Dataset Information

Priorities of Hybrid Clinician-Managers: A Qualitative Study of How Managers Balance Clinical Quality Among Competing Responsibilities.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Oversight of clinical quality is only one of physical therapy managers' multiple responsibilities. With the move to value-based care, organizations need sound management to navigate this evolving reimbursement landscape. Previous research has not explored how competing priorities affect physical therapy managers' oversight of clinical quality. The purpose of this study was to create a preliminary model of the competing priorities, motivations, and responsibilities of managers while overseeing clinical quality.

Methods

This qualitative study used the Rapid Qualitative Inquiry method. A purposive sample of 40 physical therapy managers and corporate leaders was recruited. A research team performed semi-structured interviews and observations in outpatient practices. The team used a grounded theory-based immersion/crystallization analysis approach. Identified themes delineated the competing priorities and workflows these managers use in their administrative duties.

Results

Six primary themes were identified that illustrate how managers: (1) balance managerial and professional priorities; (2) are susceptible to stakeholder influences; (3) experience internal conflict; (4) struggle to measure and define quality objectively; (5) are influenced by the culture and structure of their respective organizations; and (6) have professional needs apart from the needs of their clinics.

Conclusion

Generally, managers' focus on clinical quality is notably less comprehensive than their focus on clinical operations. Additionally, the complex role of hybrid clinician-manager leaves limited time beyond direct patient care for administrative duties. Managers in organizations that hold them accountable to quality-based metrics have more systematic clinical quality oversight processes.

Impact

This study gives physical therapy organizations a framework of factors that can be influenced to better facilitate managers' effective oversight of clinical quality. Organizations offering support for those managerial responsibilities will be well positioned to thrive in the new fee-for-value care structure.

SUBMITTER: Hoekstra CJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8152923 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Patients with severe mental illness may be subjected to Community Treatment Orders (CTOs) in order to secure that the patients adhere to treatment. Few studies have investigated the use of CTOs within an Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) setting, and little is known about how the tension between the patients' autonomy and the clinicians' responsibility to act in the patients' best interest are resolved in practice. The aim of this study was to explore the service providers' experiences with CTOs within an ACT setting. METHODS:The study was based on reviews of case files of 15 patients, eight individual qualitative in depth interviews and four focus group interviews with service providers involved in ACT and decisions related to CTOs. A modified grounded theory approach was used to analyze the data. RESULTS:The main theme 'responsibility with conflicting priorities' emerged from data analysis (case file reviews, individual interviews and focus group interviews). The balance between coercive approaches and the emphasis on promoting patient autonomy was seen as problematic. The participants saw few alternatives to CTOs as long-term measures to secure ongoing treatment for some of the patients. However, participants perceived the ACT model's comprehensive scope as an opportunity to build rapport with patients and thereby better meet their needs. The team approach, the ACT providers' commitment to establish supportive relationships and the frequent meetings with patients in their home environment were highlighted. The ACT approach gave them insight into patients' everyday lives and, in some cases a greater sense of security when considering whether to take patients off CTOs. CONCLUSIONS:Many of the participants viewed CTOs as helpful in securing long-term treatment for patients. CTO decision-making was described as challenging and complex and presented the providers with many dilemmas. The ACT approach was considered as helpful in that it afforded comprehensive, patient-centered support and opportunities to build rapport.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite ample clinical evidence that gaining excess weight in pregnancy results in negative health outcomes for women and infants, more than half of women in Western industrialized nations gain in excess of national guidelines. The influence of socio-demographic factors and weight gain is well-established but not causal; the influence of psychological factors may explain some of this variation. METHODS:This is the qualitative portion of an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study designed to identify predictive psychological factors of excess gestational weight gain (QUAN) and then explain the relevance of those factors (qual). For this portion of the study, we used a qualitative descriptive approach to elicit 39 pregnant women's perspectives of gestational weight gain, specifically inquiring about factors determined as relevant to excess gestational weight gain by our previous predictive study. Women were interviewed in the latter half of their third trimester. Data were analyzed using a combination of unconstrained deductive content analysis to describe the findings relevant to the predictive factors and a staged inductive content analytic approach to examine the data without a focus on the predictive factors. RESULTS:Very few participants consistently made deliberate choices relevant to weight gain; most behaviour relevant to weight gain happened with in-the-moment decisions. These in-the-moment decisions were influenced by priorities, hunger, a consideration of the consequence of the decision, and accommodation of pregnancy-related discomfort. They were informed by the foundational information a woman had available to her, including previous experience and interactions with health care providers. The foundational information women used to make these decisions was often incomplete. While women were aware of the guidelines related to gestational weight gain, they consistently mis-applied them due to incorrect understanding of their own BMI. Only one woman was aware that weight gain was linked to maternal and infant health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS:There is an important role for prenatal providers to provide the foundational information to positively influence in-the-moment decisions. Understanding how weight gain guidelines apply to one's own pre-pregnancy BMI and comprehending the well-established link between gestational weight gain and health outcomes may help women prioritize healthy weight gain amongst many competing factors.

