stage review. Ten sources were searched including academic databases and policy archives. In the second stage, 13 front-line experts were interviewed to develop initial practice-based programme theory. In the third stage, evidence identified in the first stage was appraised based on rigour and relevance, and selected to refine programme theory focusing on what works, why and under what circumstances. Results A total of 74 academic and 10 policy sources were included. The review identified 12 mechanisms to achieve: patient-centric complaint handling and system-wide quality improvement. The complaint handling pathway includes (1) access of information; (2) collaboration with support and advocacy services; (3) staff attitude and signposting; (4) bespoke responding; and (5) public accountability. The improvement pathway includes (6) a reliable coding taxonomy; (7) standardised training and guidelines; (8) a centralised informatics system; (9) appropriate data sampling; (10) mixed-methods spotlight analysis; (11) board priorities and leadership; and (12) just culture. Discussion If healthcare settings are better supported to report, analyse and use complaints data in a standardised manner, complaints could impact on care quality in important ways. This review has established a range of evidence-based, short-term recommendations to achieve this.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jackie van Dael
- Centre for Health Policy, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Tom W Reader
- Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| | - Alex Gillespie
- Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| | - Ana Luisa Neves
- Centre for Health Policy, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Ara Darzi
- Centre for Health Policy, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Erik K Mayer
- Centre for Health Policy, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Travaglia J. Disturbing the Doxa of Patient Safety Comment on "False Dawns and New Horizons in Patient Safety Research and Practice". Int J Health Policy Manag 2018; 7:867-869. [PMID: 30316235 PMCID: PMC6186486 DOI: 10.15171/ijhpm.2018.26] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2017] [Accepted: 03/13/2018] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
In a recent edition of this journal, Mannion and Braithwaite provide a succinct analysis of the emergence, and ultimately limited impact, of what they term the current ‘Safety I’ movement in healthcare. They describe the arc of this field from denial, through engagement via mechanisms and approaches imported from other industries, to the current situation where, despite ‘best efforts,’ error rates remain stubbornly recalcitrant. In examining the failure of system-wide efforts to produce sustained reductions in errors and adverse events, that article exposes the doxa, or what Bourdieu calls ‘the taken for granted’ which is central to this latest wave of patient safety movement. In this commentary, I would like to take focus on two key elements of Mannion and Braithwaite’s argument: that harm is caused by misguided but otherwise well-intentioned actions and the ‘embracing’ of patient safety. I then conclude by briefly considering the implications of these for Safety II, particularly as envisaged by the authors as an evolutionary, and therefore linear progression, from Safety I.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joanne Travaglia
- Centre for Health Services Management, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Bouwman R, de Graaff B, de Beurs D, van de Bovenkamp H, Leistikow I, Friele R. Involving Patients and Families in the Analysis of Suicides, Suicide Attempts, and Other Sentinel Events in Mental Healthcare: A Qualitative Study in The Netherlands. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2018; 15:E1104. [PMID: 29843464 PMCID: PMC6025554 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15061104] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2018] [Revised: 05/16/2018] [Accepted: 05/24/2018] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Involving patients and families in mental healthcare is becoming more commonplace, but little is known about how they are involved in the aftermath of serious adverse events related to quality of care (sentinel events, including suicides). This study explores the role patients and families have in formal processes after sentinel events in Dutch mental healthcare. We analyzed the existing policies of 15 healthcare organizations and spoke with 35 stakeholders including patients, families, their counselors, the national regulator, and professionals. Respondents argue that involving patients and families is valuable to help deal with the event emotionally, provide additional information, and prevent escalation. Results indicate that involving patients and families is only described in sentinel event policies to a limited extent. In practice, involvement consists mostly of providing aftercare and sharing information about the event by providers. Complexities such as privacy concerns and involuntary admissions are said to hinder involvement. Respondents also emphasize that involvement should not be obligatory and stress the need for patients and families to be involved throughout the process of treatment. There is no one-size-fits-all strategy for involving patients and families after sentinel events. The first step seems to be early involvement during treatment process itself.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Renée Bouwman
- NIVEL, P.O. Box 1568, 3500 BN Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Bert de Graaff
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | | - Hester van de Bovenkamp
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Ian Leistikow
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
- Dutch Healthcare and Youth Inspectorate, 3521 AZ Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Roland Friele
- NIVEL, P.O. Box 1568, 3500 BN Utrecht, The Netherlands.
- TRANZO (Scientific Centre for Care and Welfare), Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Tilburg University, 5037 DB Tilburg, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|