'Look up from the waiting list and see the bigger picture': a qualitative analysis of clinical specialist physiotherapist perspectives on low back pain care in Ireland

INTRODUCTION

Healthcare systems are struggling to deliver high-quality low back pain (LBP) care. In 2012 specialist physiotherapist-led musculoskeletal (MSK) triage services were introduced in Irish hospitals to expedite patient care and alleviate pressure on elective orthopaedic/ rheumatology consultant clinics. Specialist physiotherapists have expertise to inform health service improvement and reform, but their perspectives of LBP healthcare delivery have received scant attention.

OBJECTIVES

To explore specialist physiotherapists' perspectives on LBP care in Ireland, the barriers and facilitators to quality LBP care and the development of MSK interface services in primary care settings.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional observational study using an anonymous electronic survey with thematic framework analysis of response data from open-ended questions.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty-four clinical specialist physiotherapists in Irish MSK triage services.

RESULTS

Thematic analysis resulted in six overarching themes, grouped into two categories. One category pertained to LBP healthcare in Ireland with the following three themes: 1) Inadequate health services for patients with LBP; 2) Need for defined LBP clinical pathways; 3) Need for a multisectoral approach to spine health. Themes in the second category, pertaining to the development of community-based MSK interface services, were: 4) Concern regarding isolation from secondary care services; 5) Unrealistic expectations of MSK triage; 6) Improved communication and collaboration with primary care services.

CONCLUSION

Specialist physiotherapists have concerns regarding LBP health services and persistence of a biomedical, secondary care-led approach. They advocate for investment in primary care multi-disciplinary teams, enhanced integration across primary and secondary care, development of a national clinical pathway and a multisectoral approach. CONTRIBUTION OF PAPER.

Effect of clinical engagement on value, standardisation, decision-making and savings in NHS product procurement

BACKGROUND

UK healthcare expenditure is now £193.8 billion a year. The procurement function is seen as central to driving efficiencies within the NHS. This comes with an increasing onus on clinicians, including nurses and allied health professionals, to accept procurement outcomes to realise efficiency savings, with or without prior engagement.

AIMS

This empirical study seeks to examine whether clinical engagement in the procurement of healthcare products in the NHS is necessary to achieve value, savings and standardisation; it will thereby address a gap in the research.

METHODS

A multi-method qualitative case study design was used, which included a survey and eight semi-structured interviews.

FINDINGS

Results identified three factors that influence the achievement of value, savings and standardisation around clinical engagement: micro-level processes for clinical engagement; clinical stakeholders and clinical procurement professionals as experts at the centre of procurement activity; and clinical value in standardisation. A shift away from standardisation to resilience was identified, resulting from current market supply pressures.

CONCLUSION

This research brings empirically derived findings to address gaps in research, supports the benefit of clinical engagement through specific forums for collaboration at a trust level and provides a clinical/expert impact/preference matrix as a resource for procurement professionals to facilitate clinical engagement.

Physician managers in Hong Kong public hospitals

PURPOSE

Examining the self-identification of physician managers with their manager and clinician roles, and its impact on the state and professional powers in healthcare governance.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

With purposive sampling, a total of 15 frontline clinical department managers (mainly principal consultants) and directorial managers (mainly Hospital Chief Executives) were recruited to elite interviews. The themes for data collection and analysis were based on a systematic scoping review of previous empirical studies.

FINDINGS

Physician managers maintained respective jurisdictions in policymaking and clinical governance, as well as their primary self-identification as rationalizers or protectors of medicine, according to their managerial roles at a directorial or departmental level. However, a two-way hybridization of physician managers allowed the exchange of clinical and managerial authority, resulting in cooperation alongside struggles among medical elites; while some frontline managers were exposed to managerial values with the awareness of budget and organizational administration, some directorial managers remained aligned to a traditional mode of professional communication, such as persuasion through informal personal networks and by using clinician language and maintaining symbolic contact with the clinical field.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

This study identifies the inconsistency in physician managers' identity work, as well as its patterns. It goes beyond a dichotomized framework of professionalism versus managerialism or an arbitrarily blurred identity.