Project description:BackgroundSince 2013, the ZAZIC consortium supported the Zimbabwe Ministry of Health and Child Care (MOHCC) to implement a high quality, integrated voluntary medical male circumcision (VMMC) program in 13 districts. With the aim of significantly lowering global HIV rates, prevention programs like VMMC make every effort to achieve ambitious targets at an increasingly reduced cost. This has the potential to threaten VMMC program quality. Two measures of program quality are follow-up and adverse event (AE) rates. To inform further VMMC program improvement, ZAZIC conducted a quality assurance (QA) activity to assess if pressure to do more with less influenced program quality.MethodsKey informant interviews (KIIs) were conducted at 9 sites with 7 site-based VMMC program officers and 9 ZAZIC roving team members. Confidentiality was ensured to encourage candid conversation on adherence to VMMC standards, methods to increase productivity, challenges to target achievement, and suggestions for program modification. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed using Atlas.ti 6.ResultsVMMC teams work long hours in diverse community settings to reach ambitious targets. Rotating, large teams of trained VMMC providers ensures meeting demand. Service providers prioritize VMMC safety procedures and implement additional QA measures to prevent AEs among all clients, especially minors. However, KIs noted three areas where pressure for increased numbers of clients diminished adherence to VMMC safety standards. For pre- and post-operative counselling, MC teams may combine individual and group sessions to reach more people, potentially reducing client understanding of critical wound care instructions. Second, key infection control practices may be compromised (handwashing, scrubbing techniques, and preoperative client preparation) to speed MC procedures. Lastly, pressure for client numbers may reduce prioritization of patient follow-up, while client-perceived stigma may reduce care-seeking. Although AEs appear well managed, delays in AE identification and lack of consistent AE reporting compromise program quality.ConclusionIn pursuit of ambitious targets, healthcare workers may compromise quality of MC services. Although risk to patients may appear minimal, careful consideration of the realities and risks of ambitious target setting by donors, ministries, and implementing partners could help to ensure that client safety and program quality is consistently prioritized over productivity.

Project description:A new regulatory framework to support local quality and safety efforts in hospitals was introduced to the Norwegian healthcare system in 2017. This study aimed to investigate hospital managers' perspectives on implementation efforts and the resulting work practices, to understand if, and how, the new Quality Improvement Regulation influenced quality and safety improvement activities.DesignThis article reports one study level (the perspectives of hospital managers), as part of a multilevel case study. Data were collected by interviews and analysed according to qualitative content analysis.SettingThree hospitals retrieved from two regional health trusts in Norway.Participants20 hospital managers or quality advisers selected from different levels of hospital organisations.ResultsFour themes were identified in response to the study aim: (1) adaptive capacity in hospital management and practice, (2) implementation efforts and challenges with quality improvement, (3) systemic changes and (4) the potential to learn. Recent structural and cultural changes to, and development of, quality improvement systems in hospitals were discovered (3). Participants however, revealed no change in their practice solely due to the new Quality Improvement Regulation (2). Findings indicated that hospital managers are legally responsible for quality improvement implementation and participants described several benefits with the new Quality Improvement Regulation (2). This related to adaptation and flexibility to local context, and clinical autonomy as an inevitable element in hospital practice (1). Trust and a safe work environment were described as key factors to achieve adverse event reporting and support learning processes (4).ConclusionsThis study suggests that a lack of time, competence and/or motivation, impacted hospitals' implementation of quality improvement efforts. Hospital managers' autonomy and adaptive capacity to tailor quality improvement efforts were key for the new Quality Improvement Regulation to have any relevant impact on hospital practice and for it to influence quality and safety improvement activities.

