HCFMUSP: Resiliência como Resposta à Pandemia de COVID-19

ABSTRACT The teaching case describes a set of emergency actions taken by HCFMUSP to manage the needs brought by the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil. The case objective considers the issues related to the impact of the pandemic mostly in healthcare operations, emphasizing how to: (a) adapt health system governance in response to a crisis (crisis management); (b) manage the health system capacity, which traditionally is not so resilient; (c) deal with a new disease (knowledge management). Thus, it should allow gathering elements for the management of future crises.

HCFMUSP: Resilience in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic

ABSTRACT The teaching case describes a set of emergency actions taken by HCFMUSP to manage the needs brought by the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil. The case objective considers the issues related to the impact of the pandemic mostly in healthcare operations, emphasizing how to: (a) adapt health system governance in response to a crisis (crisis management); (b) manage the health system capacity, which traditionally is not so resilient; (c) deal with a new disease (knowledge management). Thus, it should allow gathering elements for the management of future crises.

Balancing hospital governance: A systematic review of 15 years of empirical research

It is crucial that we gain a deeper understanding of the features of organizational governance and how they contribute to hospital performance. Health care governance research has traditionally had a strong focus on the size and composition (i.e., the attributes) of the governing bodies, but less attention has been given to the dynamics, processes, and roles. Furthermore, evidence regarding the interconnection between the board and the executive management is lacking. This systematic literature review is thus intended to give a detailed summary of the attributes, the dynamics, and the processes, as well as the roles of governing bodies, by synthesizing the findings of published empirical studies. The framework of Kane et al. (2009) was used to position the results, taking into account external constraints and outputs/performance. Sixty-three studies were included in the systematic review. The majority of these studies deal with attributes (n = 34) and roles (n = 27); the smallest number of studies (n = 11) focus on dynamics and processes. There is a lack of consistency in the research findings on attributes and there is too little research into the dynamics and processes of hospital governance. However, it has been shown that clinical participation on the hospital board and the focus on quality in hospital board roles can have a beneficial effect. The studies do not provide sufficient direction on what best practice for governing hospitals should be. For this reason, we here provide a useful framework for understanding the aspects of governance and their impact on performance in hospitals and compare these with general corporate governance literature. Therefrom we propose avenues for further research.

Governance arrangements for health systems in low-income countries: an overview of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Governance arrangements include changes in rules or processes that determine authority and accountability for health policies, organisations, commercial products and health professionals, as well as the involvement of stakeholders in decision-making. Changes in governance arrangements can affect health and related goals in numerous ways, generally through changes in authority, accountability, openness, participation and coherence. A broad overview of the findings of systematic reviews can help policymakers, their technical support staff and other stakeholders to identify strategies for addressing problems and improving the governance of their health systems.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of the available evidence from up-to-date systematic reviews about the effects of governance arrangements for health systems in low-income countries. Secondary objectives include identifying needs and priorities for future evaluations and systematic reviews on governance arrangements and informing refinements of the framework for governance arrangements outlined in the overview.

METHODS

We searched Health Systems Evidence in November 2010 and PDQ Evidence up to 17 December 2016 for systematic reviews. We did not apply any date, language or publication status limitations in the searches. We included well-conducted systematic reviews of studies that assessed the effects of governance arrangements on patient outcomes (health and health behaviours), the quality or utilisation of healthcare services, resource use (health expenditures, healthcare provider costs, out-of-pocket payments, cost-effectiveness), healthcare provider outcomes (such as sick leave), or social outcomes (such as poverty, employment) and that were published after April 2005. We excluded reviews with limitations that were important enough to compromise the reliability of the findings of the review. Two overview authors independently screened reviews, extracted data and assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. We prepared SUPPORT Summaries for eligible reviews, including key messages, 'Summary of findings' tables (using GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence) and assessments of the relevance of findings to low-income countries.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 7272 systematic reviews and included 21 of them in this overview (19 primary reviews and 2 supplementary reviews). We focus here on the results of the 19 primary reviews, one of which had important methodological limitations. The other 18 were reliable (with only minor limitations).We grouped the governance arrangements addressed in the reviews into five categories: authority and accountability for health policies (three reviews); authority and accountability for organisations (two reviews); authority and accountability for commercial products (three reviews); authority and accountability for health professionals (seven reviews); and stakeholder involvement (four reviews).Overall, we found desirable effects for the following interventions on at least one outcome, with moderate- or high-certainty evidence and no moderate- or high-certainty evidence of undesirable effects. Decision-making about what is covered by health insurance- Placing restrictions on the medicines reimbursed by health insurance systems probably decreases the use of and spending on these medicines (moderate-certainty evidence). Stakeholder participation in policy and organisational decisions- Participatory learning and action groups for women probably improve newborn survival (moderate-certainty evidence).- Consumer involvement in preparing patient information probably improves the quality of the information and patient knowledge (moderate-certainty evidence). Disclosing performance information to patients and the public- Disclosing performance data on hospital quality to the public probably encourages hospitals to implement quality improvement activities (moderate-certainty evidence).- Disclosing performance data on individual healthcare providers to the public probably leads people to select providers that have better quality ratings (moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Investigators have evaluated a wide range of governance arrangements that are relevant for low-income countries using sound systematic review methods. These strategies have been targeted at different levels in health systems, and studies have assessed a range of outcomes. Moderate-certainty evidence shows desirable effects (with no undesirable effects) for some interventions. However, there are important gaps in the availability of systematic reviews and primary studies for the all of the main categories of governance arrangements.

