Clinical governance development: learning from the New Zealand experience

Clinical governance in New Zealand: perceptions from registered health professionals in health care delivery compared with social insurance

ObjectiveEffective clinical governance can improve delivery of health outcomes. This exploratory study compared perceptions of clinical governance development held by registered health professionals employed by two different but interrelated health organisations in the broader New Zealand (NZ) health system. Most staff in public sector healthcare service delivery organisations (i.e. District Health Boards (DHBs)) are registered health professionals, whereas these clinical staff represent a small minority (5%) in social insurance organisations (i.e. the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC)). Given these different contexts, comparison of results from three surveys of clinical governance perceptions identified key learnings for the development of clinical governance.MethodsThe Clinical Governance Development Index (CGDI) was administered to registered health professional staff in NZ DHBs and ACC, at different time points. The data were explored, compared and reported.ResultsResponses to survey items completed by NZ DHB staff and registered health professionals employed by ACC were compared. For each administration, there was a similar profile of positive responses across the seven CGDI items. The 2020 ACC survey results for one item were clearly different. This item asked about perceptions of full and active involvement in organisational processes and decision making (i.e. clinical engagement).ConclusionsPerceptions of registered health professionals working in the NZ public sector delivering health services were compared with those held by staff employed by a NZ social insurer predominantly commissioning and influencing care. The results indicated similar levels of clinical governance development. Clinical governance development in the ACC context can benefit from clear communication, building strong supporting structures and greater management-clinical provider partnerships. Clinical governance development drives health outcomes and regular measurement of developmental progress can provide momentum. There is room across the NZ health system to raise awareness and leverage clinical governance to deliver improved health outcomes.What is known about the topic?Little is known about the perceptions held by registered health professionals employed by social insurance organisations. There are no published comparative studies exploring differences in perceptions between registered health professionals across two different organisational contexts, both with a goal of improving health outcomes.What does this paper add?Effective clinical governance drives coordinated, quality systems that promote optimal health outcomes. Social insurance organisations predominantly commission healthcare providers to deliver health outcomes. Although registered health professionals employed by social insurance organisations represent a small total number of staff, their perspective on clinical governance, as reported via survey, indicated there is most to be gained in the development of partnerships between management and clinical providers. This exploratory study fills a gap in the existing clinical governance development literature and evidence base.What are the implications for practitioners?Any health organisation can leverage clinical governance to deliver improved health outcomes. Effective clinical governance interventions are targeted to specific organisational context and culture. For ACC, a clear definition, enhanced management-clinical provider partnerships and strong supporting structures or organisational arrangements can be further developed. The survey results indicated that a focus on management-clinical provider partnerships is a clear priority for ACC clinical governance development. Partnerships based in empowered collaboration require greater clinical engagement, as well as increased capability for aligning with organisational priorities. Effective clinical governance development requires attention to context and culture. It can improve delivery of health outcomes.

What components are important for effective healthcare alliance governance? Findings from a modified Delphi study in New Zealand

Alliance governance is a form of governance developed in industry settings and more recently applied to healthcare. The core idea behind alliance governance is to involve the many stakeholders in the system to collaboratively develop a joint programme that promotes an integrated and whole of systems approach to care. Little is known about the model in healthcare, nor what those involved in an alliance should be focused upon. Using a modified Delphi method, this research presents a set of components that research participants agreed should underpin development of an effective alliance governance arrangement. These characteristics include a systems perspective-a truly shared governance protocol based on a shared vision and a common purpose; performance measurement-collecting and using real-time data that depicts the realities of an end-to-end system to establish better and more achievable goals based on alliance performance; a relational perspective to promote trust, respect and collaboration amongst alliance members, who historically have been competing for contracts and resources; structural changes that enable and promote a shared governance system; and, finally, equity and inclusion to ensure a diverse alliance which promotes diversity of ideas, and involvement of all stakeholders in the decision making process. This research is relevant to policymakers seeking to develop effective alliance-type arrangements as well as to those involved in the practice of alliance governance.

Has the clinical governance development agenda stalled? Perceptions of New Zealand medical professionals in 2012 and 2017

Clinical governance is a key policy and organisational foundation for health care quality improvement. This study sought to measure progress with clinical governance development from the perspective of practicing medical professionals in the New Zealand public health system. A short fixed-response survey, with questions derived from a government policy statement, was sent in 2012 and 2017 to all registered medical professionals in ongoing employment in New Zealand's public health system. Respondents, therefore, worked across New Zealand's 20 District Health Boards (DHBs), which own and manage public hospital and health care services. The survey sought to gauge medical professionals' perspectives around performance on, and implementation of, key clinical governance components. The overall performance in clinical governance development declined or stalled between the two survey periods across eight out of 10 key survey questions. There were improvements on two questions relating to respondent familiarity with clinical governance concepts, and to management support for clinical leadership development, but no change in areas such as having a structure to support clinical governance, or working in partnership with management. Limited government and DHB policy attention to clinical governance may well have contributed to stalled development across the New Zealand health system. If so, this finding has lessons for other countries and health systems in which there has been varying government support for the clinical governance agenda with ramifications around expectations for clinical leadership on, and involvement in, quality improvement.

The theory and practice of integrative health care governance

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to outline the theory and practice of governance for integrated care, using the case of New Zealand’s healthcare alliances.

Design/methodology/approach

This is descriptive analysis.

Findings

Alliance governance provides considerable scope for bringing health professional together to focus on whole system approaches to care design. As such, it facilitates care integration.

Research limitations/implications

This is a descriptive review.

Originality/value

Descriptions of alliance governance in New Zealand and in general are rare in the literature. This paper fills this gap.

Supporting and activating clinical governance development in Ireland: sharing our learning

Purpose

– The purpose of this paper is to present a description of the Irish national clinical governance development initiative and an evaluation of the initiative with the purpose of sharing the learning and proposing actions to activate structures and processes for quality and safety. The Quality and Patient Safety Division of the Health Service Executive established the initiative to counterbalance a possible focus on finances during the economic crisis in Ireland and bring attention to the quality of clinical care.

Design/methodology/approach

– A clinical governance framework for quality in healthcare in Ireland was developed to clearly articulate the fundamentals of clinical governance. The project plan involved three overlapping phases. The first was designing resources for practice; the second testing the implementation of the national resources in practice; and the third phase focused on gathering feedback and learning.

Findings

– Staff responded positively to the clinical governance framework. At a time when there are a lot of demands (measurement and scrutiny) the health services leads and responds well to focused support as they improve the quality and safety of services. Promoting the use of the term “governance for quality and safety” assisted in gaining an understanding of the more traditional term “clinical governance”. The experience and outcome of the initiative informed the identification of 12 key learning points and a series of recommendations

Research limitations/implications

– The initial evaluation was conducted at 24 months so at this stage it is not possible to assess the broader impact of the clinical governance framework beyond the action project hospitals.

Practical implications

– The single most important obligation for any health system is patient safety and improving the quality of care. The easily accessible, practical resources assisted project teams to lead changes in structures and processes within their services. This paper describes the fundamentals of the clinical governance framework which might serve as a guide for more integrative research endeavours on governance for quality and safety.

Originality/value

– Experience was gained in both the development of national guidance and their practical use in targeted action projects activating structures and processes that are a prerequisite to delivering safe quality services.