Project description:Background and aimsPatient-centered care (PCC) benefits patients, health-care providers, and health-care systems by providing delivery of care that addresses patient values and needs while improving provider experiences, and by decreasing health-care expenditure. To improve PCC, health-care systems need to measure it. Recently, we developed a PCC framework that is evidence based and patient informed. The purpose of this study was to gather the perspective of clinician-scientists and quality improvement experts regarding the PCC domains included in the framework. Their perspectives were used to refine these domains, which ultimately will inform the development of PCC quality indicators.MethodsParticipants were recruited via expert and snowball sampling. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinician-scientists and quality improvement experts from Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom from October 2017 to January 2018. With the use of an interview guide developed using the PCC framework, interviews were audio recorded and transcribed for a thematic analysis using NVivo qualitative data analysis software. Inductive thematic analysis was used to identify themes and subthemes.ResultsSixteen semi-structured interviews were conducted, which included four clinician-scientists and 12 quality improvement experts. Twelve of the participants were from Canada, three from the United Kingdom, and one from the United States. From the thematic analysis, three major themes were identified: (a) measurability of PCC, (b) practical considerations for implementing measurement, and (c) policy and practice implications. Participants discussed barriers and recommendations to improve and increase the clarity of the PCC domains in health system reporting, resulting in several future directions to refine and target specific PCC domains.ConclusionClinician-scientists and quality improvement experts provided key recommendations for the measurement of PCC. The perspectives of key stakeholders in PCC measurement will inform strategies for the implementation and uptake of patient-centered quality indicators in health-care systems. The views of these key experts can lay the foundation for the development of standardized measures of PCC, to ensure monitoring and improvement of PCC.

Project description:Rationale & Objective:Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is a home-based kidney replacement therapy used by a growing number of patients with kidney failure. This qualitative study explores the impact of remote management technologies on PD treatment priorities of patients, their care partners, and clinicians. Study Design:Qualitative study, designed and conducted in collaboration with a stakeholder panel that included patients, patient advocates, care partners, and health care professionals. Setting & Participants:13 health care providers, 13 patients, and 4 care partners with at least 3 months experience with PD were recruited from the United States and United Kingdom through postings in PD clinics, websites, and social media. Methodology:Semi-structured telephone interviews with a purposive sample of participants. Analytical Approach:Inductive thematic development adapted from a grounded theory approach through analysis of interview transcripts by 3 independent coders. Results:4 main themes about PD treatments emerged that enabled evaluation of remote management: (1) impact of PD on everyday life, (2) simplifying treatment processes, (3) awareness and visibility of at-home treatments, and (4) support for managing treatments. The relative importance of these themes differed between patients/care partners and health care providers and by use of remote management cyclers. Limitations:Remote management is new to PD, mirrored in the limited penetration of use in the study sample, suggestive of findings reflecting early adoption. Conclusions:Participants welcomed technological advances such as remote management for PD, although priorities differed by stakeholder group. Remote management could potentially influence health care provider decisions about patient suitability for PD, while patients/care partners prioritized pre-emptive and early treatment adjustments. Currently, decisions about access to remote management are outside the control of patients and families, but this may change with more widespread use.

Project description:IMPORTANCE:While the number of prescribing clinicians (physicians and nurse practitioners) who provide any nursing home care remained stable over the past decade, the number of clinicians who focus their practice exclusively on nursing home care has increased by over 30%. OBJECTIVES:To measure the association between regional trends in clinician specialization in nursing home care and nursing home quality. DESIGN:Retrospective cross-sectional study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS:Patients treated in 15,636 nursing homes in 305 US hospital referral regions between 2013 and 2016. MEASURES:Clinician specialization in nursing home care for 2012-2015 was measured using Medicare fee-for-service billings. Nursing home specialists were defined as generalist physicians (internal medicine, family medicine, geriatrics, and general practice) or advanced practitioners (nurse practitioners and physician assistants) with at least 90% of their billings for care in nursing homes. The number of clinicians was aggregated at the hospital referral region level and divided by the number of occupied Medicare-certified nursing home beds. Nursing Home Compare quality measure scores for 2013-2016 were aggregated at the HHR level, weighted by occupied beds in each nursing home in the hospital referral region. We measured the association between the number of nursing home specialists per 1000 beds and the clinical quality measure scores in the subsequent year using linear regression. RESULTS:An increase in nursing home specialists per 1000 occupied beds in a region was associated with lower use of long-stay antipsychotic medications and indwelling bladder catheters, higher prevalence of depressive symptoms, and was not associated with urinary tract infections, use of restraints, or short-stay antipsychotic use. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS:Higher prevalence of nursing home specialists was associated with regional improvements in 2 of 6 quality measures. Future studies should evaluate whether concentrating patient care among clinicians who specialize in nursing home practice improves outcomes for individual patients. The current findings suggest that prescribing clinicians play an important role in nursing home care quality.