Hospital ownership, decisions on supervisory board characteristics, and financial performance

BACKGROUND

Dynamic and complex transformations in the hospital market increase the relevance of good corporate governance. However, hospital performance and the characteristics of supervisory boards differ depending on ownership. The question therefore arises whether hospital owners can influence performance by addressing supervisory board characteristics.

PURPOSE

The objective of this study is to explain differences in the financial performance of hospitals with regard to ownership by studying the size and composition of supervisory boards.

METHODOLOGY

The AMADEUS database was used to collect information on hospital financial performance in 2009 and 2010. Business and quality reports, hospital websites, and data from health insurer were used to obtain information on hospital and board characteristics. The resulting sample consisted of 175 German hospital corporations. We utilized ANOVA and regression analysis to test a mediation hypothesis that investigated whether decisions regarding board size and composition were associated with financial performance and could explain performance differences.

FINDINGS

Financial performance and board size and composition depend on ownership. An increase in board size and greater politician participation were negatively associated with all five tested measures of financial performance. Furthermore, an increase in physician participation was positively associated with one dimension of financial performance, whereas one negative relationship was identified for nurse and economist participation. For clerics, no associations were found.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Decisions concerning board size and composition are important as they relate to hospital financial performance. We contribute to existing research by showing that, in addition to board size and physician participation, the participation of other professionals can also influence financial performance.

Corporate governance in Czech hospitals after the transformation

BACKGROUND

This contribution is a response to the current issue of corporate governance in hospitals in the Czech Republic, which draw a significant portion of funds from public health insurance. This not only has a significant impact on the economic efficiency of hospitals, but ultimately affects the whole system of healthcare provision in the Czech Republic. Therefore, the effectiveness of the corporate governance of hospitals might affect the fiscal stability of the health system and, indirectly, health policy for the whole country.

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this paper is to evaluate the success of the transformation in connection with the performance of corporate governance in hospitals in the Czech Republic. Specifically, there was an examination of the management differences in various types of hospitals, which differed in their ownership structure and legal form.

METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

A sample of 100 hospitals was investigated in 2009, i.e., immediately after the transformation had been completed, and then three years later in 2012. With regard to the different public support of individual hospitals, the operating subsidies were removed from the economic results of the corporations in the sample. The adjusted economic results were first of all examined in relationship to the type of hospital (according to owner and legal form), and then in relation to its size, the size of the supervisory board and the education level of the senior hospital manager. A multiple median regression was used for the evaluation.

FINDINGS

One of the basic findings was the fact that the hospital's legal form had no influence on economic results. Successful management in the form of adjusted economic results is only associated with the private type of facility ownership. From the perspective of our concept of corporate governance other factors were under observation: the size of the hospital, the size of the supervisory board and the medical qualifications of the senior manager had no statistically verifiable influence on the efficiency of the hospital management, though we did record certain developments as a result of the transformation process. The economic results that were reported were significantly distorted by the operating subsidies from the founder.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

The results can be used immediately on several practical levels: on the macro level as part of the state's formulation of health policy, particularly in the optimization of the structure of healthcare providers, as well as for the completion of reforms in legal forms and hospital founders, and on the micro level as part of the effective administration and governance of hospitals through corporate governance regardless of the form of ownership.